4 50 763 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d66f0dacf0bb176350d587f97ec479d4.pdf 7f17197db1a8edc646c4e7fee8d92902 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 5 THE SLOVAKS AND THE PITTSBURGH PACT Peter P. Hletko M.D. PREFACE None of the material in this article is new. The Slovaks are very well acquainted with it. It has been presented in book and pamphlet form, in newspaper articles etc. in the Slovak language many times. Our purpose here is to present this material to the American public and to acquaint it with the Pittsburgh Pact and all that the Pact guaranteed the Slovak nation in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. We feel that the American public is entitled to know all about the Pittsburgh Pact because the Pact is an American product and is in line with the principles of democracy and self-determination of small nations, for the defense of which principles this country, too, entered World Wars . We also feel that the American people, mindful of the fact that its own pioneers came here and founded a government on strong principles of democracy as opposed to aristocracy in an endeavor to escape the persecutions in their own land, shall lend the pleadings of the Slovak people a sympathetic ear. We present a few historical sketches so that the reader may know who the Slovak people are and that they have a glorious past; that they once had their freedom; how they regained their freedom; how they came to be in the CzechoSlovak Republic; how events developed and led to the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact; how the Slovaks seceded from Czecho-Slovakia and set up their own independent Slovak State. We want the reader to know what the Pact guaranteed, how the stipulations of the Pact were ignored, and what flimsy objections were raised relative to the validity of the Pact by those who were patrties to that Pact and who later became interested that the provisions of the Pact should be ignored. We hope that the reader will then understand why the Slovaks were clamoring for their autonomy-homerule-in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and now want "out" of the Communistic c-SSR and into their own independent State or Republic. �6 SLOVAKIA HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The Slovaks as a nation are not unknown in historical annals. They have a glorious past extending many centuries back. Stephen J . Palickar writes the following short synopsis: "The historical era of the Slovak Race marks its beginning at the time when the Slovaks are said to have reached Europe in the sixth century Before Christ. This period, of course, remains in such darkness as to leave us nothing but conjecture. Beginning with 335 A. D., we find that history reveals a. sufficient amount of facts pertaining to the Slovaks which leads us to believe that sometime during that period the Slovak Race had contacted with Byzantine influences and had already inherited a substantial share of Latin and German culture. This phase of Slovak life was next followed by periods of small rulers and that of King Svatopluk who was master of nearly the whole of Central Europe, whose land was known as the Great Slovak-Moravian Kingdom. During the period in which King Svatopluk ruled over this vast Slovakian territory, many enterprising feats had taken place among the Slovaks. Culture had made deep inroads among the people but it was not until Christianity was accepted by the Slovaks did history really begin to deal with them in any paramount way. The first Christian Church of the Slovaks was established by the Slovakian prince, Pribina, in the ancient city of Nitra about 830 A.D. Complete Christianization of the Slovak people was later effected by the Saints Cyril and Methodius (863-885). Church building and the acceptance of Christianity by the Slovaks antedates that of the Bohemians by 60 years; the Poles by 140 years; Russians by 160 years, and the Hungarians by 175 years." Just how powerful and influential this ancient Kingdom of the Slovaks was, may be judged from the description given by Joseph Skultety, outstanding Slovak philologist and historian. (Translation by 0. D. Koreff: 'Sketches from Slovak History'.) He writes: "The State of our ancestors, which even in Mojmir's days unto 846 had been built wisely and courageously, was already a power in the days of Rastislav. The Germans were then pushing down the Danube as they never did afterwards, and Greater Moravia, the young Slavonic State, bravely barred their way. True enough, their aggression only increased thereby. King Louis, surnamed the German, a grandson of Charlemagne, in 855, immediately after his accession, invaded Moravia with a great military force in order to rid himself of a danger which was growing there for his realm. But here the first resistance was so great that Louis decided rather to leave the opponent in peace than to expose his whole army to a catastrophe ... Rastislav pursued Louis, the German, invaded his territory and devastated a large area ... Under Svatopluk, after Rastislav, Greater Moravia represented a still greater military power. The defeat of the Germans in 870, beneath Devin (where Rastislav had his castle described as 'a mighty fortress with which not even one of the most ancient can compare'), was crushing. Their army perished in the battle; very few saved themselves by flight. There were few families in Bavaria, Austria and Carinthia who did not mourn the loss of some of their members ... Later in his reign Svatopluk com- �SLOVAKIA 7 pletely stopped the onslaught of the Germans down the Danube, towards the East. In German annals a record is preserved stating that when he went against Arnulf in 884 his army was seen in one place to pass all day, from morning until evening. Svatopluk already had extended his sovereignty to the North, over Bohemia, where the first historic prince, Borivoj, ruled, and over the Polish Slavs on the Upper Vistula; in the South his sovereignty extended even farther ; far beyond the frontier of Slovak territory. "To found such a state, a Slav state on the middle Danube at that time-in the second half of the ninth century-certainly was a great accomplishment; history will never cease speaking of it. There were indeed indications that a center was originating here around which a considerable part of the Slav would unite. But a young state, in order to fortify itself, to consolidate, must needs have favorable conditions. Our Slovak ancestors, at the end of the ninth century, were not so fortunate. The Germanic world still lived in a condition of fermentto have it as a neighbor was not good. It would yield, retreat, only under duress, as under Svatopluk. After Svatopluk's death the nomadic Magyars came as another neighbor on the southern bank of the Danube and to the Tisa river. Under such circumstances, after the first weak• ening, caused by internal, domestic strife, a young organization is apt to fare badly. This strife, this discord among the sons of Svatopluk, was incited by their German neighbors and Greater Moravia perished. The Magyars came to the Danube in 896, two years after Svatopluk's death, Mojmir II, Svatopluk's successor, in 900 petitioned for and procured from Rome two bishops and one archbishop, thus still organizing the Church. In 902 he still proved to his trans-Danubian neighbors that he is a son of Svatopluk, but not long afterwards he was no more .. . Greater Moravia perished." What happened to the Slovaks after the downfall of their Moravian kingdom is obscure and that part of history is rather nebulous. However, eventually we again find them coming to the fore. Palickar writes: "From the time of Matus cak .. . who in 1301 succeeded in restoring part of the lost Kingdom for the Slovaks, under whose rule thirty fortified castles were preserved, the Slovaks retained their spirit of nationalism and racial identity. Nor did culture cease to exist amongst the Slovaks during the Middle Ages, though it is often said that about• this time the real link to Slovakian history became lost and obscured in the pages of time. Contrary to that belief, however, the fact remains that Slovak history had never ceased to be written for a period of years until the well known revolution of 1848." · In all those Middle Age centuries we see the Slovaks attacked and their territory invaded and devastated by the Huns, the Tartars, the Turks and other tribes. And we also see the gradual coming over of the Magyars across the Danube and domesticating themselves on Slovak soil, until after centuries, the Magyars assumed control. What occured around 1848 is well synopsized by Palickar: "The Hungarians at this time waged war against Austria, while the Slovaks, after years of anticipation mixed with bitterness and resentment for the Hungarians, saw their opportunity and likewise rose against �8 SLOVAKIA the Hungarians for their Slovak language and national rights. The conclusion of war between Austria and Hungary, while reuniting the two people, threw the Slovaks back under the Hungarian rule with none of their rights recognized, particularly because of their support to the Austrians in this war. After presenting their famous Memorandum to the Imperial Throne of Austria in 1861, the Slovaks were granted the right to open several high schools ... the 'Matica Slovenska,' an institution for the fostering of Slovak culture wherein special study was encouraged in Slovak history, Art and Language . . . The Empire of the Austrians and Hungarians was again split in two so that in 1878 a more active crusade of Magyarizing the Slovaks had begun." It is at this point that we wish to enter into more detailed dis cussion of the modern Slovak nation and its struggles. HUNGARIAN PERSECUTION OF THE SLOVAKS The persecutions that the Slovak nation suffered in the old Austro-Hungarian Empire at the hands of the Hungarian regime are a matter of historical record. The Slovaks were denied the rights of free speech and assemblage. Their literature and schools were suppressed and forbidden. The Slovak was considered anything but a human being, and the Magyar regime did not make secrecy of its attitude toward the subordinate Slovak people. "Tot nem ember" (Slovak is not a human being) and "Buta Tot," (Ignorant Slovak) were favorite expressions that the pompous and ruling Magyar people used in referring to the Slovak people. And yet, Slovakia, as Palickar remarks, "known as a 'subordinate' nation but always the equal of those who would assume superiority over her, she can, nevertheless, boast of the fact that Slovak blood gave to the Hungarians 20 of the most famous and outstanding characters that Hungary ever had, without whom there would have been very little Hungarian history today." (Petofi, Kossuth, Cardinal Czernoch, Petian, etc.) The Slovak, however, has an inherent love for liberty and freedom, and enjoys fostering his national spirit. The thousand years that the Slovak people lived under gradually developing Magyar rule, nor the fifty years of severe persecution at the hands of the Magyars just prior to the World War I, did not succeed in effacing the national consciousness of the Slovaks. On the contrary, the policy of forcible Magyarization served only to enhance the nationalistic feeling of the Slovak people. This policy of forcible Magyarization of the Slovaks �SLOVAK.IA 9 was undoubtedly the greatest reason for Slovak immigration into America. The Slovaks are essentially a homeloving and peaceful people, but the quest for a land of true liberty made them turn their attentions to this glorious land, the home of "The brave and the free." And even after they settled here, established their colonies, acclimated themselves to their new surroundings and began to live according to local customs, they were always mindful of the injustices that had driven them out of the land of their birth, their fatherland. Every bit of news that they received about new acts of persecution at the hands of the Magyars of their brethren left behind, stirred them anew, and made them vow vengeance all over again. The Hungarian government, on the other hand, viewed with some alarm the efforts of the Slovaks in America to stir up their countrymen in Slovakia to concentrated action, and certainly did everything in its power to frustrate the further expansion and development of Slovak national consciousness in America. It sent its emissaries to America to keep the good-will of the American political and diplomatic circles, and to indirectly undermine influences of the Slovaks. The Slovaks in America, however, could no longer be controlled by forces across the ocean, and they utilized all their own opportunities to call the attention not only of the proper influential sources in America, but the whole world at large, to the prosecution and injustice that the Slovaks were suffering at the hands of the Magyars in Austria-Hungary. Then came World War I, with the crumpling of Empires and fall of Kingdoms. Austria-Hungary was not enjoying solid footing and the Slovaks in America saw in the fall of the dual-monarchy their only chance of liberation and the only ray of hope for the restoration of their long-lost freedom . THE EARLY RELATIONS OF SLOVAKS AND CZECHS What the Slovaks suffered at the hands of the Magyars, the Czechs suffered at the hands of the Austrians-the Germans, although perhaps in somewhat lesser degree. Germanic influences were making their noticeable inroads into the ranks of the Czech people, and those with weaker convictions, naturally, succumbed. The Czechs and Slovaks did not have direct close con- �10 SLOVAKIA tacts. They lived apart. They had no common meeting ground. The literati, it is true, had their mutual contacts and they wrote and dreamed of the brotherhood of the Czech and Slovak, but no closer union between the two peopies was ever established. Some were so enthusiastic in their writings that they saw the Czech and Slovak peoples as branches of one Slovanic people, but the people themselves lived as two different nations . After the large immigration of the Czechs and Slovaks into this country, both peoples continued to live and develop here as two separate nations. Each built its own churches, schools and institutions. Each founded its own fraternal and social organizations. In places the Czechs and Slovaks lived in close proximity to each other, but at no time was there any marked intermingling. Both realized that the other is his closest Slavonic brother, but the lines of demarcation between the two peoples remained very definite and well established in this country. NATIONALISTIC MOVEMENT OF SLOVAKS The Slovaks have had their fraternal and social organizations here since about 1890, or slightly previous to that. The nationalistic spirit was fostered in all of them, but because here and there small leaders, who had originally succumbed to Magyar influences while still over there in the fatherland, managed to place themselves here in strategic positions, it was necessary to convince the wide masses of Slovaks here, that it is the duty of every Slovak in America to rid himself of every bit of Magyar influence, develop a real Slovak consciousness, and help his downtrodden brethren over there, who were struggling against overwhelming odds and disadvantages to keep the Slovak nation as such on the face of the earth. Every bit of news regarding new atrocities against the Slovak people there stirred the Slovak people here and helped to engender a better Slovak consciousness, and a willingness to rise in defense of the nation. But, the one most striking incident that finally completely awakened the Slovaks in America, was the massacre in Cernova, in Slovakia: Rev. Andrej Hlinka had been suspended by His Eminence Bishop Parvy because of his political activi- �SLOVAKIA 11 ties. The Hungarian government also took steps to make Hlinka harmless and the result was that he was sentenced to 2 years in jail. He was an ardent Slovak nationalist and in some of his political campaign speeches he had exhorted his Slovak followers to fight against the policies of Magyarization. In the meantime, the inhabitants of cernova, the birthplace of Hlinka, had succeeded in completing the building of their little church with the funds that Hlinka had collected, and preparations were made for a proper dedication and blessing of the church. The villagers appealed to the Bishop that Hlinka be re-instated and that he be delegated to perform the blessing of the church. The Bishop, however, appointed someone else and the date was set for October 27, 1907. The inhabitants of cernova then notified the Bishop that they do not wish to have the blessing performed on that date. Their wishes, however, were not to be respected and on the date set the proper appointee rode into town to perform the blessing of the Church. The villagers were congregated in the street in front of the Church and refused to admit the Church dignitaries, insisting that they wish Hlinka to bless their Church and no one else. A scuffle occured, and in the turmoil that followed, the gendarmes, standing nearby, were ordered to fire into the mob. They did! The street cleared in a hurry and 9 dead, 3 dying, 12 seriously injured and 80 less seriously injured persons were left lying there. That night 14 Slovak martyrs were found dead as the result of that salvo of bullets. And some months later numerous Slovaks were given jail sentences because of their participation in the c ernova uprising. The Slovaks ,in America realized that such atrocities must not go on unnoticed and rmprotested. The world at large must be informed about them. Many protest mass meetings followed. The Catholic Clergy called its first Cat:p.olic Slovak Congress on September 3, 1906, to WilkesBarre. The Slovak newspapermen and journalists met in December, 1906, in Pittsburgh. Everything was being worked up for a concentrated action of all the Slovaks, irrespective of their religious or political beliefs. This effort to unify the Slovaks was also responsible for the pamphlet: �12 SLOVAKIA "Political criminal trial against the Rev. Father Andrew Hlinka, the Rev. Father Joseph Tomik, Dr. srobar and others, in Ruzomberok, Liptov Comitat, Hungary, November 26 to December 26, 1906," published by the Slovak journalists. A benefit fund was also created, and thousands of dollars were sent to the old country for the support of the loyal and nationalistically conscious Slovaks who were imprisoned and otherwise mistreated by the Magyars. The outstanding result of the atrocities in Slovakia was the founding of the Slovak League of America. The Slovak Newspapermen's Association at the instigation of Rev. Stefan Furdek called the First Slovak Congress to Cleveland May 26, 1907. The representatives of all the Slovak organizations came to Cleveland for that meeting. Along with them came 7,000 other Slovaks, of all creeds, beliefs and dialects. None cared about anything else than that they are Slovaks, that their people are being cruelly mistreated under Magyar rule, and that they must come to the rescue of their brethren. Amid such enthusiasm the Slovak League was founded at that meeting in Cleveland. The Rev. Stefan Furdek was elected president, Albert Mamatey, secretary, Rev. John Porubsky, financial Secretary. Dr. M. Francisci, treasurer. The aim of the organization was. embodied principally in the following sentence of the By-laws: "That the Slovak nation may take its place among the older nations as an equal among equals." A National Fund was created from which the nationalistic movements of the Slovaks in the Fatherland were to be supported. Numerous mass meetings, under the auspices of the new Slovak League, followed all over the United States. Resolutions were adopted at these mass meetings, the contents of which in the main verse : 1. We protest against the massacre and imprisonment of our leading Slovak men in Hungary. 2. We strenously protest against the unfounded indictment of our Slovak peasants; against the unfounded procedure. of the courts, which are hurling our people into investigative imprisonment, as it has recently occured so many times. 3. We demand, that the Laws in Hungary be abided by and that they serve the Magyar as well as the Slovak, and not that the Slovak would get imprisonment and heavy fine on the least provocation. LIBRARY �SLOVAKIA 13 THE EARLY MOVEMENT FOR FREEDOM Such then was the stage-setting among the Slovaks here in America and in Hungary when World War I, broke out. The original gun-shot, in fact, which was to precipitate the world catastrophe, had really not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovaks in America had already prepared a Memorandum, intended for all the parliaments of the civilized world. Ivan Daxner, Sr., the Secretary of the Slovak League at the time, was just making the final corrections of the Memorandum, when first fire broke out in Europe, fore-telling the coming of the World War. With this sudden turn of affairs in Europe, many thought that the contents of the Memorandum should be changed. Sox:ne thought that it should definitely express the thought: "We want to break away from the Magyars." Others thought that it should express the idea: "We want to be with the Czechs." A middle course was chosen, and the Memorandum, delivered to all members of Congress of the United States asked, that "The Slovaks in Hungary should obtain their natural privileges of life, freedom and pursuit of happiness, which they have been deprived of by the dynasty; that the Slovaks be given an opportunity to develop their national spirit, their abilities, and the natural resources of their native land ; that the Slovaks be guaranteed the realization of their national ideals and efforts, which have been mercilessly trodden by the tyrannical Hungarian Government. " The Memorandum set forth in detail a description of the Slovak nation and a description of the land that the nation inhabits. It set forth a description of the Magyar atrocities: How the nation is oppressed by the Magyars, particularly since 1863; how its language is being expelled not only from governmental offices and schools, but even from the home circles of government officials and employes of Slovak descent. The Magyar government wilfully avoids Par. 44 of the Laws of 1868, according to which Slovak schools were to be . built by government funds . The government not only does not respect this law, but it has gone even further, and has forcefully closed schools which the Slovak people have established out of their own funds and voluntary contributions. The government has suppressed the "Matica Slovenska"-"The Slovak Foundation"the highest cultural and scientific institute of the Slovaks, �14 SLOVAKIA founded for their own advancement and uplift. The Magyar government has forcefully taken thousands of children during the years 1863-86 away from their parents, and sent them to Magyar territories for the purpose of complete Magyarization of these youthful Slovaks. The Slovaks are paying their taxes, but not one cent is being expended from government funds for Slovak culture and Slovak social welfare. For these and many other reasons the Slovaks in America, as free citizens of a great country, petitioned all influential political factors in Europe and all over the civilized world, in the name of justice and humanity, to see to it, when future new political units would be established and when fates of nations were to be decided that all the injustices perpetrated on the Slovak nation would be erased, and that the Slovak people be considered as an equal and free nation among the other nations of the world. The Slovak League asked that the Slovak people be granted their complete self-government and the freedom of self-determination in the field of politics as well as in the field of culture and commerce. This Memorandum was signed by all the officials of the Slovak League, by the representatives of twenty-three Slovak newspapers, by the representatives of twenty organizations, by fifty-two Catholic priests and forty Protestant Ministers. This Memorandum, published in five languages, besides the English, reached the most influential political and diplomatic factors in America. It did much to bring the Slovak cause before the World. It attracted attention to the Slovaks, who already up to that time, certainly were not an unknown quantity, as may be witnessed by the long conversation that President Taft had with the representatives of Slovak organizations in 1910. The main significance of this Memorandum, however, lies in the fact that the Slovaks of America, immediately after the outbreak of the War, were publicly taking upon themselves the role of a leader of the entire Slovak nation of the World-and they were doing it independently, without ties with anybody. They took upon themselves the duty of formulating the policies of the entire nation-and they demanded the right of self-determination and self-government in behalf of their entire nation. The Memorandum �SLOVAKIA 15 clearly showed that immediately after the outbreak of the War, the Slovaks in America had visions of liberating the Slovak nation from the control of all other nations. The signatures on the Memorandum were likewise significant, and they show just why the Slovaks of America assumed the leadership of the entire nation. The Slovak masses of America were organized, and the number of Slovaks in America standing in organized ranks exceeded the number of organized Slovaks that were ever known in their own fatherland. The number of publications represented on the Memorandum by signature also exceeded the number that the Slovaks had in their native country. All this clearly shows that the more progressive portion of the nation was found here in America, and that this portion had a full privilege, moral and financial, to speak in behalf of the entire nation. COOPERATION OF THE SLOVAKS AND CZECHS It is unnecessary to go into much detail to show how the Slovaks struggled for their cause and their liberation during those early years of World War I. They were fully united here-all the Slovaks-but they were carrying on the battle practically single-handed. Very often, at the meetings of their common organization, the Slovak League, they considered the question, whether they should find an ally and unite with him in their struggle, or whether they should continue to work single-handedly and independently for the brighter future of their nation. They were unanimous in their effort to tear the Slovaks across the sea from Magyar rule. There were no dissenters and no objectors to that idea. But in order that the Slovaks may come to bask in the sunshine of freedom, it was .necessary that Austria-Hungary be disrupted, and for such work they necessarily had to find an ally. Several proposed combinations developed. Some favored the Czechs as the ally to be sought. Others favored the Russians. Others favored the Poles, who already had promises from the Allies for a restoration of Poland. Gradually the Czechs came to be selected as the most logical ally to be sought. By what process of reasoning the Czechs came to be generally favored is probably best expressed in a letter written by Rev. Matus Jankola, Bridgeport, Connecticut, December 11, 1914, to Joseph Rusek, Editor of "Jednota." �16 SLOVAKIA "Our battle-cry must be: 'Away from the Magyars.' We must work for the self-government of Slovakia. Never, however, in the confines of Hungary, united with the Magyars! Their sentence over us is fatal: 'Tot nem ember.' It's in their blood ... We should ally ourselves with our Slav brothers. But with whom? The Russians are in part orthodox, and in part, too powerful. They would devour us. The Poles are closer to us, but they too , are too powerful in everything. We can ally ourselves with the Czechs only. There are two Czechs to every Slovak. We have just about the same language. The people would not have to learn another language ; their financial , commercial etc. abilities will benefit our weakness and inability. Austria-Hungary may serve as an example for our alliance. The higher government, diplomatic corps and army, all common. Let all the rest remain separate, whether is shall be a republican, or monarchistic confederation." Notice how Rev. Jankola, a popular leader of the Slovaks, and undoubtedly expressing the concensus of opinion of the Slovaks in that letter, visioned the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. Anot}:ler letter of his (December 15, 1915, from Bridgeport, Connecticut) again brings an interesting opinion about the Czechs, which no doubt was not only his own, but the more or less established opinion about the Czechs among the Slovaks generally, and how he pictured the future relations of the Slovaks and Czechs. He wrote: "We shall mean nothing in a monarchy, and absolutely nothing in a great Russia. But we would stand on a footing of equality with the Czechs a-la Austria and Hungary, or formerly, Norway and Sweden ; with our own self-government , our own parliament, our own Slovak language. Can we ever obtain this under Russia, or Austria-Hungary ? "In regards to the Czechs: Their supremacy can only be temporary ; until the time that we rear one generation in our own spirit. I do not consider the Czech liberalism so dangerous. Our nature and character are different. The Slovaks-I mean the common people-shall retain their character." These were Father Jankola's unofficial letters, but they express the predominant sentiment among the greater portion of the Slovaks in America, and practically the unanimous sentiment among the Catholic Slovaks in America, which, expressed in other words, meant: We favor cooperation with the Czechs, we must unite with them, but before we do, it is necessary to agree with them, that we are forming a state, where both nations-the Czech and the Slovak-will be equal factors with their own selfgovernments. �SLOVAKIA 17 ORGANIZATION OF THE CZECHS IN AMERICA The Czechs were not as well prepared to take up the cause of their liberation when the war broke out as were the Slovaks. The Czechs were divided into many small lodges and into a number of varying factions. Their press, too, was not as unanimous in its attitude toward the War and in its stand toward one side or the other. Some of the Czech newspapers, and among them were several of the more influential, favored the retention of old Austria. They looked with much disfavor on the attempts of some energetic Czech patriots who took up the standard against the old regime. They ridiculed all attempts to tear down old Austria. They considered all such attempts futile. Those favoring the old regime were found principally in the ranks of the Czech socialists and Czech free-thinkers. The Catholic Czechs had a smaller percentage of those who favored adherence to the old regime. Most of the Catholic Czechs immediately became enthused with the cause of liberation, even though they were frequently censured for it on the grounds that they were directly playing into the hands of Professor T . G. Masaryk, an enemy of the Church. The foundations of a united Czech revolutionary organization were laid on March 13th and 14th, 1915, in Cleveland, at a joint meeting of local Czechs with representatives from Chicago and New York. The immediate results were very mediocre. It was only in August, 1915, when Vojta Benes, a teacher, came to this country with an appeal from Professor Masaryk and his own brother, Dr. Eduard Benes, and when he himself began working on the organization, that the Czech National Alliance began to take root and spread. Then first the Czech public responded to the appeals of its leaders with generous contributions to the cause of liberating the Czech nation. The National Czech Alliance was actually founded on September 1, 1915. Its main office was in Chicago. Its first prominent and zealous workers were such as were known for their free-thinking and anti-Church ideas. These, naturally, did not entice the Catholic Czechs into their ranks. The Catholic Czechs remained unorganized for some time, but they worked independently, although many of them contributed funds and otherwise assisted the cause sponsored by the National Czech Alliance. Finally, on February �18 SLOVAKIA 6, 191 7, the Catholic Czechs organized too. They formed their Alliance of Czech Catholics. On May 5, 1917, the first steps were taken to coordinate the efforts of the two groups of Czechs, and on July 4, 1917, they affected a compromise and decided on ways and means of cooperating. The representatives of the two factions or organizations then issued a joint appeal to the Czechs of America asking for support of the movement to establish an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic, at the same time advising the Czech public that the two factions from now on would work and cooperate for this one high ideal and admirable cause. THE CLEVELAND AGREEMENT The Cleveland Agreement was the fore-runner of the Pittsburgh Pact. Perhaps the latter would never have been drafted and signed, had not certain difficulties arisen which gave the Slovaks reason enough to suspect that the Czechs were not altogether sincere when they suggested and submitted the original Cleveland Agreement. But, let us see how the Cleveland Agreement came to be and what it contained. In the foregoing chapter, it was related that the Czech National Alliance was organized on September 1, 1915. The National Alliance of Czech Catholics did not come to be organized until in 1917, and up to that time the Czech National Alliance, naturally, was appearing as the only representative of the Czech people in America in this revolutionary movement, which was ultimately to spell the overthrow of the Austria-Hungarian monarchy and an establishment of an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic. While the Czechs were laying the foundations of their organization in America, similar Czech organizations were being formed in France, Switzerland and Russia, which embodied in their programs a representation of the Slovaks too. That these Czech organizations could take upon themselves the representations of the Slovaks, too, was made possible only by the fact that, outside of Russia, there were too few Slovaks in any of the other countries, and these few Slovaks hardly could deal on an equal basis with the Czechs, who outnumbered them. All this time Professor T. G. Masaryk was very active �SLOVAKIA 19 in the revolutionary movement. Other leaders in the Czech movement were also busy and difficulties arose, but after all these were ironed out, T. G. Masaryk became the recognized head of the movement for the liberation of the Czechs and the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. In order, however, that the visible and recognized head of the revolutionary movement could have the right to speak in behalf of the Slovaks too, it was necessary that at least one recognized portion of Slovak immigration express itself clearly and distinctly in favor of the joint effort with the Czechs. The Slovak group in America was the logical group to be sought and its favor gained. The Czech National Alliance in America was asked from Paris by Professor T. G. Masaryk himself to gain the cooperation of this Slovak group in America. Joseph Tvrzicky, the Secretary of the Czech National Alliance, officially invited the Slovak League of America to a meeting, the purpose of which was to be: "That we could unite for combined political work." Along with this invitation Tvrzicky sent a proposed draft on an Agreement, which later the Slovaks accepted in Cleveland, on October 22, 1915, just as Tvrzicky had drafted it. The Cleveland Agreement contained the following points: "1. Independence of Czech lands and Slovakia ; 2. A union of the Czech and Slovak nations in a federative alliance of states with a complete national autonomy of Slovakia, with its own parliament, its own state government, its own complete cultural freedom, and therefore, its own complete use of the Slovak language, its own financial and political government and with a Slovak state language. 3. Voting power: General, secret and direct. 4. Form of Government: A personal union with a democratic form of State, the same as in England. 5. These points form the basis of a mutual agreement and can be enlarged or expanded only with the approval of both parties. The Czech National Alliance reserves the right of making possible changes, and the Slovak League has the same right." These five points of the Cleveland Agreement were the basis on which all the various factors of Slovak public life in America agreed to cooperate with the Czechs for the one and mutual cause. Everything was clearly defined, the program very definitely set forth, and both parties of the agreement could �20 SLOVAKIA undertake their first steps with complete confidence to each other. It is worth mentioning that the Cleveland Agreement was accepted by the Slovaks with the firm conviction that T. G. Masaryk was fully informed in advance about this Agreement and each and every point of its contents, or that he shall be fully informed. Ignac Gessay, one of the active Slovak workers, writes of this as follows: "It is important to note that we Slovaks did not draft the Cleveland Agreement, but our brother Czechs did, the representatives of the Czech National Alliance. They offered it to us in a brotherly way in return for our fraternal help to them. Mr. Emanuel Voska, one of the representatives present there in behalf of the Czech National Alliance, arose and amidst great applause announced that, the Text of this Agreement is known to Professor Masaryk-the President of the National Council and that he agrees with it." With the field all set for a fine close cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks, further work was to follow. But the very first act, the purpose of which was, to announce that the Czechs and Slovaks are working for a common aim already threw a "monkey wrench" into the machinery, and caused some uneasiness and the first little suspicion in the minds of the Slovaks. This first act was issued in Paris, on November 14, 1915. It was a proclamation against Austria-Hungary. The Czecho-Slovak National Council did not formally exist at the time, so Professor Masaryk simply signed the proclamation: "The Foreign Czech Committee." Four representatives of the Czechs in America were signed on that Proclamation, as well as two representatives of the Slovaks in America, yet it was a "Czech Committee" not a Czecho-Slovak Committee. In this very first act the Slovaks saw a wilful attempt to deprive them of all their due rights and privileges, and so already at such an early date after the enthusiastic acceptance of the Cleveland Agreement, which heralded the closest cooperation, understanding and mutual help of the Czechs and Slovaks, the difficulties of that cooperation with the Czechs became quite plain to the Slovaks. DIFFICULTIES BETWEEN THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS The Cleveland Agreement, which had been so enthusiastically accepted and signed by both parties, was being adhered by the Slovaks to the very letter. Still, difficulties �SLOVAKIA 21 between the Czechs and Slovaks kept cropping up. Those must be attributed to an erronerous Czech understanding of the Slovak question and the Slovak attitude in the whole matter. For, certainly, had the Czechs fully understood just how the Slovaks felt about their alliance with the Czechs, had they realized that the Slovaks were full-heartedly in favor of an honest and sincere cooperation with the Czechs, but that they were suspicious of every move that was not in keeping with the Agreement, these misunderstandings would never have come to pass, and the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact would never have been necessary. The situation became such that the Slovak League called its Ninth Congress to Chicago on February 22, 1916, and in the call for the session, Albert Mamatey, the president, and Ivan Daxner, the Secretary, made the following statement: "It is unavoidably necessary to hold a joint conference with our Czech brethren in order that we may avoid misunderstandings and perhaps even conflicts with them, which could arise if our Czech brethren did not take the Agreement made with the Slovaks in the same light as it was made and signed by the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance." The Congress met and ironed out many difficulties, but this did not suffice. The Slovaks wanted to have direct information from their own people about the progress of the revolutionary movement in Europe. In order that they may not depend entirely on the Czech National Alliance for all their information, they decided to send two representatives, Dr. G. Kosik, Editor of the Catholic Sokol, and Dr. Stefan Osusky, an attorney and minister, to Europe. The intention of sending these two Slovaks was of the best, but the Czechs in America were very disappointed over this step. The result of it was that they began supporting and encouraging M. Getting, Editor of Slovak Sokol, and a few others who began showing and expressing dissatisfaction over the management of affairs of the Slovak League. It may be remarked here that Getting was one of the original ultra-enthusiasts for a complete union with the Czechs. All his efforts in this direction were rewarded later. He became Czechoslovak consul in Pittsburgh. Such behavior of the Czechs was, of course, anything but appreciated by the Slovaks. It had a tendency to tear down the unanimity of the Slovak spirit which had been �22 SLOVAKIA established at a conference of the Slovak League on April 12, 1916, in Pittsburgh. The minutes of that session tell that Mr. Kompis called attention of those present to the fact that Masaryk, who is a Moravian Slovak, never mentioned the Slovaks in any of his lectures, speeches and proclamations, and that a periodical like the "ceskoslovenska Samostatnost" (Czecho-Slovak Independence) published items which were deragatory to the Slovak people, and which in spirit and in fact were in direct contradition to the intentions of the Cleveland Agreement. A strong Slovak spirit pervaded this session of the Slovak League. Mr. Daxner expressed himself that the Slovaks did not wish to raise small questions of formalities against the Czechs, but they did wish to call the attention of the Czechs to the violations of the basic principles of their agreement with them. "Yes," said Mr. Daxner, "we want to tear away from the Magyars and be with the Czechs, not under the Czechs." The Slovaks again felt united among themselves, and they adopted the following resolution, which even M. Getting signed very willingly: Adopted at the joint session of the Slovak organizations, newspapers , Slovak clergy and other National workers, called by the Slovak League to Pittsburgh on April 12, 1916: We, the representatives of the Slovak organizations and newspapers, gathered here this day, admit the necessity of harmonious cooperation in all nationalistic undertakings intended for the benefit of liberating Slovakia from a political, cultural and economic yoke; We further attest that we will avoid all disturbances which might harm the above mentioned cooperation in the interest of the nation ; We bind ourselves to assist with all our abilities the political program expressed in the "Agreement" between the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance, adopted in Cleveland, Ohio, on October 22, 1915. JAN PAJ'fKUCH, Hlas ; GUSTAV KOSfK, Katolicky Sokol; JOZEF RUSEK, Jednota ; IVAN BIELEK, Narodne Noviny ; KAROL BELOHLAVEK, Slovensky Hlasnik; MILAN GETTING, Slovensky Sokol; NIKOLAJ S. BIELIK, Bratstvo; C. L. ORBACH, Slovak v Amerike ; J"OLIUS BUCKO, Narodny Dennik. Getting signed this resolution, but he continued his activity against the Slovak League nevertheless. The Czechs supported him, much to the disappointment of the Slovak leaders and the officials of the League, as the official correspondence of Albert Mamatey, the president of the �SLOVAKIA 23 League, shows so clearly. These, as well as the many other difficulties that arose here, in Russia and elsewhere, between the Czechs and Slovaks, prompted many of the Slovaks to lose faith in the Cleveland Agreement, and in the Czechs, and prompted them to turn in quest of new allies for the Slovaks. PRESIDENT WILSON, THE ALLIES AND THE RIGHTS OF SMALL NATIONS Perhaps the quest of some of the discontented Slovaks may have taken firmer footing, hact not important things occured in the diplomatic world. President Wilson was reelected on November 8, 1916, and soon after his re-election (December 21, 1916) he issued a proclamation to the warring nations in which he asked for a statement of their conditions of peace. The Allies answered January 12, 1917, and in the conditions which they enumerated, the folloving sentence was found: "Liberation of the Italians, Slavs, Roumanians, Czecho-Slovaks from foreign government control." The Slovaks up to that time abhorred the term "Czecho-Slovak." They were Slovaks, and the Bohemian brethren were Czechs. The term "Czecho-Slovak" was one that was condemned because it was fraught with dangers for the retention of the individuality of the Slovak people. Yet, the reply of the Allies gave the Slovaks as well as the Czechs great joy, and in their great enthusiasm over the ray 0f hope that the Allies gave them, the Slovaks temporarily overlooked the use of the term "Czecho-Slovaks." How the term "Czecho-Slovaks" came to be embodied in the Allies' reply is also an interesting episode. T. G. Masaryk explains that the term "Czecho-Slovak" was written into the Allies' reply after the reply had been all written. "The word Czecho-Slovaks"-he writes-"contained in the proclamation, has its own interesting internal history. There were three suggestions: 'liberation of the Czechs''the Czech nation'-'the Czecho-Slovaks.' The latter suggestion was accepted at a conference of Dr. Benes (Czech), Stefanik (Slovak) and Osusky (Slovak).''-Dr. Benes on the other hand writes that he conferred with Osusky and Sychravy about the matter, since Stefanik was then in Russia, and he further states U:1at, "Osusky expressed fear that �24 SWVAKIA the Allies' reply to President Wilson might name the Czechs only, not the Slovaks"-and for that reason he insisted on the term "Czechoslovak." Be it as it may, the above explanations automatically leave the impression that the two Slovak leaders-or the one, if we are to accept Benes's explanation-feared that only the Czechs or the Czech nation would be mentioned and made special note of in the Allies' reply to President Wilson, and they were therefore glad to reach even such a compromise that, mention should be made of Czecho-Slovaks. Doesn't it make one wonder about the real sincerity of the Czech leaders who worried more about their own cause than the joint cause of both nations? JOINT VENTURES OF THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS Despite all the discrepancies that had arisen, the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance continued with their work and progressed side by side. They actually combined in undertakings only when occasion called for it. But the necessities of the turbulent times forced both sides to greater cooperation. The Slovak League held another Congress in Cleveland on February 22, 1917. Much of the discussion concerned the attitude of the Czechs, who had caused many misunderstandings because of their failure to adhere to the contents of the Cleveland Agreement. After all was said and done, however, the Congress adopted a resolution, whereby the League again promises the Czech National Alliance its full cooperation, at least up to such time as the Slovaks will gain their freedom. A "Joint Czecho-Slovak Proclamation" was also issued, in which gratitude is expressed to the United States and the Allies for the attention that these have given the Czech and Slovak efforts up to that time. The proclamation also contained one sentence, which probably very fully expressed the hopes and desires of the Slovaks: "Therefore, we request an independent Czecho-Slovak state with complete self-government for the Slovaks." This Congress also noted and considered the dangerous work of several newspaper and advertising agencies, which had been getting articles into the press that were hurting the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks. The result was that in March, 1917, the Slovak League and the Czech Na- �SLOVAKIA 25 tional Alliance opened the Slav Press Bureau in New York for the purpose of spreading more favorable propaganda about the joint cause and warding off propaganda that was intended to do harm. This was the first real venture of the Czechs and Slovaks jointly. Others had to follow, and they did. Particularly was it necessary to raise funds to carry on the work, and the Czechs and Slovaks went about it enthusiastically. The Slovaks, believing that it was their cause as much as the Czechs', and believing that after the battle was over, they were to receive as much consideration as the Czechs, worked very zealously, and at every occasion contributed their share of work and finances. Even in the number of volunteers who joined the Czecho-Slovak army forces, the Slovaks did their full share of duty, and it is significant that the first volunteers who applied to the Czecho-Slovak forces were Slovaks. The popular General Milan Rastislav Stefanik, an ardent Slovak leader in the fight for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks, visited America and first asked for volunteers. This may perhaps explain why the Slovaks were among the first volunteers, but whatever the reason, the Slovaks were not wanting in their zeal, enthusiasm and willingness to work for the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks, even when it came to recruiting men, who were to face death on the battle fields. That the Slovaks were willing to contribute their share of the burden was also proved by the following incident: Since the Czechs up to that time had their two organizations : The Czech National Alliance and the Alliance of Czech Catholics, and the Slovaks had their one joint organization, The Slovak League, it was thought feasible to combine all these three into one formal organization. All three had been cooperating together, but it was thought that a joint council of the three may do much toward coordinating all work and effort. Accordingly, a Czecho-Slovak National Council of America ( or later called: American Czecho-Slovak Board) was organized in which all three organizations were to be represended. Each side--the Czechs and the Slovaks-were to be represented equally-each by eight representatives. The Czechs thought, however, that since they had two organizations (both were working under one name as though one organization: Bohemian National Al- �26 SLOVAKIA liance) they should be entitled to twice eight representatives in the joint Czecho-Slovak Council. The Slovaks refused to yield on this point. "How do you wish to arrange this?" one Czech asked. "We want to be represented in this body equally with you brother Czechs," the Slovaks replied. "And will you contribute to the common cause on a fifty-fifty basis?" "Yes, we will." And so it was arranged that if the Slovaks are to get equal representation with the Czechs in their joint bodies, they are to bear one-half of the burden. And from that time up to the conclusion of the joint movement, the Slovaks always contributed at least one-half of the finances necessary to carry on the work. T. G. MASARYK IN AMERICA The year 1918 found the Slovaks in America busy with their work. They were tremendously enthusiastic. Their efforts seemed to be leading to success. Their goal-the liberation of Slovakia, and the founding of a Czecho-Slovak state, in which the Slovaks would enjoy all the privileges of freedom, seemed so close at hand. From time to time, however, little incidents would keep occuring that would cool the enthusiasm of the Slovaks. There seemed to be an undercurrent which made the Slovaks feel that the Czechs are not fully sincere with the Slovaks, that they are considering themselves and their well-being first, and that they are neglecting the Slovaks everywhere, except where the Slovaks insist on their recognition and their share of privileges. Some of this difficulty was no doubt caused by the many letters that the Slovak legionaries from America, serving in the Czecho-Slovak Army, sent here from France. They complained that the official language of the Czecho-Slovak Army is the Czech. That they are not receiving the Slovak newspapers and Slovak books which are being sent to them, but that they are being supplied with Czech books and Czech newspapers exclusively. The Slovaks tried to overlook all these small incidents. They were imbued with the spirit of their freedom, so close at hand, and anything that occurred which might dampen their enthusiasm, confidence etc. was passed on and at- �SLOVAKIA 27 tributed to human short-comings of individuals. Here was a noble joint cause, and what else mattered! On April 29, 1918, T. G. Masaryk arrived in Vancouver. Much was expected of him. He was looked upon as the person who could settle most of the small differences and suspicions and discrepancies that had arisen. He was the president of the Czecho-Slovak National Council and therefore, the leader of the revolution, the leader working for the liberation of Czech lands and Slovakia. He was enthusiastically received by the Slovaks. They hoped that he would positively assure them that any suspicions about the insincerity of the Czechs were absolutely unfounded. Masaryk made his first public appearance at an enthusiastic mass meeting of 50,000 Slavs in Chicago on May 5, 1918. The Czech newspapers, however, published such reports about this meeting and about Masaryk's address that the Slovak periodicals complained immediately. The "Jednota"-the ©fficial weekly of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest and one of the oldest Slovak organizations in America-was fast to catch up with this ignoring of the Slovaks in these reports, and it criticized Masaryk. It showed its discontent over the fact that, while he kept mentioning the 'Czech lands,' 'the Czech army,' 'the Czech fight,' 'Czech future ' etc., etc., he never mentioned Slovakia, he forgot the Slovak volunteers, he completely ignored the Slovak participation in the struggle. The "Jednota" kept calling attention to the fact that the Czechs, in other ways, too, were forgetting about the Slovaks, that they were misinforming the Americans about the Czech and Slovak relations, that they were picturing the Slovaks as subordinates to the Czechs, or as a people who really are a part of the Czech nation. The "Jednota" kept warning the Slovak public that, unless the Slovaks were not careful, the Czech people would assume complete control of the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, create a large Czech State, and the Slovaks would not gain the real independence and freedom that they were dreaming of. Masaryk finally came to Pittsburgh and on May 30, 1918, the Slovaks there made a tremendous celebration over his visit. Masaryk spoke there first in English, then in Czech. He said beautiful things. He was proud that by birth he really is a Slovak. He prided himself on working many �28 SLOVAKIA years for the cause of bringing the Czechs and Slovaks closer together. He said that there should be no differences among us. The National Council and all its branches in Russia and America have Slovak representatives as well as Czechs. Dr. Stefanik, a Slovak, he said, has done so much thus far in this struggle. Both sides, he said, have cooperated beautifully. The Slovaks and Czechs are united, and the differences that creep in are being artificially produced by the German and Magyar influences, who have reasons to wish for difficulties between the Czechs and Slovaks. The relations of Slovakia to the Czech lands in the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, he pictured very favorably. There will be a free Bohemia and a free Slovakia. Political control, education, courts of justice and all else in Slovakia shall be Slovak, in Bohemia it shall be Czech. We would be "silly" if we thought anything else, or if we did not wish each other well. There should be no difficulties among us because of languages. We understand each other and what more could we wish for? The Czech majority need not be feared. It will be found in Bohemia. In Slovakia the majority shall be Slovak. Each branch, or each nation, shall be boss in its own home. Everyone shall have his personal liberty guaranteed. The huge gathering received Masaryk's address with a tremendous ovation. The Slovaks, present there in very large numbers, were overjoyed. These were all the things they had been wishing for. THE PITTSBURGH PACT That same evening Masaryk had a conference with the representatives of the Slovaks in the Moose Temple on Penn Avenue. It was a confidential conference. Those present were asking Masaryk about the various proposed arrangements in the new State. He answered all questions to the complete satisfaction of all present. He convinced everybody that he meant everything well, and the Slovaks left the conference thoroughly convinced that here is their real leader under whose guidance the Slovak people would be led into the promised land. The next day, May 31st, according to the official report of the Slovak League Press Bureau-The Czecho-Slovak National Council met in the same building and Masaryk at- �SLOVAKIA 29 tended the session. "At this session," says the report, "Prof. Masaryk performed an act which shall always have historical significance in the history of the Czechs and Slovaks. This act consisted of a new agreement between the Czechs and Slovaks. Professor Masaryk wrote the new agreement himself, and it establishes the relations between the two nations. According to this agreement, Czecho-Slovakia shall be a Republic in which Slovakia shall form a completely self-governed part with its Slovak capitol, its Slovak parliament, its Slovak schools, its Slovak courts of justice and its own (public) control. Albert Mamatey, president of the Slovak League shall get a copy of this agreement. He shall publish it in the near future. Masaryk concluded his mission among the Slovaks in Pittsburgh in this way." And that the Slovaks were completely satisfied over such an outcome may be judged from the same report of the Slovak League Press Bureau which said: "There are no reasons anymore for further fearing, for any prejudice, for any suspicion. Everything is now clear between us and the brother Czechs. From to-day on we must refrain from talking about anything which would separate us for, there is nothing which really separates us. Let us put forth all our strength from to-day on and let us work to gain the one big and holy aim, which is: The liberation of Czecho-Slovakia." Even though the entire text of this Pittsburgh Pact was not known to the Slovaks in detail, they were satisfied when they read the short description of its contents. Even the "Jednota," which had more or less led the opposition and utilized every opportunity to warn the Slovaks to be careful, was now satisfied. It said: "Professor Masaryk is an ardent friend of the Slovaks and the Slovak language . We had our doubts about that. Today there is not a shadow of doubt. We respect him and recognize him as our leader in the struggle for our liberty. We have confidence in him, we believe him and we thank God that we have a man of his character and ability at the head of our Czecho-Slovak revolution. May God give him health and strength." Albert Mamatey, the president of the Slovak League, describing what had taken place at the conference with �30 SLOVAKIA Masaryk and how the Pittsburgh Pact came to be drafted, wrote as follows: "In order that all reasons for the mistrusting of the Czechs by the Slovaks should be ended, be these reasons well founded or imagined, this matter was brought up for consideration at the last session of the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Pittsburgh on May 30, where our leader, Professor Masaryk, was also present. "We Slovaks brought up the matter, and requested Professor Masaryk to examine well that famous Cleveland Czecho-Slovak Agreement of ours, and to approve it and see to it that the leaders among the Czech brothers respect it in their relations to the Slovaks, or that he himself draft a new Agreement, which would better suit the changing conditions, since some points of that Cleveland Agreement had to be changed because of the changes in conditions caused by the war. "Professor Masaryk examined our Cleveland Agreement thoroughly, and seeing that in some details it really is not "up-to-date," he wrote a new Pact, in which he outlined very concisely, yet very clearly, the relations of the Czechs and Slovaks in this fight for liberty and later in the hopedfor Czecho-Slovak State." According to the arrangement at this conference, this Pittsburgh Pact-being a very important document, was not merely to remain in its original crude shape, but was to be lithographed and then signed by all those concerned. In the meantime, things were happening in rapid succession. The United States Government and the governments of the Allies recognized the fight of the Czechs and Slovaks for their freedom and in fact, made their independence one of the conditions of peace. The Czecho-Slovak Republic was formally proclaimed on October 28, 1918, and was in reality recognized by the Allied powers some time previous to that. An event, however, that is of utmost importance to us is, that in the meantime, Professor Masaryk, the chairman of the recognized Czecho-Slovak National Council, the temporary government of the new CzechoSlovak State, was elected first President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic by that Council. Immediately Masaryk was asked to leave America and come to the scene where activity was greatest, and where his presence, as of the Presi- �SLOVAKIA 31 dent, was now needed most. Masaryk left for the CzechoSlovak Republic on November 20, 1918, from New York on the SS. Carmen. As soon as the news reached America that Professor Masaryk was elected president and that he was to leave :soon, Mamatey, at the insistence of some of the Slovak leaders, went to see Masaryk in Washington before his departure, and there in Washington on November 14, 1918, as the qualified President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact. The Pittsburgh Pact, which he signed, read as follows: CZECHO-SLOV AK PACT Agreed Upon In Pittsburgh, Pa. , on May 30th, 1918 Representatives of the Slovak and Czech Organizations In the United States The Slovak League, the Czech National Alliance And the Alliance of Czech Catholics discussed the Czecho-Slovak question in the presence of the' chairman of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, Prof. Masaryk, and the program declarations made up to this time and resolved the following: We approve the political program which endeavors to unite the Czechs and Slovaks in an independent state of the Czech lands and Slovakia; Slovakia shall have its own administration, its own parliament and its own courts. The Slovak language shall be the official language in the school, in office and in public life in general. The Czecho-Slovak state shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic. The organization of the cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks in the U.S. shall be intensified and arranged with mutual understanding as necessity and the changing conditions shall require. The detailed regulations for the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak state are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks: and their legal representatives. �32 SLOVAKIA Who were the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact? The first and foremost signature is that of Masarykthe President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Then the following: Czechs: 1. Karel Pergler, attorney, who was chairman of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, first Czecho-Slovak ambassador in Washington, D.C., later in Japan. A member of the Czecho-Slovak parliament, lately a "man without a country" since the Czecho-Slovak Republic revoked his citizenship. 2. Dr. L. Fisher, physician, who at that time was president of the Bohemian National Alliance. 3. B. Simek, professor, Chicago, a member of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council. 4. J. J. Zmrhal, professor, Chicago, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 5. Hynek Dostal, Editor of "Hlas," St. Louis, Missouri, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 6. Rev. Oldrich Zlamal, Cleveland, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 7. Vojta Benes, Secretary Bohemian National Alliance. 8. Rev. Innocent Rest!, Chicago, president Catholic Czech Alliance. 9. Jan Straka, Secretary Catholic Czech Alliance. 10. Dr. G. Pecival, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 11. Jos. Martinek, Editor, member of Bohemian National Alliance. Slovaks: 1. Albert Mamatey, President Slovak League, later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 2. Ivan Bielek, Editor "National News," member Czecho-Slovak National Council, later President Slovak League. 3. Milan Getting, Editor "Slovak Sokol," later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. �SLOVAKIA 33 4. G. H . Mika, attorney, Bridgeport, Connecticut, member of Slav Press Bureau. 5. Ignac Gessay, Editor official organ of Slovak League, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 6. Jozef Rusek, Middletown, Pa., Editor "Jednota," official weekly publication of the First Catholic Slovak Union, and member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 7. Rev. L. J. Karlovsky, New York, minister, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 8. Jan Jancek, Jr., Secretary Slovak League, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 9. Marus Gazdik, an officer of Slovak League, later Assistant Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. 10. Jan Pankuch, Cleveland, Ohio, owner of "Denny Hlas." Later vice-president National Slovak Society. 11. Michal Bosak, Scranton, Pennsylvania, banker, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 12. Rev. Jozef Murgas, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, chairman of publicity committee for "Million Dollar Fund" collection. Clergyman. Pioneer experimenter in wireless telegraphy. 13. Andrej Schustek, Chicago, local Slovak League official, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 14. Rev. Pavel J. Siska, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, vicepresident Slovak League. 15. J. A. Feriencik, Cleveland, Ohio, writer and editor. 16. Ivan Daxner, former secretary Slovak League. 17. Rev. Jan Kubasek, a Catholic priest. President Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact as the President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. That he was a fully qualified president of the Republic, having the powers of president and recognized as such, is best attested by the fact, that in November, at the time that he affixed his signature to the Pact, Masaryk negotiated a ten million dollar loan for his State from American financiers, under the protectorate of the United States Government, of course. Another significant event that is worth recording here is the stamp of approval given all actions of President �34 SLOVAKIA Masaryk by a resolution of the temporary government adopted in Geneva on November 11, 1918, whereby "everything done by Professor Masaryk, chairman of the CzechoSlovak National Council, all agreements and promises (made by him) remain in force." The Pittsburgh Pact, drafted by Professor Masaryk, then chairman of that Council, some five months previous, and signed by him then as President, three days after this Geneva resolution was passed, was one of the "Agreements" or "promises" that must be included and intended by this resolution. And yet, as we shall see, that was one "agreement" or "promise" that has not remained in force, has not been respected, has not been honored. THE PITTSBURGH PACT DISREGARDED It is unnecessary to go into detail about all that transpired in the early days of the new State. The Czechs and Slovaks back home-in the old Austria-Hungarian State, were aware of the movement beyond the borders of the old Empire, the purpose of which was the setting up of a joint State of the Czechs and Slovaks. They, too, became imbued with enthusiasm and in due time, Czech and Slovak deputies announced in the Austrian and Hungarian parliaments that the Czechs and Slovaks no longer would be domineered by alien groups. That they were seceding from the old Empire and setting up a State of their own. Aided, abetted and controlled by Masaryk and his National Council, the end was finally achieved and the Czecho-Slovak Republic established. A constitution was drafted and accepted, temporary rules outlined, and the Republic was soon enjoying the first days of its free existence. The Slovaks, as well as the Czechs, could hardly realize that their long fought battle for liberty and freedom was at last won. Here they were-two fraternal nations-setting out with a truly mutual and fraternal spirit with their own ship of state. How mutually fraternal the two peoples regarded themselves! The Slovaks looked upon the Czechs as their long lost, more experienced brethren, who came back to help them, to aid them, and to establish a country where both could enjoy liberty at last. Under such circumstances, some small gathering in Turciansky Sv. Martin, which was supposed to be representative of the entire Slovak nation (but which was anything but that), was so overcome with �SLOVAKIA 35 enthusiasm that, unaware that anything like the Pittsburgh Pact existed in America, it adopted a long resolution voicing this enthusiasm, and going so far in this spirit of joy, that it proclaimed the Slovaks and Czechs to be one nation-the Czechoslovak people. Nothing more was necessary! That settled all disputes! The Slovaks consider themselves politically, racially and by language one people with the Czechs! The Pittsburgh Pact has no leg to stand on. It is superfluous! Therefore, it should be ignored. And after all was said and done, and the early government established with all its provisions, the crafty Czech politicians, aided by a handful of Slovak individuals aspiring for government positions, arranged all matters so, that the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were totally ignored and not embodied in the Constitution. Little did it matter that the Slovaks, after learning of the Pittsburgh Pact and all that it provided for the Slovaks, did everything in their power to enforce the Pact's provisions. The Pact was ignored, and all that it provided meant nothing. Nor did it avail the Slovaks any to point out that according to the Pact, the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives-duly elected to represent them, never had a voice in establishing the details and arrangements of the Czecho-Slovak State, and that the Sv. Martin gathering was not a legal representative body of the Slovaks. The Pittsburgh Pact continued to be ignored. The Slovak League, as one of the parties to the Pact, has clamored for the recognition of the Pact. In 1922 it directed a Memorandum to the government and the House of Deputies. The representatives of the largest Slovak political party-the People's Party-have presented a motion in parliament to have the Pittsburgh Pact recognized and embodied in the Constitution. Other methods have been tried by the Slovaks and their representatives. Deaf ears and unfriendly gestures have met all their demands, pleas, etc. How utterly the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact have been ignored is probably best revealed by the following message, which Dr. I.:udovit Bazovsky, a former member of the Revolutionary Parliament, sent to the Czecho-Slovak Parliament in Feburary, 1930: �36 SLOVAKIA HOUSE OF DEPUTIES National Parliament of the Czecho-Slovak Republic Prague. As a former member of the revolutionary National Parliament, 1 received your invitation to the celebration of the Tenth Anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. At this occasion it is necessary to present the following: WARNING The Slovak nation has been under the presumption, before and during the revolution, that it shall be able to retain its nationalistic independence. It tolerated the fiction of a "Czechoslovak" nation only under the enforced conviction, that this fiction is temporarily necessary for the purpose of a diplomatic situation. Otherwise, the Slovak nation has never renounced its independence and has never recognized the existence of a "Czechoslovak" nation. There is no such nation! There is a Czech nation and a Slovak nation; and so likewise, there is no "Czechoslovak" language, but there is a Czech language and a Slovak language. We must consider the state ideology which was in force in the former Hungary and which did not recognize a Slovak nation, but embodied us into a concept of the Magyar-Hungarian-nation, and in this way endeavored to Magyarize us, as completely outlived. It hurts us, that the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic does not recognize a Slovak nation, but a Czechoslovak nation, which of course, is then the basis for the practice of Czechization of the Slovak people in every field of public endeavor. The enforced idea about the non-existence of the Slovak nation and the fiction of a Czechoslovak nation has directly painful consequences for the Slovaks, and very advantageous economic results for the Czechs. Slovakia has been kept at a lower cultural and economic level than Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia ever since our revolution. The tax-paying people of Slovakia have been carrying a relatively and circumstantially greater burden than the ,people of the historical lands mentioned; expenditures, which should have been, and sometimes were, very meagerly allowed for Slovakia, were not directed hither; whereas, more and more was and is being systematically invested in the historical lands. The flourishing Slovak commerce was destroyed, diverted, railroad tariffs were retained to the disadvantage of Slovakia and only to the advantages of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. The land reform in Slovakia was conducted aimlessly and it frequently favored some of the otherwise unentitled centralist partisans and Czechs on political party principles alone. Agriculture in Slovakia is assisted in a small way only when the centralist party interests require it. The result of this is that, Slovakia is continually becoming poorer and poorer, and the historic lands are becoming richer and richer. The historic lands are enjoying prosperity. Slovakia is suffering poverty. It grieves the Slovaks very much that the very great numbers of Czech officials in Slovakia do not learn the Slovak language and that �SLOVAKIA 37 the official business is conducted either in Czech or in broken Slovak, which seems to be a definite Czechisizing tendency. Czech text-books are being principally used in the Junior High Schools and the native Slovak students have no scientific academic opportunity to educate themselves correctly in their mother tongue. The Slovak language is suppressed and the Czech language favored to the detriment of the former. There is not a single Slovak university, and the so-called Comenius University in Bratislava is an expressly Czechisizing institute of learning. This cultural oppression of the Slovak people has an economic background for the benefit of the Czech people. This is contrary to the principles of democracy. There is an awfully detrimental effect in the fact that, the administration of Slovakia is in the hands of the Czech center in Prague, which is not acquainted with the local Slovak conditions, and in the fact that the appointment of even the lowest employes in Slovakia depends on the Czech center in Prague. The Slovaks are not permitted to govern themselves. (Administration. ) The Slovaks cannot take their place in the legislative field because in the central parliament in Prague they are always subject to the tremendous odds against them and they are merely dependent on the favor or disfavor of the others. It is necessary to remark here that, it would be advantageous to refer many matters concerning Slovakia to a separate Slovak parliament. The judiciary in Slovakia is in a terrible condition. The lowest positions have such poor salaries attached to them that the average poor Slovak young man cannot set out upon a judical career, and these places are then filled by individuals of the wealthier Czech rising generation, who for the time being are able to have support from home. The conditions are similar in matters of the army where we can hardly find any Slovak officers even for the show of the thing. Conditions are not different in the foreign relations service. The conditions in the judiciary, particularly in reference to matters of political offenses, are very worthy of attention. Political offenses committed in Slovakia are tried by Czech judges who are unacquainted with the local conditions and the people, and who are ordering such tyrannical penalties as were never heard of during the former Hungarian regime. There are many more political punishments and jail sentences than there were during the Hungarian regime. -The demand that Slovakia should have its own courts, is totally justified. The Slovaks bear with great difficulty the fact that there is no freedom of the press in Slovakia. The eleven-year experience proves the need, and imperatively demands to-day more than ever, that the rights of the Slovak nation as they were contemplated in the Pittsburgh Pact be incorporated into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and that they be executed in practice as well. It is impossible to assure the cultural and economic prosperity of the Slovak nation without executing the Pittsburgh Pact. This is the desire of the Slovak nation. The Pittsburgh Pact is not only a historic Act, but is a binding '·Magna Charta" of the rights of the Slovak nation. �38 SLOVAKIA Perhaps the solicitude, even though exaggerated, of some of the Czech leaders who understand the sentiment of Slovakia very little. was un<U!rstandable in the beginning, that, whether or not the very pronounced recognition of the rights of the Slovak nation might not cause the state some damage in view of the surrounding foreign sentiment which understood our matters even less. But to-day, when the loyalty of the Slovak nation to the Republic does not bear any doubt whatsoever, it is not advisable to expose the nation to despair by refusing to guarantee its rights and to deprive it of the hope that it will be able to establish its rights in the Republic by constitutional means. The people in Slovakia cannot become a source of state power without the establishment of autonomy in Slovakia in accordance \\ith the minimal requirements set forth in the Pittsburgh Pact, and consequently it is impossible to imagine democl'acy, equality and freedom in Slovakia. THE VALIDITY OF THE PACT A. President Masaryk and His Attitude Toward the Pittsburgh Pact Just how the leaders-particularly the Czech leaders in the government of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, felt about the Pittsburgh Pact once the Republic was established and its Constitution drafted and ratified, is probably best exemplified by the opinions that Professor Masaryk voiced about the Pact on various occasions. Let us take up some of those opinions. 1.) On February 5, 1920, minister Tusar sent president Masaryk an official communication, asking for his version of the Pact and its significance, in view of the widespread discussion that the Pact was causing in those early days of the Republic. President Masaryk replied the same day: " .... Laws, too, are interpreted according to the circumstances under which they arose and the intentions of the legislators are sought for in the words. The Czechoslovak pact agreed upon in my presence on May 30, 1918, must be interpreted in a similar way. The leaders of the Slovak and Czech organizations in America agreed on the pact in order to frustrate the agitation against the union of the Slovaks and Czechs. The contract is made, I think, mostly between American citizens. The Pittsburgh program is one of the many pre-revolutionary programs made beyond the boundaries. It has its historical value. The Pittsburgh con- �SLOVAKIA 39 tract is made between Czechs and Slovaks, and if it could hold at all, it certainly would hold only if both parties would still agree with its contents. At the end of the contract itself it is stated that, the detailed arrangements ,_and regulations in the Czechoslovak State are being left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their empowered leaders. That was stated because the Czechs and Slovaks at the Pittsburgh meeting knew very well that American citizens have no right to decide about definite arrangements of the Czechoslovak State. The representatives of the Czechs and Slovaks for that reason also do not refer to the demands of the Pittsburgh Pact in their proclamations .. . etc." That letter by President Masaryk was his first public denial of the Pittsburgh Pact's validity. 2.) He made a similar statement when on December 15, 1922, replying to the senators and parliament members of the Slovak People's Party, who had visited him in the matter of autonomy for Slovakia, he said: "I came to America in the early part of May, 1918, and found the conditions not very pleasant in the Slovak camp and there was a faction, though insignificant, which advocated a utopian separatist program. The political situation and the situation at the battle front were pretty tense. The United States then were officially still in favor of some reform of Austria-Hungary ... In contrast to this, the Slovaks were little known in the political world, and the movement for a separatist Slovakia was doomed for the failure of its own and the joint cause in advance. "Under such circumstances I endeavored for an agreement, so that a detrimental division would not take place, and so that the fight would stop from which Austrian and Hungarian propaganda would profit. "The majority of the Slovaks, particularly the leaders, were against separatism, and so came the Pact in Pittsburgh on May 30th-which-it is understood-was valid all by itself for America and American conditions. For the Slovak side as well as the Czech side, the pact was signed by American citizens, and those naturally are not entitled to prescribe for Slovakia and their people at home, and the signers were fully aware of this. I signed the Pittsburgh Pact for that reason, too, that, it was specifically stated in �40 SLOVAKIA it that, detailed arrangements of the future State shall be made by the legal representatives of the people. And these representatives clearly voiced and politically decided the relations of Slovakia to the unified state by the ratification of the Constitution. This ratification and formal promise is binding upon the Slovak and Czech deputies and is equally binding upon me, too ... " 3.) President Masaryk voiced a still more damaging -in reality a more insulting opinion about the Pittsburgh Pact when on October 12, 1929, he wrote to Hlinka, leader of the People's Party and a deputy in parliament, as follows: " ... You yourself once admitted to me that you demand autonomy not for the present time, but for the time when the Slovaks shall be politically more mature. In accordance with that, you should endeavor that your voters should be informed and reared politically. Look at the mistakes you have made with the so-called Pittsburgh Pact. De facto you had your autonomy from the time of the revolution, and now you have all the stipulations of that pact (or rather verbal agreement) fulfilled. But the main thing is that, the document of that verbal agreement is forged, is a Jalsum, because, at the time when the American Slovaks wanted that verbal agreement, the League did not exist legally, it was recognized by the State until in 1919. For that reason a serious politician, a statesman, cannot and must not operate with such a paper. A falsification cannot become an act of State ... " B. CRITICISMS OF THE PACT ARE UNFOUNDED Time, space, nor the reader's patience, do not permit a careful analysis and refutation of all those statements by President Masaryk concerning the Pittsburgh Pact. To all, except the totally uninformed, the fallacy of those statements must be quite apparent. Few of the more glaring misstatements in these official communications, however, should be mentioned here. 1.) It seems ridiculous for the president to say that Slovakia has long had its autonomy, from the very foundation of the republic in fact, and that all stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact were in reality all fulfilled already in Slovakia. Why, if all that be so, should it be necessary that �SLOVAKIA 41 the deputies of the Slovak People's Party be forced to visit Masaryk and demand autonomy for Slovakia and demand that the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact be enforced in Slovakia? Why should it be necessary for the Slovak League to clamor for recognition of the Pittsburgh Pact? Why should Dr. L. Bazovsky be prompted by conditions in Slovakia to write a communication, as quoted in previous pages, in the twelfth year of the existence of the Republic? No, the facts are that Slovakia did not have its autonomy nor were the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact ever fulfilled. Slovakia did not have its home-rule. Slovakia was oppressed by detrimental effects of a centralized government, and the results were that, Slovakia was constantly being made commercially and economically poorer and poorer; that thousands and thousands were forced to leave their fatherland and emigrate to all parts of the world; and what is worst-that the very existence of the Slovak nation was being jeopardized by the forceful propagation of the "unified Czechoslovak nation" idea. The Memorandum which the Slovak League of America sent the Government and the National Assembly of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1922 in behalf of the embodying of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Republic, very clearly proved all the above conditions in Slovakia (as resulting from the disregard for the Pittsburgh Pact and the instituting of a centralized government.) 2.) But to return to some of the other statements made by President Masaryk. It is wholly untrue that there was an "insignificant faction which advocated a utopian separatist program." It would be closer to the truth had he said that there were a few individuals who contended that, cooperation with the Czechs, who have anti-Slovak tendencies, is impossible. And then it should be admitted that the Slovaks, at least some of the leaders, had reasons to doubt the sincerity of some of the Czech leaders, and that had not these doubts of the Slovaks been dispelled by such seemingly sound and earnest promises, made in writing and signed black-on-white as the Pittsburgh Pact, there is no telling whether the Czechs and Slovaks would really have come to establish a joint State. It was not the few individuals who were opposed to any combination with the Czechs, but the majority of the �42 SLOVAKIA recognized Slovak leaders, who were forced to be careful in their dealings with the Czechs because of the recent suspicious incidents, that Masaryk came to appease in America --and he did it in writing-in the Pittsburgh Pact. 3.) It is pointed out that the Pact was made and signed by American Slovaks and Czechs-American citizens. The fact that the pact was made between President Masaryk on one side and American Czechs and Slovaks on the other, seems to be passed over. The Czechs and Slovaks here in America certainly did not need such a Pact just for the sake of having it here, or for their own local conditions here. Was not the Czecho-Slovak Republic and its people constructed in that Pact? We deny that the Pittsburgh Pact is just a local Pact between the American Czechs and Slovaks, concerning which the Czecho-Slovak Republic government should have no interest. Then, too, Masaryk did not sign the pact as some sort of a mediator here. He was a representative of one of the parties of the Pact. The CzechoSlovak National Council of America--embodying the representative Slovak and Czech organizations in America, which called the Pittsburgh meeting at which the Pact was drafted, accepted and signed, issued a proclamation on November 7, 1919, and sent it to the government to the effect that the Pittsburgh Pact was made between President Masaryk and the representatives of the American Czechs and Slovaks. The Pact, too, could not be an agreement just to meet local conditions and drafted between American Czechs and Slovaks, since some of the signers of the Pact were not citizens of the United States of America. The Pittsburgh Pact was not intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in America, it was intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and therefore, is not valid only in America and for America. It is primarily valid in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Cleveland Agreement could be constructed as having local importance only. It was signed by American Czechs and Slovaks for the purpose of establishing the cooperation of these two nationalities in America in a joint cause. The Pittsburgh Pact, however, had more than local importance. The very fact that Professor Masaryk, the head of the temporary revolutionary government drafted it and signed it, gave it more than local importance. The Czechs �SLOVAKIA 43 and Slovaks in America were not doing all those things for themselves but for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks on the other side of the Ocean, and Masaryk, too, was not working for the welfare of the Czechs and Slovaks here in America, but for those over there. And he, as well as all others, signed the Pittsburgh Pact with the hope that they were helping to create a State where both nations might be free, contented, and where they could develop culturally, economically, etc. 4.) That the Pact may still hold good only if both sides should agree with its contents, certainly is not consistent with the very meaning, idea and intent of a pact or agreement. 5.) That the Pact is a forgery, a falsification, because the Slovak League did not exist legally at the time of the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact, and that the Pact is not valid, as Dr. srobar expressed it, because it was signed on a Legal Holiday in America, is undoubtedly best refuted by the following legal opinion: Law Offices George E . Alter 1012 Park Building Gifford K. Wright Pittsburgh, Pa. Alexander J . Barron George M. Swan ALTER, WRIGHT & BARRON Telephone James Milholland Atlantic 2211 William H. McNaugher Ralph D. McKee George F. Taylor, Jr. James K. Ruby Mahlon E. Lewis April 23, 1930 James Grove Fulton Slovak League of America Box 996 Pittsburgh, Pa. Gentlemen: You have submitted to me the following questions: 1. Is there - in the Untted States - a difference as to their legal rights between chartered and unchartered organizations which are not operated for pecuniary gain? 2. Has an unchartered organization the right to make legal and binding agreements in the United States? 3. Can an agreement, entered into by such an organization with a party of the second part - in this case Professor Masaryk - not made for the pecuniary gain �44 SLOVAKIA by the said organization, but closed on a legal holiday (Memorial Day) be declared a falsum by the party of the second part, after having received and enjoyed the benefits evolving out of that agreement? Replying to these questions, my opinion is as follo ws: ( 1) There is some difference between chartered and unchartered organizations not operated for pecuniary gain, but for such purposes as are involved in the subject of your inquiry, there is no difference. (2) I understand the organization in question at the time the " Pittsburgh Pact" was entered into was an organization having a Constitution, By-Laws, officers, etc., though not chartered by the State. For the purpose of taking the action which was taken, such an organization would have all the necessary power as fully as if it had been chartered. (3 ) The agreement entered into by the unchartered organization referred to would be just as effective as if entered into with a charter ed organization and just as valid if closed on Memo rial Day as on any other day. Very truly yours, Geo . E. Alter Karel Pergler, a Czech, an attorney, one of the signers of the Pact, later a member of the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, in discussing the validity of the Pact, said the following in the National Assembly on February 22, 1930: "The Pittsburgh Pact is not a "falsum." To circulate reports about the Pittsburgh Pact that it is a "falsum," is beside the point, is not right and does not coincide with the historical truth." 6.) The question whether the American Czechs and Slovaks-more specifically, the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact had a right to prescribe for Slovakia or the new Czecho-Slovak Republic could be expanded here to a lengthy discussion. Suffice it to say, if the signers of the Pact had no such right, why did Masaryk, as the head of the government, attempt to enter into a pact with a party or parties that had no such right? Did he himself have any right to make any prescriptions for the new State? If he had no such right, wasn't he conscious of that in Pittsburgh at the time that he drafted the Pact? And isn't it also a fact, that in the absence of any who might have the full right to make sueh prescriptions, the Czechs and Slovaks in America along with President Masaryk assumed that right upon themselves and actually did make prescriptions for the new State when they said in the pact: �SLOVAKIA 45 "The Czecho-Slovak State shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic," etc., etc. Are not these definite and clearly outlined prescriptions for the new State? Did not the temporary and provisional revolutionary Czecho-Slovak Government (Masaryk, Benes, Stefanik) assume certain rights and privileges which might be questioned by the same mode of reasoning? The Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hung ary were powerless to organize the revolution. The Czechs and Slovaks in America assumed the right to speak in behalf of their entire respective nations. The American Slovaks in issuing their Memorandum in 1914 clearly showed that they were assuming the leadership of the entire Slovak Nation of the world. Why then should their right be questioned when interpreting the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact? The Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic to this day believe that the Slovaks in America have a right to concern themselves with matters in the Czecho-Slovak Republic and have a right to exercise a voice in their ultimate disposition. The following matter clearly shows the attitude of the Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic: On May 15, 1934, deputy Andrej Hlinka and others delivered an objection to the government of Czecho-Slovakia because of the confiscations and censorship of the daily "Slovak." Among some of the articles censored in the daily "Slovak" was one by M. Mlynarovic, president of the Slovak Catholic Federation of America, quoted from Slovak newspapers in America. Hlinka and his colleagues said that they "consider the confiscation of that report (article) totally unwarranted " and that they "consider it a grave insult to the American Slovaks, who did their share in the Czechoslovak revolutionary movement and therefore have a right to speak in the matters of our State." 7.) That the Slovaks or their leaders never made demands in accordance with the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact, hardly tells the true story. The first revolutionary parliament in the new Republic was not a body representative of the people-the deputies were a more or less self-appointed group and these ratified the Constitution which ignores the Pittsburgh Pact. When in April of 1919 Hlinka learned of the Pittsburgh Pact which had been �46 SLOVAKIA signed a year previous, and when he learned of the various stipulations contained therein, which had been ignored by the Constitution, he held several mass meetings of the Slovak people, some of which were dissolved by Czech police, and the result was that, the Slovaks sent a delegation to Paris, where they might plead for the rights and privileges of the Slovak nation before the same tribunal which had permitted the establishment of a joint state of the Czechs and Slovaks. This visit to Paris in behalf of Slovak rights, those very rights outlined and guaranteed by the Pittsburgh Pact, resulted in the persecution of all Slovak autonomists and resulted in the jailing of Hlinka. The Slovaks were doing nothing more than demanding what the Pact guaranteed them. How then can anyone speak of the Slovaks as not making their demands of the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact? SOME REMARKS ABOUT THE PITTSBURGH PACT Something that was frequently hurled at the adherents of the Pittsburgh Pact-the autonomists-both here in America and in Czecho-Slovakia, was that they are traitors of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, enemies of the state etc. Nothing was farther from the truth. The Slovak autonomists were loyal friends of the State. They did not advocate separation from the Czechs, they did not advocate secession from the Czecho-Slovak Republic-they merely wanted for the Slovak nation what they believed it justly had coming to it,-its rights, its home-rule, as promised and guaranteed in the Pittsburgh Pact. The two major parties in Slovakia which demanded the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were: The Slovak People's Party, the largest party in Slovakia, a Catholic party, led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, and the National Party, non-denominational, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. The chief proponents of the autonomist endeavors here in America were: The Slovak League, comprising American Slovaks of all creeds, and the Catholic Slovak Federation. The chief opponents of the Pittsburgh Pact and the endeavors of the autonomists were the leaders of the Czech government and the political parties allied with the government. Included among these were a small percentage of Slovaks who had found it advantageous to side with the �SLOVAKIA 47 ruling government. These usually were afforded good positions, offices etc., etc., and naturally, their sincerity with the national Slovak welfare was doubted in Slovak circles. These had their followers here in America and although they comprise the minority of Slovaks here, aided and abetted by government circles, they had been well able to hold a strong position. The vast majority of the Slovaks in America, and the far greater portion of the Slovak press here were in sympathy with the autonomy movement, yet the centralist forces held the point of vantage, they had the strategic positions, as will always happen with those who hold sides with the government recognized in diplomatic circles. The Slovaks were not attempting to overthrow the state. They wanted their joint state with the Czechs, the work of the few discontended pro-Magyar workers to the contrary notwithstanding. The Slovaks felt that they voluntarily entered into the formation of the Republic under certain guarantees. They were to have their own administration, their own parliament, their own courts of justice. They had none of these. They were promised that the Slovak language would be the official language in their schools, in their offices and in their public life in general. They then found that the Slovak language was not the official language in their country. The numerous Czech officials who held positions in Slovakia refused to learn the Slovak language and they used the Czech exclusively. The Slovaks found that according to the accepted law, the official language of the State was the Czechoslovak language -a non-entity-there can be no such language, since there are two separate and distinct nations-the Czechs and the Slovaks-each with their own and distinct language. The schools and institutions of higher learning had a preponderance of Czech instructors and professors, notwithstanding the fact that many thousand Slovaks qualified to hold these positions were clamoring in vain to obtain these positions. All in all, some 300,000 Czechs had immigrated to Slovakia and held positions there, while intelligent and qualified Slovaks could find no place of employment. These Slovaks felt that they should be given preference for these positions in their homeland. Why should the young Slovak, ready and qualified to embark on a career, be forced to be �48 SLOVAKIA idle, to go hungry, or to emigrate, while 300,000 intruders find steady employment in his native Slovakia? Further discontent among the Slovak was caused by the methods of oppression exercized against them. Freedom of the press and speech were unknown. Jail sentences and financial penalties were imposed with great freedom and abandon by the Czech judges upon any and all who dared to criticize the government and the conditions for which the government was responsible. The republic supposedly had a democratic form of government. Yet, there is nothing in a democracy that is above criticism, not even the ruling government, and if it is, democracy certainly ceases to exist. The Slovaks objected too, to the Czechisizing policies adopted by those in control. They objected to having anyone forcefully thrust upon them the idea of a unified Czechoslovak nationality. They believed they comprise one nation, separate and distinct from the Czech nation, and though with the Czechs they form one Czecho-Slovak state, they still remain a separate and distinct nationality from the Czechs. The Czechs want to be and remain Czechs, and the Slovaks feel they are and want to be and remain Slovaks, not Czechs, not even Czechoslovak s. The Slovaks deny the existence of a unified Czechoslovak nationality, and anyone attempting to force such principles upon them is looked upon as an enemy of the Slovak people, who is jeopardizing their individual national existence and attempting to erase the Slovak nation off the face of the earth. The recognition and implementati on of the Pittsburgh Pact was the only solution of all these difficulties at that time. It certainly was a means of stopping the unrest and discontent among the Slovaks and it was the most efficient means of frustrating the propaganda of all enemies of the Republic, who relied on the unrest of the Slovaks as a means of revision of the peace treaties. The most ardent proponents of this revision were the Hungarians. They believed that injustice had been done them and one remedy that would act as a so~thing lotion on their imagined bruises would have been annexation of the fertile, productive and naturally wealthy territory of Slovakia back to Hungary. Their agents in the Slovak ranks fanned hatred �SLOVAKIA 49 against the Czecho-Slovak Republic. With those the Slovaks had no sympathies, even if a few exceptions were found here and there, which merely proved the rule. But, the stubborn Czechs could not see all of this and rather than yield to the entitled demands of the Slovaks they were willing to risk their future. 20th ANNIVERSARY OF THE PACT AND WHAT FOLLOWED: AUTONOMY, INDEPENDENCE, RESUBJUGATION AND COMMUNISM In 1938 the Slovaks in Slovakia, led by the two autonomist parties-Hlinka's People's Party Wudova strana), and Razus's National Party (Narodna strana ), decided to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact (Pittsburghska dohoda). The purpose of the celebration was to call attention of the world to the fact that the postulates of the Pact had not been fulfilled and complied with; that the Slovaks were very dissatisfied with such treatment on the part of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government; that they still insist and clamor for the fulfillment of all the promises that Masaryk and the Czechs made in the Pittsburgh Pact. And because Masaryk and some of his hench-men had claimed that in fact no such pact or agreement had ever been made and concluded, the Slovak League of America was asked by the Slovaks in Slovakia to bring the original lithographed copy of the Pittsburgh Pact, personally signed by president Masaryk after he had already been elected president of Czecho-Slovakia, and by the representatives of the Czech and Slovak organizations in the U.S.A. The Slovak League sent an official delegation to the Pittsburgh Pact anniversary celebration in Bratislava, Slovakia. The delegation consisted of Dr. Peter P. Hletko of Chicago, Illinois, the president of the Slovak League and the designated leader of the delegation; Jozef Husek, of Middletown, Pennsylvania, editor of 'Jednota,' the largest Slovak newspaper in America, and one of the original signers of the Pittsburgh Pact; Dominic Sloboda, of Lorain, Ohio, president of the Slovak Catholic Sokol, the largest Slovak gymnastic and athletic fraternal society in America; Andrew Novak, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, supreme treasurer of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest Slovak fraternal society in the world; Michael Sincak, former president of the Slovak Catholic �50 SLOVAKIA Sokol, and Rev. Andrej Rolik, of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, a Lutheran minister. The delegation attended a huge rally in Bratislava on June 5, 1938, attended by 100,000 Slovaks from all parts of Slovakia. Msgr. Hlinka, the leader of the People's Party, addressed the huge gathering. So did Dr. Hletko. And to prove Masaryk and some of the Czechs wrong when they had said that no such document was ever drafted and signed, and that no such agreement ever existed in writing and that Pittsburghska dohoda was a "falsum," Dr. Hletko unfurled the original copy of the agreement from the balcony of the National Theatre building for all to see. The enthusiastic assemblage became loud and hysterical and it vowed to demand fulfillment of all the promises made in writing to the Slovaks in this agreement. The determination of the Slovaks grew and increased immensely. They were now not to be denied! The Slovak League delegation visited President Benes and conferred with him at length in regards to the implementation of the Pittsburgh Pact. It visited the prime minister, Milan Hodfa, a Slovak, with definite centralist Czecho-Slovak leanings, who otherwise was powerless to force the fulfillment of the Pittsburgh Pact postulates. The delegation also visited the minister of foreign affairs, Krofta, the National Czecho-Slovak Council and many other government officials, reminding them that this is perhaps the eleventh hour for complying with all the guarantees contained in the Pittsburgh Pact, since omnious war clouds were gathering over Central Europe, Adolph Hitler was acting belligerent and brandishing a war sword and threatening Czecho-Slovakia with annihilation or annexation to the German Reich. But all this to no avail. The Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government officials would not commit themselves or promise to implement the Pact, even at such a late and dangerous hour. The result was that the Slovaks ran out of patience and after several additional provocative acts by the CzechoSlovak government, the Slovaks in a revolutionary move declared their autonomy in the Czecho-Slovak Republic on October 6th 1938. The Czechs were powerless and yielded under the tremendous international pressure, but only for a short time. They bided their time, waiting for an opportune occasion, and when they thought the time ripe, they struck and attempted to wrest autonomy from the Slovaks. �SLOVAKIA 51 Two Slovak Hlinka Guardsmen were shot and killed in the attempted coup. But the Czechs' attempt boomeranged. The Slovaks did not surrender their autonomy. Instead, now convinced that the Czechs were anything but sincere in yielding to the autonomy demand of the Slovaks, the Slovaks now struck even farther. They now were not satisfied with a semblance of autonomy from the insincere and scheming Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government, who wanted to destroy that autonomy at the earliest and the first opportune moment . The Slovaks now feared that even in the future the Czechs would attempt to destroy the autonomy they had yielded to the Slovaks under the duress and pressure of an international situation. The Slovaks, knowing that the Czechs were under considerable pressure from Hitler, decided they would utilize this situation for their own benefit and tear away from the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak Republic rather than go down to annihilation along with the Czechs. The Slovaks did just that and they set up their own independent state, a Slovak Republic. Hitler had no love for the Czechs, and while he had no special love or sympathies for the Slovaks, he too utilized the situation to disrupt the Czecho-Slovak, so-called democratic republic. He took over the Czechs into a protectorate along with Moravia. He recognized the independent state of Slovakia, in fact, guaranteed its existence and safety for the next 25 years. And this too, compromised the Slovaks in the eyes of their enemies. That made the Slovaks nazis, they said. The Slovak autonomous parliament voted unanimously and to a man to establish the independent state, a republic, on March 14, 1939. This move was also prompted by Hungarian threats of land-grabbing from the Slovaks, abetted by the Italian Mussolini and his son-in-law Count Ciano, who openly placed themselves on the side of the Hungarians and their unjust and irresponsible demands against the Slovaks and Czecho-Slovakia. The Slovaks felt that having control over their Slovak lands they would better be able to prevent any land-grabs and annexation of Slovak lands and people than would the unsympathetic Czechs be who had no particular interest to protect, save and conserve Slovak land and people. Msgr. Jozef Tiso was elected first president of the new Slovak Republic. �52 SLOVAKIA The Slovak state progressed and developed very nicely for the next 6 years. The state set up its own currency and monetary system, its own army, postal system and everything that qualifies a successful and prosperous independent state. It is not the purpose nor the area of this treatise to describe the Slovak Republic. Suffice it to say that independent Slovakia was a sharp thorn in the Czechs' eyes. They were burning with envy, hate and revenge and scheming every way to destroy the independence of Slovakia. The former president of Czecho-Slovakia, Eduard Benes, spent much time in Russia, convincing the Russians to strike against Slovakia under the ruse that it is an ally of Germany. Russia finally did strike and brought back Benes with arms to his throne in Prague, of course, as a Russian and communist puppet. The Americans, also under the illusion that they are thereby defeating Hitler and the Germans, took a hand in destroying the independent Slovak state and they helped to force the Slovaks back into Czecho-Slovakia, albeit now a communistic Czecho-Slovakia. It was the American armed forces and the American counterintelligence that ferreted out president Tiso and members of his government, hidden in Austria, after their forced departure from Slovakia when the Russian army invaded Slovakia and committed many atrocities, inhumanities and indecencies, particularly against the female population in Slovakia. The Americans turned over Msgr. Tiso and members of his government to the Russian communists and their Czech puppets in Prague, Benes included, because he was the prime puppet of the Russians. President Tiso was tried by a rump court, found guilty of treason against Czecho-Slovakia and hung on April 18, 1947. Yet, his guilt was no greater nor graver than that of our own George Washington against England when he strove to free the 13 American colonies from British rule, dominance and tax extortion. Of course, he was not caught and apprehended and his revolution succeeded. That's the difference. Washington threw off an English government that was ruling an English people in America-in an English colony. President Tiso threw off a government that was not a Slovak government, but the government of and by another people, the Czechs. President Tiso's attempt was more justified than George Washington's. Tiso was overpowered by the �SLOVAKIA 53 Russian communists and delivered to the gallows with the help of Americans, American officials. Yet, the Americans in Washington's day strove for their complete independence in the same way that the Slovaks did. In any event, the help that Americans gave to help destroy the independent, democratic Republic of Slovakia, and to. aid in bringing Tiso to the gibbet, does not serve to their credit and glory, and never will. I, as a native American of Slovak parentage and descent, am not proud of that record. No Americans should be proud of it. We Americans stand for democracy, liberty, independence-for everybody, everywhere. But very often that is but a lip service. We don't always mean it sincerely. The Americans-and that includes our government too, should make amends somehow, or at least try to make amends for this travesty, and attempt to correct the injustice they have helped perpetrate on the Slovaks. But, because of their injudicious procedure and handling of the war situation, things have gone so far that the U.S. cannot do anything about correcting this highly unjustifiable situation. The communists, now in command and control, will see to that. Incidentally, when asked, the puppet president, Benes, refused to commute the Tiso sentence or spare his life. Perhaps, as a mere puppet, he did not dare. Well, either way, the good Lord took care of him. This is the story of the Pittsburgh Pact. It was implemented for a short time and eventually led to Slovak independence and the Slovak state. It is still a great historical document that all sincere, conscious and loyal Slovaks revere and respect. The original copy is here in the U.S.A. The delegation of the Slovak League when asked to leave the document in Slovakia in 1938 refused to do so on orders of the entire organization. Even when asked during the existence of the Slovak state to send the document to Slovakia as a historical museum piece, the Slovak League refused, realizing that conditions were not permanent and stable enough and that opponents of the document would seek to destroy it and remove all evidence of the fact that the Slovaks had been promised and guaranteed their rights and autonomy. The Slovak League refused to part with the document and kept it here in America-in safety. And it is good that they kept it here, �54 SLOVAKIA where it still can and does serve as a grand document attesting to the perfidy of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government. Today, nothing will obliterate the memories of this perfidious behavior but a restoration of an independent Slovak state or the creation of an independent Slovakia in a constellation of Central European states, but not as a part of Czecho-Slovakia under any circumstances. Just prior to leaving for Slovakia in 1938 with the Pittsburgh Pact Dr. Hletko, as president of the Slovak League and as the leader of the delegation had the document registered, filed on record and photostated in the Cook County Recorder's office in Chicago, where that record exists to this day. BIBLIOGRAPHY Karol Sidor: Slovcici v Zahranicnom odboji. 1929. Bratislava. The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact, 1934. Published by the Slovak Catholic Federation of America. Author: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Vice President of t he SCF. at that time. K. (:ulen: Pittsburghskci Dohoda. 1937. Bratislava. Fr. Hrusovsky: Slovenske Dejiny. 1939. Published by Matica Slovenska, Turciansky Sv. Martin, Slovakia. Topix. November 5, 1951 issue. Vol. 10, No. 6. A cartoon magazine published by the Cathechetical Guild Educational Society, St. Paul, Minn. Joseph M. Kirschbaum LL.D. , Ph.D.: Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe. 1960. R. Speller & Sons, publ. , New York, N. Y. Gilbert L. Oddo : Slovakia and its people. 1960. Publ. R. Speller & Sons, New York. Joseph A. Mikus, J.D.: Slovakia - a political history: 1918-1950. 1963. Marquette University Press. THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA condemns and unequivocally opposes all forms of tyranny, every form of totalitarian political system. The Slovak League of America has always recognized the Godless philosophy of materialistic Communism for the dread evil and conspiracy against free humanity that it is, as the political system which threatens mankind with utter enslavement and, therefore, has fought resolutely against it in and out of season and, today, is still determined to fight against it with all the means at its command until the dread plague of Communism is wiped off the face of the earth. � SLOVAKIA 5 THE SLOVAKS AND THE PITTSBURGH PACT Peter P. Hletko M.D. PREFACE None of the material in this article is new. The Slovaks are very well acquainted with it. It has been presented in book and pamphlet form, in newspaper articles etc. in the Slovak language many times. Our purpose here is to present this material to the American public and to acquaint it with the Pittsburgh Pact and all that the Pact guaranteed the Slovak nation in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. We feel that the American public is entitled to know all about the Pittsburgh Pact because the Pact is an American product and is in line with the principles of democracy and self-determination of small nations, for the defense of which principles this country, too, entered World Wars . We also feel that the American people, mindful of the fact that its own pioneers came here and founded a government on strong principles of democracy as opposed to aristocracy in an endeavor to escape the persecutions in their own land, shall lend the pleadings of the Slovak people a sympathetic ear. We present a few historical sketches so that the reader may know who the Slovak people are and that they have a glorious past; that they once had their freedom; how they regained their freedom; how they came to be in the CzechoSlovak Republic; how events developed and led to the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact; how the Slovaks seceded from Czecho-Slovakia and set up their own independent Slovak State. We want the reader to know what the Pact guaranteed, how the stipulations of the Pact were ignored, and what flimsy objections were raised relative to the validity of the Pact by those who were patrties to that Pact and who later became interested that the provisions of the Pact should be ignored. We hope that the reader will then understand why the Slovaks were clamoring for their autonomy-homerule-in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and now want "out" of the Communistic c-SSR and into their own independent State or Republic. �6 SLOVAKIA HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The Slovaks as a nation are not unknown in historical annals. They have a glorious past extending many centuries back. Stephen J . Palickar writes the following short synopsis: "The historical era of the Slovak Race marks its beginning at the time when the Slovaks are said to have reached Europe in the sixth century Before Christ. This period, of course, remains in such darkness as to leave us nothing but conjecture. Beginning with 335 A. D., we find that history reveals a. sufficient amount of facts pertaining to the Slovaks which leads us to believe that sometime during that period the Slovak Race had contacted with Byzantine influences and had already inherited a substantial share of Latin and German culture. This phase of Slovak life was next followed by periods of small rulers and that of King Svatopluk who was master of nearly the whole of Central Europe, whose land was known as the Great Slovak-Moravian Kingdom. During the period in which King Svatopluk ruled over this vast Slovakian territory, many enterprising feats had taken place among the Slovaks. Culture had made deep inroads among the people but it was not until Christianity was accepted by the Slovaks did history really begin to deal with them in any paramount way. The first Christian Church of the Slovaks was established by the Slovakian prince, Pribina, in the ancient city of Nitra about 830 A.D. Complete Christianization of the Slovak people was later effected by the Saints Cyril and Methodius (863-885). Church building and the acceptance of Christianity by the Slovaks antedates that of the Bohemians by 60 years; the Poles by 140 years; Russians by 160 years, and the Hungarians by 175 years." Just how powerful and influential this ancient Kingdom of the Slovaks was, may be judged from the description given by Joseph Skultety, outstanding Slovak philologist and historian. (Translation by 0. D. Koreff: 'Sketches from Slovak History'.) He writes: "The State of our ancestors, which even in Mojmir's days unto 846 had been built wisely and courageously, was already a power in the days of Rastislav. The Germans were then pushing down the Danube as they never did afterwards, and Greater Moravia, the young Slavonic State, bravely barred their way. True enough, their aggression only increased thereby. King Louis, surnamed the German, a grandson of Charlemagne, in 855, immediately after his accession, invaded Moravia with a great military force in order to rid himself of a danger which was growing there for his realm. But here the first resistance was so great that Louis decided rather to leave the opponent in peace than to expose his whole army to a catastrophe ... Rastislav pursued Louis, the German, invaded his territory and devastated a large area ... Under Svatopluk, after Rastislav, Greater Moravia represented a still greater military power. The defeat of the Germans in 870, beneath Devin (where Rastislav had his castle described as 'a mighty fortress with which not even one of the most ancient can compare'), was crushing. Their army perished in the battle; very few saved themselves by flight. There were few families in Bavaria, Austria and Carinthia who did not mourn the loss of some of their members ... Later in his reign Svatopluk com- �SLOVAKIA 7 pletely stopped the onslaught of the Germans down the Danube, towards the East. In German annals a record is preserved stating that when he went against Arnulf in 884 his army was seen in one place to pass all day, from morning until evening. Svatopluk already had extended his sovereignty to the North, over Bohemia, where the first historic prince, Borivoj, ruled, and over the Polish Slavs on the Upper Vistula; in the South his sovereignty extended even farther ; far beyond the frontier of Slovak territory. "To found such a state, a Slav state on the middle Danube at that time-in the second half of the ninth century-certainly was a great accomplishment; history will never cease speaking of it. There were indeed indications that a center was originating here around which a considerable part of the Slav would unite. But a young state, in order to fortify itself, to consolidate, must needs have favorable conditions. Our Slovak ancestors, at the end of the ninth century, were not so fortunate. The Germanic world still lived in a condition of fermentto have it as a neighbor was not good. It would yield, retreat, only under duress, as under Svatopluk. After Svatopluk's death the nomadic Magyars came as another neighbor on the southern bank of the Danube and to the Tisa river. Under such circumstances, after the first weak• ening, caused by internal, domestic strife, a young organization is apt to fare badly. This strife, this discord among the sons of Svatopluk, was incited by their German neighbors and Greater Moravia perished. The Magyars came to the Danube in 896, two years after Svatopluk's death, Mojmir II, Svatopluk's successor, in 900 petitioned for and procured from Rome two bishops and one archbishop, thus still organizing the Church. In 902 he still proved to his trans-Danubian neighbors that he is a son of Svatopluk, but not long afterwards he was no more .. . Greater Moravia perished." What happened to the Slovaks after the downfall of their Moravian kingdom is obscure and that part of history is rather nebulous. However, eventually we again find them coming to the fore. Palickar writes: "From the time of Matus cak .. . who in 1301 succeeded in restoring part of the lost Kingdom for the Slovaks, under whose rule thirty fortified castles were preserved, the Slovaks retained their spirit of nationalism and racial identity. Nor did culture cease to exist amongst the Slovaks during the Middle Ages, though it is often said that about• this time the real link to Slovakian history became lost and obscured in the pages of time. Contrary to that belief, however, the fact remains that Slovak history had never ceased to be written for a period of years until the well known revolution of 1848." · In all those Middle Age centuries we see the Slovaks attacked and their territory invaded and devastated by the Huns, the Tartars, the Turks and other tribes. And we also see the gradual coming over of the Magyars across the Danube and domesticating themselves on Slovak soil, until after centuries, the Magyars assumed control. What occured around 1848 is well synopsized by Palickar: "The Hungarians at this time waged war against Austria, while the Slovaks, after years of anticipation mixed with bitterness and resentment for the Hungarians, saw their opportunity and likewise rose against �8 SLOVAKIA the Hungarians for their Slovak language and national rights. The conclusion of war between Austria and Hungary, while reuniting the two people, threw the Slovaks back under the Hungarian rule with none of their rights recognized, particularly because of their support to the Austrians in this war. After presenting their famous Memorandum to the Imperial Throne of Austria in 1861, the Slovaks were granted the right to open several high schools ... the 'Matica Slovenska,' an institution for the fostering of Slovak culture wherein special study was encouraged in Slovak history, Art and Language . . . The Empire of the Austrians and Hungarians was again split in two so that in 1878 a more active crusade of Magyarizing the Slovaks had begun." It is at this point that we wish to enter into more detailed dis cussion of the modern Slovak nation and its struggles. HUNGARIAN PERSECUTION OF THE SLOVAKS The persecutions that the Slovak nation suffered in the old Austro-Hungarian Empire at the hands of the Hungarian regime are a matter of historical record. The Slovaks were denied the rights of free speech and assemblage. Their literature and schools were suppressed and forbidden. The Slovak was considered anything but a human being, and the Magyar regime did not make secrecy of its attitude toward the subordinate Slovak people. "Tot nem ember" (Slovak is not a human being) and "Buta Tot," (Ignorant Slovak) were favorite expressions that the pompous and ruling Magyar people used in referring to the Slovak people. And yet, Slovakia, as Palickar remarks, "known as a 'subordinate' nation but always the equal of those who would assume superiority over her, she can, nevertheless, boast of the fact that Slovak blood gave to the Hungarians 20 of the most famous and outstanding characters that Hungary ever had, without whom there would have been very little Hungarian history today." (Petofi, Kossuth, Cardinal Czernoch, Petian, etc.) The Slovak, however, has an inherent love for liberty and freedom, and enjoys fostering his national spirit. The thousand years that the Slovak people lived under gradually developing Magyar rule, nor the fifty years of severe persecution at the hands of the Magyars just prior to the World War I, did not succeed in effacing the national consciousness of the Slovaks. On the contrary, the policy of forcible Magyarization served only to enhance the nationalistic feeling of the Slovak people. This policy of forcible Magyarization of the Slovaks �SLOVAK.IA 9 was undoubtedly the greatest reason for Slovak immigration into America. The Slovaks are essentially a homeloving and peaceful people, but the quest for a land of true liberty made them turn their attentions to this glorious land, the home of "The brave and the free." And even after they settled here, established their colonies, acclimated themselves to their new surroundings and began to live according to local customs, they were always mindful of the injustices that had driven them out of the land of their birth, their fatherland. Every bit of news that they received about new acts of persecution at the hands of the Magyars of their brethren left behind, stirred them anew, and made them vow vengeance all over again. The Hungarian government, on the other hand, viewed with some alarm the efforts of the Slovaks in America to stir up their countrymen in Slovakia to concentrated action, and certainly did everything in its power to frustrate the further expansion and development of Slovak national consciousness in America. It sent its emissaries to America to keep the good-will of the American political and diplomatic circles, and to indirectly undermine influences of the Slovaks. The Slovaks in America, however, could no longer be controlled by forces across the ocean, and they utilized all their own opportunities to call the attention not only of the proper influential sources in America, but the whole world at large, to the prosecution and injustice that the Slovaks were suffering at the hands of the Magyars in Austria-Hungary. Then came World War I, with the crumpling of Empires and fall of Kingdoms. Austria-Hungary was not enjoying solid footing and the Slovaks in America saw in the fall of the dual-monarchy their only chance of liberation and the only ray of hope for the restoration of their long-lost freedom . THE EARLY RELATIONS OF SLOVAKS AND CZECHS What the Slovaks suffered at the hands of the Magyars, the Czechs suffered at the hands of the Austrians-the Germans, although perhaps in somewhat lesser degree. Germanic influences were making their noticeable inroads into the ranks of the Czech people, and those with weaker convictions, naturally, succumbed. The Czechs and Slovaks did not have direct close con- �10 SLOVAKIA tacts. They lived apart. They had no common meeting ground. The literati, it is true, had their mutual contacts and they wrote and dreamed of the brotherhood of the Czech and Slovak, but no closer union between the two peopies was ever established. Some were so enthusiastic in their writings that they saw the Czech and Slovak peoples as branches of one Slovanic people, but the people themselves lived as two different nations . After the large immigration of the Czechs and Slovaks into this country, both peoples continued to live and develop here as two separate nations. Each built its own churches, schools and institutions. Each founded its own fraternal and social organizations. In places the Czechs and Slovaks lived in close proximity to each other, but at no time was there any marked intermingling. Both realized that the other is his closest Slavonic brother, but the lines of demarcation between the two peoples remained very definite and well established in this country. NATIONALISTIC MOVEMENT OF SLOVAKS The Slovaks have had their fraternal and social organizations here since about 1890, or slightly previous to that. The nationalistic spirit was fostered in all of them, but because here and there small leaders, who had originally succumbed to Magyar influences while still over there in the fatherland, managed to place themselves here in strategic positions, it was necessary to convince the wide masses of Slovaks here, that it is the duty of every Slovak in America to rid himself of every bit of Magyar influence, develop a real Slovak consciousness, and help his downtrodden brethren over there, who were struggling against overwhelming odds and disadvantages to keep the Slovak nation as such on the face of the earth. Every bit of news regarding new atrocities against the Slovak people there stirred the Slovak people here and helped to engender a better Slovak consciousness, and a willingness to rise in defense of the nation. But, the one most striking incident that finally completely awakened the Slovaks in America, was the massacre in Cernova, in Slovakia: Rev. Andrej Hlinka had been suspended by His Eminence Bishop Parvy because of his political activi- �SLOVAKIA 11 ties. The Hungarian government also took steps to make Hlinka harmless and the result was that he was sentenced to 2 years in jail. He was an ardent Slovak nationalist and in some of his political campaign speeches he had exhorted his Slovak followers to fight against the policies of Magyarization. In the meantime, the inhabitants of cernova, the birthplace of Hlinka, had succeeded in completing the building of their little church with the funds that Hlinka had collected, and preparations were made for a proper dedication and blessing of the church. The villagers appealed to the Bishop that Hlinka be re-instated and that he be delegated to perform the blessing of the church. The Bishop, however, appointed someone else and the date was set for October 27, 1907. The inhabitants of cernova then notified the Bishop that they do not wish to have the blessing performed on that date. Their wishes, however, were not to be respected and on the date set the proper appointee rode into town to perform the blessing of the Church. The villagers were congregated in the street in front of the Church and refused to admit the Church dignitaries, insisting that they wish Hlinka to bless their Church and no one else. A scuffle occured, and in the turmoil that followed, the gendarmes, standing nearby, were ordered to fire into the mob. They did! The street cleared in a hurry and 9 dead, 3 dying, 12 seriously injured and 80 less seriously injured persons were left lying there. That night 14 Slovak martyrs were found dead as the result of that salvo of bullets. And some months later numerous Slovaks were given jail sentences because of their participation in the c ernova uprising. The Slovaks ,in America realized that such atrocities must not go on unnoticed and rmprotested. The world at large must be informed about them. Many protest mass meetings followed. The Catholic Clergy called its first Cat:p.olic Slovak Congress on September 3, 1906, to WilkesBarre. The Slovak newspapermen and journalists met in December, 1906, in Pittsburgh. Everything was being worked up for a concentrated action of all the Slovaks, irrespective of their religious or political beliefs. This effort to unify the Slovaks was also responsible for the pamphlet: �12 SLOVAKIA "Political criminal trial against the Rev. Father Andrew Hlinka, the Rev. Father Joseph Tomik, Dr. srobar and others, in Ruzomberok, Liptov Comitat, Hungary, November 26 to December 26, 1906," published by the Slovak journalists. A benefit fund was also created, and thousands of dollars were sent to the old country for the support of the loyal and nationalistically conscious Slovaks who were imprisoned and otherwise mistreated by the Magyars. The outstanding result of the atrocities in Slovakia was the founding of the Slovak League of America. The Slovak Newspapermen's Association at the instigation of Rev. Stefan Furdek called the First Slovak Congress to Cleveland May 26, 1907. The representatives of all the Slovak organizations came to Cleveland for that meeting. Along with them came 7,000 other Slovaks, of all creeds, beliefs and dialects. None cared about anything else than that they are Slovaks, that their people are being cruelly mistreated under Magyar rule, and that they must come to the rescue of their brethren. Amid such enthusiasm the Slovak League was founded at that meeting in Cleveland. The Rev. Stefan Furdek was elected president, Albert Mamatey, secretary, Rev. John Porubsky, financial Secretary. Dr. M. Francisci, treasurer. The aim of the organization was. embodied principally in the following sentence of the By-laws: "That the Slovak nation may take its place among the older nations as an equal among equals." A National Fund was created from which the nationalistic movements of the Slovaks in the Fatherland were to be supported. Numerous mass meetings, under the auspices of the new Slovak League, followed all over the United States. Resolutions were adopted at these mass meetings, the contents of which in the main verse : 1. We protest against the massacre and imprisonment of our leading Slovak men in Hungary. 2. We strenously protest against the unfounded indictment of our Slovak peasants; against the unfounded procedure. of the courts, which are hurling our people into investigative imprisonment, as it has recently occured so many times. 3. We demand, that the Laws in Hungary be abided by and that they serve the Magyar as well as the Slovak, and not that the Slovak would get imprisonment and heavy fine on the least provocation. LIBRARY �SLOVAKIA 13 THE EARLY MOVEMENT FOR FREEDOM Such then was the stage-setting among the Slovaks here in America and in Hungary when World War I, broke out. The original gun-shot, in fact, which was to precipitate the world catastrophe, had really not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovaks in America had already prepared a Memorandum, intended for all the parliaments of the civilized world. Ivan Daxner, Sr., the Secretary of the Slovak League at the time, was just making the final corrections of the Memorandum, when first fire broke out in Europe, fore-telling the coming of the World War. With this sudden turn of affairs in Europe, many thought that the contents of the Memorandum should be changed. Sox:ne thought that it should definitely express the thought: "We want to break away from the Magyars." Others thought that it should express the idea: "We want to be with the Czechs." A middle course was chosen, and the Memorandum, delivered to all members of Congress of the United States asked, that "The Slovaks in Hungary should obtain their natural privileges of life, freedom and pursuit of happiness, which they have been deprived of by the dynasty; that the Slovaks be given an opportunity to develop their national spirit, their abilities, and the natural resources of their native land ; that the Slovaks be guaranteed the realization of their national ideals and efforts, which have been mercilessly trodden by the tyrannical Hungarian Government. " The Memorandum set forth in detail a description of the Slovak nation and a description of the land that the nation inhabits. It set forth a description of the Magyar atrocities: How the nation is oppressed by the Magyars, particularly since 1863; how its language is being expelled not only from governmental offices and schools, but even from the home circles of government officials and employes of Slovak descent. The Magyar government wilfully avoids Par. 44 of the Laws of 1868, according to which Slovak schools were to be . built by government funds . The government not only does not respect this law, but it has gone even further, and has forcefully closed schools which the Slovak people have established out of their own funds and voluntary contributions. The government has suppressed the "Matica Slovenska"-"The Slovak Foundation"the highest cultural and scientific institute of the Slovaks, �14 SLOVAKIA founded for their own advancement and uplift. The Magyar government has forcefully taken thousands of children during the years 1863-86 away from their parents, and sent them to Magyar territories for the purpose of complete Magyarization of these youthful Slovaks. The Slovaks are paying their taxes, but not one cent is being expended from government funds for Slovak culture and Slovak social welfare. For these and many other reasons the Slovaks in America, as free citizens of a great country, petitioned all influential political factors in Europe and all over the civilized world, in the name of justice and humanity, to see to it, when future new political units would be established and when fates of nations were to be decided that all the injustices perpetrated on the Slovak nation would be erased, and that the Slovak people be considered as an equal and free nation among the other nations of the world. The Slovak League asked that the Slovak people be granted their complete self-government and the freedom of self-determination in the field of politics as well as in the field of culture and commerce. This Memorandum was signed by all the officials of the Slovak League, by the representatives of twenty-three Slovak newspapers, by the representatives of twenty organizations, by fifty-two Catholic priests and forty Protestant Ministers. This Memorandum, published in five languages, besides the English, reached the most influential political and diplomatic factors in America. It did much to bring the Slovak cause before the World. It attracted attention to the Slovaks, who already up to that time, certainly were not an unknown quantity, as may be witnessed by the long conversation that President Taft had with the representatives of Slovak organizations in 1910. The main significance of this Memorandum, however, lies in the fact that the Slovaks of America, immediately after the outbreak of the War, were publicly taking upon themselves the role of a leader of the entire Slovak nation of the World-and they were doing it independently, without ties with anybody. They took upon themselves the duty of formulating the policies of the entire nation-and they demanded the right of self-determination and self-government in behalf of their entire nation. The Memorandum �SLOVAKIA 15 clearly showed that immediately after the outbreak of the War, the Slovaks in America had visions of liberating the Slovak nation from the control of all other nations. The signatures on the Memorandum were likewise significant, and they show just why the Slovaks of America assumed the leadership of the entire nation. The Slovak masses of America were organized, and the number of Slovaks in America standing in organized ranks exceeded the number of organized Slovaks that were ever known in their own fatherland. The number of publications represented on the Memorandum by signature also exceeded the number that the Slovaks had in their native country. All this clearly shows that the more progressive portion of the nation was found here in America, and that this portion had a full privilege, moral and financial, to speak in behalf of the entire nation. COOPERATION OF THE SLOVAKS AND CZECHS It is unnecessary to go into much detail to show how the Slovaks struggled for their cause and their liberation during those early years of World War I. They were fully united here-all the Slovaks-but they were carrying on the battle practically single-handed. Very often, at the meetings of their common organization, the Slovak League, they considered the question, whether they should find an ally and unite with him in their struggle, or whether they should continue to work single-handedly and independently for the brighter future of their nation. They were unanimous in their effort to tear the Slovaks across the sea from Magyar rule. There were no dissenters and no objectors to that idea. But in order that the Slovaks may come to bask in the sunshine of freedom, it was .necessary that Austria-Hungary be disrupted, and for such work they necessarily had to find an ally. Several proposed combinations developed. Some favored the Czechs as the ally to be sought. Others favored the Russians. Others favored the Poles, who already had promises from the Allies for a restoration of Poland. Gradually the Czechs came to be selected as the most logical ally to be sought. By what process of reasoning the Czechs came to be generally favored is probably best expressed in a letter written by Rev. Matus Jankola, Bridgeport, Connecticut, December 11, 1914, to Joseph Rusek, Editor of "Jednota." �16 SLOVAKIA "Our battle-cry must be: 'Away from the Magyars.' We must work for the self-government of Slovakia. Never, however, in the confines of Hungary, united with the Magyars! Their sentence over us is fatal: 'Tot nem ember.' It's in their blood ... We should ally ourselves with our Slav brothers. But with whom? The Russians are in part orthodox, and in part, too powerful. They would devour us. The Poles are closer to us, but they too , are too powerful in everything. We can ally ourselves with the Czechs only. There are two Czechs to every Slovak. We have just about the same language. The people would not have to learn another language ; their financial , commercial etc. abilities will benefit our weakness and inability. Austria-Hungary may serve as an example for our alliance. The higher government, diplomatic corps and army, all common. Let all the rest remain separate, whether is shall be a republican, or monarchistic confederation." Notice how Rev. Jankola, a popular leader of the Slovaks, and undoubtedly expressing the concensus of opinion of the Slovaks in that letter, visioned the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. Anot}:ler letter of his (December 15, 1915, from Bridgeport, Connecticut) again brings an interesting opinion about the Czechs, which no doubt was not only his own, but the more or less established opinion about the Czechs among the Slovaks generally, and how he pictured the future relations of the Slovaks and Czechs. He wrote: "We shall mean nothing in a monarchy, and absolutely nothing in a great Russia. But we would stand on a footing of equality with the Czechs a-la Austria and Hungary, or formerly, Norway and Sweden ; with our own self-government , our own parliament, our own Slovak language. Can we ever obtain this under Russia, or Austria-Hungary ? "In regards to the Czechs: Their supremacy can only be temporary ; until the time that we rear one generation in our own spirit. I do not consider the Czech liberalism so dangerous. Our nature and character are different. The Slovaks-I mean the common people-shall retain their character." These were Father Jankola's unofficial letters, but they express the predominant sentiment among the greater portion of the Slovaks in America, and practically the unanimous sentiment among the Catholic Slovaks in America, which, expressed in other words, meant: We favor cooperation with the Czechs, we must unite with them, but before we do, it is necessary to agree with them, that we are forming a state, where both nations-the Czech and the Slovak-will be equal factors with their own selfgovernments. �SLOVAKIA 17 ORGANIZATION OF THE CZECHS IN AMERICA The Czechs were not as well prepared to take up the cause of their liberation when the war broke out as were the Slovaks. The Czechs were divided into many small lodges and into a number of varying factions. Their press, too, was not as unanimous in its attitude toward the War and in its stand toward one side or the other. Some of the Czech newspapers, and among them were several of the more influential, favored the retention of old Austria. They looked with much disfavor on the attempts of some energetic Czech patriots who took up the standard against the old regime. They ridiculed all attempts to tear down old Austria. They considered all such attempts futile. Those favoring the old regime were found principally in the ranks of the Czech socialists and Czech free-thinkers. The Catholic Czechs had a smaller percentage of those who favored adherence to the old regime. Most of the Catholic Czechs immediately became enthused with the cause of liberation, even though they were frequently censured for it on the grounds that they were directly playing into the hands of Professor T . G. Masaryk, an enemy of the Church. The foundations of a united Czech revolutionary organization were laid on March 13th and 14th, 1915, in Cleveland, at a joint meeting of local Czechs with representatives from Chicago and New York. The immediate results were very mediocre. It was only in August, 1915, when Vojta Benes, a teacher, came to this country with an appeal from Professor Masaryk and his own brother, Dr. Eduard Benes, and when he himself began working on the organization, that the Czech National Alliance began to take root and spread. Then first the Czech public responded to the appeals of its leaders with generous contributions to the cause of liberating the Czech nation. The National Czech Alliance was actually founded on September 1, 1915. Its main office was in Chicago. Its first prominent and zealous workers were such as were known for their free-thinking and anti-Church ideas. These, naturally, did not entice the Catholic Czechs into their ranks. The Catholic Czechs remained unorganized for some time, but they worked independently, although many of them contributed funds and otherwise assisted the cause sponsored by the National Czech Alliance. Finally, on February �18 SLOVAKIA 6, 191 7, the Catholic Czechs organized too. They formed their Alliance of Czech Catholics. On May 5, 1917, the first steps were taken to coordinate the efforts of the two groups of Czechs, and on July 4, 1917, they affected a compromise and decided on ways and means of cooperating. The representatives of the two factions or organizations then issued a joint appeal to the Czechs of America asking for support of the movement to establish an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic, at the same time advising the Czech public that the two factions from now on would work and cooperate for this one high ideal and admirable cause. THE CLEVELAND AGREEMENT The Cleveland Agreement was the fore-runner of the Pittsburgh Pact. Perhaps the latter would never have been drafted and signed, had not certain difficulties arisen which gave the Slovaks reason enough to suspect that the Czechs were not altogether sincere when they suggested and submitted the original Cleveland Agreement. But, let us see how the Cleveland Agreement came to be and what it contained. In the foregoing chapter, it was related that the Czech National Alliance was organized on September 1, 1915. The National Alliance of Czech Catholics did not come to be organized until in 1917, and up to that time the Czech National Alliance, naturally, was appearing as the only representative of the Czech people in America in this revolutionary movement, which was ultimately to spell the overthrow of the Austria-Hungarian monarchy and an establishment of an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic. While the Czechs were laying the foundations of their organization in America, similar Czech organizations were being formed in France, Switzerland and Russia, which embodied in their programs a representation of the Slovaks too. That these Czech organizations could take upon themselves the representations of the Slovaks, too, was made possible only by the fact that, outside of Russia, there were too few Slovaks in any of the other countries, and these few Slovaks hardly could deal on an equal basis with the Czechs, who outnumbered them. All this time Professor T. G. Masaryk was very active �SLOVAKIA 19 in the revolutionary movement. Other leaders in the Czech movement were also busy and difficulties arose, but after all these were ironed out, T. G. Masaryk became the recognized head of the movement for the liberation of the Czechs and the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. In order, however, that the visible and recognized head of the revolutionary movement could have the right to speak in behalf of the Slovaks too, it was necessary that at least one recognized portion of Slovak immigration express itself clearly and distinctly in favor of the joint effort with the Czechs. The Slovak group in America was the logical group to be sought and its favor gained. The Czech National Alliance in America was asked from Paris by Professor T. G. Masaryk himself to gain the cooperation of this Slovak group in America. Joseph Tvrzicky, the Secretary of the Czech National Alliance, officially invited the Slovak League of America to a meeting, the purpose of which was to be: "That we could unite for combined political work." Along with this invitation Tvrzicky sent a proposed draft on an Agreement, which later the Slovaks accepted in Cleveland, on October 22, 1915, just as Tvrzicky had drafted it. The Cleveland Agreement contained the following points: "1. Independence of Czech lands and Slovakia ; 2. A union of the Czech and Slovak nations in a federative alliance of states with a complete national autonomy of Slovakia, with its own parliament, its own state government, its own complete cultural freedom, and therefore, its own complete use of the Slovak language, its own financial and political government and with a Slovak state language. 3. Voting power: General, secret and direct. 4. Form of Government: A personal union with a democratic form of State, the same as in England. 5. These points form the basis of a mutual agreement and can be enlarged or expanded only with the approval of both parties. The Czech National Alliance reserves the right of making possible changes, and the Slovak League has the same right." These five points of the Cleveland Agreement were the basis on which all the various factors of Slovak public life in America agreed to cooperate with the Czechs for the one and mutual cause. Everything was clearly defined, the program very definitely set forth, and both parties of the agreement could �20 SLOVAKIA undertake their first steps with complete confidence to each other. It is worth mentioning that the Cleveland Agreement was accepted by the Slovaks with the firm conviction that T. G. Masaryk was fully informed in advance about this Agreement and each and every point of its contents, or that he shall be fully informed. Ignac Gessay, one of the active Slovak workers, writes of this as follows: "It is important to note that we Slovaks did not draft the Cleveland Agreement, but our brother Czechs did, the representatives of the Czech National Alliance. They offered it to us in a brotherly way in return for our fraternal help to them. Mr. Emanuel Voska, one of the representatives present there in behalf of the Czech National Alliance, arose and amidst great applause announced that, the Text of this Agreement is known to Professor Masaryk-the President of the National Council and that he agrees with it." With the field all set for a fine close cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks, further work was to follow. But the very first act, the purpose of which was, to announce that the Czechs and Slovaks are working for a common aim already threw a "monkey wrench" into the machinery, and caused some uneasiness and the first little suspicion in the minds of the Slovaks. This first act was issued in Paris, on November 14, 1915. It was a proclamation against Austria-Hungary. The Czecho-Slovak National Council did not formally exist at the time, so Professor Masaryk simply signed the proclamation: "The Foreign Czech Committee." Four representatives of the Czechs in America were signed on that Proclamation, as well as two representatives of the Slovaks in America, yet it was a "Czech Committee" not a Czecho-Slovak Committee. In this very first act the Slovaks saw a wilful attempt to deprive them of all their due rights and privileges, and so already at such an early date after the enthusiastic acceptance of the Cleveland Agreement, which heralded the closest cooperation, understanding and mutual help of the Czechs and Slovaks, the difficulties of that cooperation with the Czechs became quite plain to the Slovaks. DIFFICULTIES BETWEEN THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS The Cleveland Agreement, which had been so enthusiastically accepted and signed by both parties, was being adhered by the Slovaks to the very letter. Still, difficulties �SLOVAKIA 21 between the Czechs and Slovaks kept cropping up. Those must be attributed to an erronerous Czech understanding of the Slovak question and the Slovak attitude in the whole matter. For, certainly, had the Czechs fully understood just how the Slovaks felt about their alliance with the Czechs, had they realized that the Slovaks were full-heartedly in favor of an honest and sincere cooperation with the Czechs, but that they were suspicious of every move that was not in keeping with the Agreement, these misunderstandings would never have come to pass, and the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact would never have been necessary. The situation became such that the Slovak League called its Ninth Congress to Chicago on February 22, 1916, and in the call for the session, Albert Mamatey, the president, and Ivan Daxner, the Secretary, made the following statement: "It is unavoidably necessary to hold a joint conference with our Czech brethren in order that we may avoid misunderstandings and perhaps even conflicts with them, which could arise if our Czech brethren did not take the Agreement made with the Slovaks in the same light as it was made and signed by the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance." The Congress met and ironed out many difficulties, but this did not suffice. The Slovaks wanted to have direct information from their own people about the progress of the revolutionary movement in Europe. In order that they may not depend entirely on the Czech National Alliance for all their information, they decided to send two representatives, Dr. G. Kosik, Editor of the Catholic Sokol, and Dr. Stefan Osusky, an attorney and minister, to Europe. The intention of sending these two Slovaks was of the best, but the Czechs in America were very disappointed over this step. The result of it was that they began supporting and encouraging M. Getting, Editor of Slovak Sokol, and a few others who began showing and expressing dissatisfaction over the management of affairs of the Slovak League. It may be remarked here that Getting was one of the original ultra-enthusiasts for a complete union with the Czechs. All his efforts in this direction were rewarded later. He became Czechoslovak consul in Pittsburgh. Such behavior of the Czechs was, of course, anything but appreciated by the Slovaks. It had a tendency to tear down the unanimity of the Slovak spirit which had been �22 SLOVAKIA established at a conference of the Slovak League on April 12, 1916, in Pittsburgh. The minutes of that session tell that Mr. Kompis called attention of those present to the fact that Masaryk, who is a Moravian Slovak, never mentioned the Slovaks in any of his lectures, speeches and proclamations, and that a periodical like the "ceskoslovenska Samostatnost" (Czecho-Slovak Independence) published items which were deragatory to the Slovak people, and which in spirit and in fact were in direct contradition to the intentions of the Cleveland Agreement. A strong Slovak spirit pervaded this session of the Slovak League. Mr. Daxner expressed himself that the Slovaks did not wish to raise small questions of formalities against the Czechs, but they did wish to call the attention of the Czechs to the violations of the basic principles of their agreement with them. "Yes," said Mr. Daxner, "we want to tear away from the Magyars and be with the Czechs, not under the Czechs." The Slovaks again felt united among themselves, and they adopted the following resolution, which even M. Getting signed very willingly: Adopted at the joint session of the Slovak organizations, newspapers , Slovak clergy and other National workers, called by the Slovak League to Pittsburgh on April 12, 1916: We, the representatives of the Slovak organizations and newspapers, gathered here this day, admit the necessity of harmonious cooperation in all nationalistic undertakings intended for the benefit of liberating Slovakia from a political, cultural and economic yoke; We further attest that we will avoid all disturbances which might harm the above mentioned cooperation in the interest of the nation ; We bind ourselves to assist with all our abilities the political program expressed in the "Agreement" between the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance, adopted in Cleveland, Ohio, on October 22, 1915. JAN PAJ'fKUCH, Hlas ; GUSTAV KOSfK, Katolicky Sokol; JOZEF RUSEK, Jednota ; IVAN BIELEK, Narodne Noviny ; KAROL BELOHLAVEK, Slovensky Hlasnik; MILAN GETTING, Slovensky Sokol; NIKOLAJ S. BIELIK, Bratstvo; C. L. ORBACH, Slovak v Amerike ; J"OLIUS BUCKO, Narodny Dennik. Getting signed this resolution, but he continued his activity against the Slovak League nevertheless. The Czechs supported him, much to the disappointment of the Slovak leaders and the officials of the League, as the official correspondence of Albert Mamatey, the president of the �SLOVAKIA 23 League, shows so clearly. These, as well as the many other difficulties that arose here, in Russia and elsewhere, between the Czechs and Slovaks, prompted many of the Slovaks to lose faith in the Cleveland Agreement, and in the Czechs, and prompted them to turn in quest of new allies for the Slovaks. PRESIDENT WILSON, THE ALLIES AND THE RIGHTS OF SMALL NATIONS Perhaps the quest of some of the discontented Slovaks may have taken firmer footing, hact not important things occured in the diplomatic world. President Wilson was reelected on November 8, 1916, and soon after his re-election (December 21, 1916) he issued a proclamation to the warring nations in which he asked for a statement of their conditions of peace. The Allies answered January 12, 1917, and in the conditions which they enumerated, the folloving sentence was found: "Liberation of the Italians, Slavs, Roumanians, Czecho-Slovaks from foreign government control." The Slovaks up to that time abhorred the term "Czecho-Slovak." They were Slovaks, and the Bohemian brethren were Czechs. The term "Czecho-Slovak" was one that was condemned because it was fraught with dangers for the retention of the individuality of the Slovak people. Yet, the reply of the Allies gave the Slovaks as well as the Czechs great joy, and in their great enthusiasm over the ray 0f hope that the Allies gave them, the Slovaks temporarily overlooked the use of the term "Czecho-Slovaks." How the term "Czecho-Slovaks" came to be embodied in the Allies' reply is also an interesting episode. T. G. Masaryk explains that the term "Czecho-Slovak" was written into the Allies' reply after the reply had been all written. "The word Czecho-Slovaks"-he writes-"contained in the proclamation, has its own interesting internal history. There were three suggestions: 'liberation of the Czechs''the Czech nation'-'the Czecho-Slovaks.' The latter suggestion was accepted at a conference of Dr. Benes (Czech), Stefanik (Slovak) and Osusky (Slovak).''-Dr. Benes on the other hand writes that he conferred with Osusky and Sychravy about the matter, since Stefanik was then in Russia, and he further states U:1at, "Osusky expressed fear that �24 SWVAKIA the Allies' reply to President Wilson might name the Czechs only, not the Slovaks"-and for that reason he insisted on the term "Czechoslovak." Be it as it may, the above explanations automatically leave the impression that the two Slovak leaders-or the one, if we are to accept Benes's explanation-feared that only the Czechs or the Czech nation would be mentioned and made special note of in the Allies' reply to President Wilson, and they were therefore glad to reach even such a compromise that, mention should be made of Czecho-Slovaks. Doesn't it make one wonder about the real sincerity of the Czech leaders who worried more about their own cause than the joint cause of both nations? JOINT VENTURES OF THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS Despite all the discrepancies that had arisen, the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance continued with their work and progressed side by side. They actually combined in undertakings only when occasion called for it. But the necessities of the turbulent times forced both sides to greater cooperation. The Slovak League held another Congress in Cleveland on February 22, 1917. Much of the discussion concerned the attitude of the Czechs, who had caused many misunderstandings because of their failure to adhere to the contents of the Cleveland Agreement. After all was said and done, however, the Congress adopted a resolution, whereby the League again promises the Czech National Alliance its full cooperation, at least up to such time as the Slovaks will gain their freedom. A "Joint Czecho-Slovak Proclamation" was also issued, in which gratitude is expressed to the United States and the Allies for the attention that these have given the Czech and Slovak efforts up to that time. The proclamation also contained one sentence, which probably very fully expressed the hopes and desires of the Slovaks: "Therefore, we request an independent Czecho-Slovak state with complete self-government for the Slovaks." This Congress also noted and considered the dangerous work of several newspaper and advertising agencies, which had been getting articles into the press that were hurting the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks. The result was that in March, 1917, the Slovak League and the Czech Na- �SLOVAKIA 25 tional Alliance opened the Slav Press Bureau in New York for the purpose of spreading more favorable propaganda about the joint cause and warding off propaganda that was intended to do harm. This was the first real venture of the Czechs and Slovaks jointly. Others had to follow, and they did. Particularly was it necessary to raise funds to carry on the work, and the Czechs and Slovaks went about it enthusiastically. The Slovaks, believing that it was their cause as much as the Czechs', and believing that after the battle was over, they were to receive as much consideration as the Czechs, worked very zealously, and at every occasion contributed their share of work and finances. Even in the number of volunteers who joined the Czecho-Slovak army forces, the Slovaks did their full share of duty, and it is significant that the first volunteers who applied to the Czecho-Slovak forces were Slovaks. The popular General Milan Rastislav Stefanik, an ardent Slovak leader in the fight for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks, visited America and first asked for volunteers. This may perhaps explain why the Slovaks were among the first volunteers, but whatever the reason, the Slovaks were not wanting in their zeal, enthusiasm and willingness to work for the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks, even when it came to recruiting men, who were to face death on the battle fields. That the Slovaks were willing to contribute their share of the burden was also proved by the following incident: Since the Czechs up to that time had their two organizations : The Czech National Alliance and the Alliance of Czech Catholics, and the Slovaks had their one joint organization, The Slovak League, it was thought feasible to combine all these three into one formal organization. All three had been cooperating together, but it was thought that a joint council of the three may do much toward coordinating all work and effort. Accordingly, a Czecho-Slovak National Council of America ( or later called: American Czecho-Slovak Board) was organized in which all three organizations were to be represended. Each side--the Czechs and the Slovaks-were to be represented equally-each by eight representatives. The Czechs thought, however, that since they had two organizations (both were working under one name as though one organization: Bohemian National Al- �26 SLOVAKIA liance) they should be entitled to twice eight representatives in the joint Czecho-Slovak Council. The Slovaks refused to yield on this point. "How do you wish to arrange this?" one Czech asked. "We want to be represented in this body equally with you brother Czechs," the Slovaks replied. "And will you contribute to the common cause on a fifty-fifty basis?" "Yes, we will." And so it was arranged that if the Slovaks are to get equal representation with the Czechs in their joint bodies, they are to bear one-half of the burden. And from that time up to the conclusion of the joint movement, the Slovaks always contributed at least one-half of the finances necessary to carry on the work. T. G. MASARYK IN AMERICA The year 1918 found the Slovaks in America busy with their work. They were tremendously enthusiastic. Their efforts seemed to be leading to success. Their goal-the liberation of Slovakia, and the founding of a Czecho-Slovak state, in which the Slovaks would enjoy all the privileges of freedom, seemed so close at hand. From time to time, however, little incidents would keep occuring that would cool the enthusiasm of the Slovaks. There seemed to be an undercurrent which made the Slovaks feel that the Czechs are not fully sincere with the Slovaks, that they are considering themselves and their well-being first, and that they are neglecting the Slovaks everywhere, except where the Slovaks insist on their recognition and their share of privileges. Some of this difficulty was no doubt caused by the many letters that the Slovak legionaries from America, serving in the Czecho-Slovak Army, sent here from France. They complained that the official language of the Czecho-Slovak Army is the Czech. That they are not receiving the Slovak newspapers and Slovak books which are being sent to them, but that they are being supplied with Czech books and Czech newspapers exclusively. The Slovaks tried to overlook all these small incidents. They were imbued with the spirit of their freedom, so close at hand, and anything that occurred which might dampen their enthusiasm, confidence etc. was passed on and at- �SLOVAKIA 27 tributed to human short-comings of individuals. Here was a noble joint cause, and what else mattered! On April 29, 1918, T. G. Masaryk arrived in Vancouver. Much was expected of him. He was looked upon as the person who could settle most of the small differences and suspicions and discrepancies that had arisen. He was the president of the Czecho-Slovak National Council and therefore, the leader of the revolution, the leader working for the liberation of Czech lands and Slovakia. He was enthusiastically received by the Slovaks. They hoped that he would positively assure them that any suspicions about the insincerity of the Czechs were absolutely unfounded. Masaryk made his first public appearance at an enthusiastic mass meeting of 50,000 Slavs in Chicago on May 5, 1918. The Czech newspapers, however, published such reports about this meeting and about Masaryk's address that the Slovak periodicals complained immediately. The "Jednota"-the ©fficial weekly of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest and one of the oldest Slovak organizations in America-was fast to catch up with this ignoring of the Slovaks in these reports, and it criticized Masaryk. It showed its discontent over the fact that, while he kept mentioning the 'Czech lands,' 'the Czech army,' 'the Czech fight,' 'Czech future ' etc., etc., he never mentioned Slovakia, he forgot the Slovak volunteers, he completely ignored the Slovak participation in the struggle. The "Jednota" kept calling attention to the fact that the Czechs, in other ways, too, were forgetting about the Slovaks, that they were misinforming the Americans about the Czech and Slovak relations, that they were picturing the Slovaks as subordinates to the Czechs, or as a people who really are a part of the Czech nation. The "Jednota" kept warning the Slovak public that, unless the Slovaks were not careful, the Czech people would assume complete control of the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, create a large Czech State, and the Slovaks would not gain the real independence and freedom that they were dreaming of. Masaryk finally came to Pittsburgh and on May 30, 1918, the Slovaks there made a tremendous celebration over his visit. Masaryk spoke there first in English, then in Czech. He said beautiful things. He was proud that by birth he really is a Slovak. He prided himself on working many �28 SLOVAKIA years for the cause of bringing the Czechs and Slovaks closer together. He said that there should be no differences among us. The National Council and all its branches in Russia and America have Slovak representatives as well as Czechs. Dr. Stefanik, a Slovak, he said, has done so much thus far in this struggle. Both sides, he said, have cooperated beautifully. The Slovaks and Czechs are united, and the differences that creep in are being artificially produced by the German and Magyar influences, who have reasons to wish for difficulties between the Czechs and Slovaks. The relations of Slovakia to the Czech lands in the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, he pictured very favorably. There will be a free Bohemia and a free Slovakia. Political control, education, courts of justice and all else in Slovakia shall be Slovak, in Bohemia it shall be Czech. We would be "silly" if we thought anything else, or if we did not wish each other well. There should be no difficulties among us because of languages. We understand each other and what more could we wish for? The Czech majority need not be feared. It will be found in Bohemia. In Slovakia the majority shall be Slovak. Each branch, or each nation, shall be boss in its own home. Everyone shall have his personal liberty guaranteed. The huge gathering received Masaryk's address with a tremendous ovation. The Slovaks, present there in very large numbers, were overjoyed. These were all the things they had been wishing for. THE PITTSBURGH PACT That same evening Masaryk had a conference with the representatives of the Slovaks in the Moose Temple on Penn Avenue. It was a confidential conference. Those present were asking Masaryk about the various proposed arrangements in the new State. He answered all questions to the complete satisfaction of all present. He convinced everybody that he meant everything well, and the Slovaks left the conference thoroughly convinced that here is their real leader under whose guidance the Slovak people would be led into the promised land. The next day, May 31st, according to the official report of the Slovak League Press Bureau-The Czecho-Slovak National Council met in the same building and Masaryk at- �SLOVAKIA 29 tended the session. "At this session," says the report, "Prof. Masaryk performed an act which shall always have historical significance in the history of the Czechs and Slovaks. This act consisted of a new agreement between the Czechs and Slovaks. Professor Masaryk wrote the new agreement himself, and it establishes the relations between the two nations. According to this agreement, Czecho-Slovakia shall be a Republic in which Slovakia shall form a completely self-governed part with its Slovak capitol, its Slovak parliament, its Slovak schools, its Slovak courts of justice and its own (public) control. Albert Mamatey, president of the Slovak League shall get a copy of this agreement. He shall publish it in the near future. Masaryk concluded his mission among the Slovaks in Pittsburgh in this way." And that the Slovaks were completely satisfied over such an outcome may be judged from the same report of the Slovak League Press Bureau which said: "There are no reasons anymore for further fearing, for any prejudice, for any suspicion. Everything is now clear between us and the brother Czechs. From to-day on we must refrain from talking about anything which would separate us for, there is nothing which really separates us. Let us put forth all our strength from to-day on and let us work to gain the one big and holy aim, which is: The liberation of Czecho-Slovakia." Even though the entire text of this Pittsburgh Pact was not known to the Slovaks in detail, they were satisfied when they read the short description of its contents. Even the "Jednota," which had more or less led the opposition and utilized every opportunity to warn the Slovaks to be careful, was now satisfied. It said: "Professor Masaryk is an ardent friend of the Slovaks and the Slovak language . We had our doubts about that. Today there is not a shadow of doubt. We respect him and recognize him as our leader in the struggle for our liberty. We have confidence in him, we believe him and we thank God that we have a man of his character and ability at the head of our Czecho-Slovak revolution. May God give him health and strength." Albert Mamatey, the president of the Slovak League, describing what had taken place at the conference with �30 SLOVAKIA Masaryk and how the Pittsburgh Pact came to be drafted, wrote as follows: "In order that all reasons for the mistrusting of the Czechs by the Slovaks should be ended, be these reasons well founded or imagined, this matter was brought up for consideration at the last session of the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Pittsburgh on May 30, where our leader, Professor Masaryk, was also present. "We Slovaks brought up the matter, and requested Professor Masaryk to examine well that famous Cleveland Czecho-Slovak Agreement of ours, and to approve it and see to it that the leaders among the Czech brothers respect it in their relations to the Slovaks, or that he himself draft a new Agreement, which would better suit the changing conditions, since some points of that Cleveland Agreement had to be changed because of the changes in conditions caused by the war. "Professor Masaryk examined our Cleveland Agreement thoroughly, and seeing that in some details it really is not "up-to-date," he wrote a new Pact, in which he outlined very concisely, yet very clearly, the relations of the Czechs and Slovaks in this fight for liberty and later in the hopedfor Czecho-Slovak State." According to the arrangement at this conference, this Pittsburgh Pact-being a very important document, was not merely to remain in its original crude shape, but was to be lithographed and then signed by all those concerned. In the meantime, things were happening in rapid succession. The United States Government and the governments of the Allies recognized the fight of the Czechs and Slovaks for their freedom and in fact, made their independence one of the conditions of peace. The Czecho-Slovak Republic was formally proclaimed on October 28, 1918, and was in reality recognized by the Allied powers some time previous to that. An event, however, that is of utmost importance to us is, that in the meantime, Professor Masaryk, the chairman of the recognized Czecho-Slovak National Council, the temporary government of the new CzechoSlovak State, was elected first President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic by that Council. Immediately Masaryk was asked to leave America and come to the scene where activity was greatest, and where his presence, as of the Presi- �SLOVAKIA 31 dent, was now needed most. Masaryk left for the CzechoSlovak Republic on November 20, 1918, from New York on the SS. Carmen. As soon as the news reached America that Professor Masaryk was elected president and that he was to leave :soon, Mamatey, at the insistence of some of the Slovak leaders, went to see Masaryk in Washington before his departure, and there in Washington on November 14, 1918, as the qualified President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact. The Pittsburgh Pact, which he signed, read as follows: CZECHO-SLOV AK PACT Agreed Upon In Pittsburgh, Pa. , on May 30th, 1918 Representatives of the Slovak and Czech Organizations In the United States The Slovak League, the Czech National Alliance And the Alliance of Czech Catholics discussed the Czecho-Slovak question in the presence of the' chairman of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, Prof. Masaryk, and the program declarations made up to this time and resolved the following: We approve the political program which endeavors to unite the Czechs and Slovaks in an independent state of the Czech lands and Slovakia; Slovakia shall have its own administration, its own parliament and its own courts. The Slovak language shall be the official language in the school, in office and in public life in general. The Czecho-Slovak state shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic. The organization of the cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks in the U.S. shall be intensified and arranged with mutual understanding as necessity and the changing conditions shall require. The detailed regulations for the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak state are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks: and their legal representatives. �32 SLOVAKIA Who were the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact? The first and foremost signature is that of Masarykthe President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Then the following: Czechs: 1. Karel Pergler, attorney, who was chairman of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, first Czecho-Slovak ambassador in Washington, D.C., later in Japan. A member of the Czecho-Slovak parliament, lately a "man without a country" since the Czecho-Slovak Republic revoked his citizenship. 2. Dr. L. Fisher, physician, who at that time was president of the Bohemian National Alliance. 3. B. Simek, professor, Chicago, a member of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council. 4. J. J. Zmrhal, professor, Chicago, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 5. Hynek Dostal, Editor of "Hlas," St. Louis, Missouri, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 6. Rev. Oldrich Zlamal, Cleveland, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 7. Vojta Benes, Secretary Bohemian National Alliance. 8. Rev. Innocent Rest!, Chicago, president Catholic Czech Alliance. 9. Jan Straka, Secretary Catholic Czech Alliance. 10. Dr. G. Pecival, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 11. Jos. Martinek, Editor, member of Bohemian National Alliance. Slovaks: 1. Albert Mamatey, President Slovak League, later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 2. Ivan Bielek, Editor "National News," member Czecho-Slovak National Council, later President Slovak League. 3. Milan Getting, Editor "Slovak Sokol," later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. �SLOVAKIA 33 4. G. H . Mika, attorney, Bridgeport, Connecticut, member of Slav Press Bureau. 5. Ignac Gessay, Editor official organ of Slovak League, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 6. Jozef Rusek, Middletown, Pa., Editor "Jednota," official weekly publication of the First Catholic Slovak Union, and member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 7. Rev. L. J. Karlovsky, New York, minister, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 8. Jan Jancek, Jr., Secretary Slovak League, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 9. Marus Gazdik, an officer of Slovak League, later Assistant Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. 10. Jan Pankuch, Cleveland, Ohio, owner of "Denny Hlas." Later vice-president National Slovak Society. 11. Michal Bosak, Scranton, Pennsylvania, banker, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 12. Rev. Jozef Murgas, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, chairman of publicity committee for "Million Dollar Fund" collection. Clergyman. Pioneer experimenter in wireless telegraphy. 13. Andrej Schustek, Chicago, local Slovak League official, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 14. Rev. Pavel J. Siska, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, vicepresident Slovak League. 15. J. A. Feriencik, Cleveland, Ohio, writer and editor. 16. Ivan Daxner, former secretary Slovak League. 17. Rev. Jan Kubasek, a Catholic priest. President Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact as the President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. That he was a fully qualified president of the Republic, having the powers of president and recognized as such, is best attested by the fact, that in November, at the time that he affixed his signature to the Pact, Masaryk negotiated a ten million dollar loan for his State from American financiers, under the protectorate of the United States Government, of course. Another significant event that is worth recording here is the stamp of approval given all actions of President �34 SLOVAKIA Masaryk by a resolution of the temporary government adopted in Geneva on November 11, 1918, whereby "everything done by Professor Masaryk, chairman of the CzechoSlovak National Council, all agreements and promises (made by him) remain in force." The Pittsburgh Pact, drafted by Professor Masaryk, then chairman of that Council, some five months previous, and signed by him then as President, three days after this Geneva resolution was passed, was one of the "Agreements" or "promises" that must be included and intended by this resolution. And yet, as we shall see, that was one "agreement" or "promise" that has not remained in force, has not been respected, has not been honored. THE PITTSBURGH PACT DISREGARDED It is unnecessary to go into detail about all that transpired in the early days of the new State. The Czechs and Slovaks back home-in the old Austria-Hungarian State, were aware of the movement beyond the borders of the old Empire, the purpose of which was the setting up of a joint State of the Czechs and Slovaks. They, too, became imbued with enthusiasm and in due time, Czech and Slovak deputies announced in the Austrian and Hungarian parliaments that the Czechs and Slovaks no longer would be domineered by alien groups. That they were seceding from the old Empire and setting up a State of their own. Aided, abetted and controlled by Masaryk and his National Council, the end was finally achieved and the Czecho-Slovak Republic established. A constitution was drafted and accepted, temporary rules outlined, and the Republic was soon enjoying the first days of its free existence. The Slovaks, as well as the Czechs, could hardly realize that their long fought battle for liberty and freedom was at last won. Here they were-two fraternal nations-setting out with a truly mutual and fraternal spirit with their own ship of state. How mutually fraternal the two peoples regarded themselves! The Slovaks looked upon the Czechs as their long lost, more experienced brethren, who came back to help them, to aid them, and to establish a country where both could enjoy liberty at last. Under such circumstances, some small gathering in Turciansky Sv. Martin, which was supposed to be representative of the entire Slovak nation (but which was anything but that), was so overcome with �SLOVAKIA 35 enthusiasm that, unaware that anything like the Pittsburgh Pact existed in America, it adopted a long resolution voicing this enthusiasm, and going so far in this spirit of joy, that it proclaimed the Slovaks and Czechs to be one nation-the Czechoslovak people. Nothing more was necessary! That settled all disputes! The Slovaks consider themselves politically, racially and by language one people with the Czechs! The Pittsburgh Pact has no leg to stand on. It is superfluous! Therefore, it should be ignored. And after all was said and done, and the early government established with all its provisions, the crafty Czech politicians, aided by a handful of Slovak individuals aspiring for government positions, arranged all matters so, that the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were totally ignored and not embodied in the Constitution. Little did it matter that the Slovaks, after learning of the Pittsburgh Pact and all that it provided for the Slovaks, did everything in their power to enforce the Pact's provisions. The Pact was ignored, and all that it provided meant nothing. Nor did it avail the Slovaks any to point out that according to the Pact, the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives-duly elected to represent them, never had a voice in establishing the details and arrangements of the Czecho-Slovak State, and that the Sv. Martin gathering was not a legal representative body of the Slovaks. The Pittsburgh Pact continued to be ignored. The Slovak League, as one of the parties to the Pact, has clamored for the recognition of the Pact. In 1922 it directed a Memorandum to the government and the House of Deputies. The representatives of the largest Slovak political party-the People's Party-have presented a motion in parliament to have the Pittsburgh Pact recognized and embodied in the Constitution. Other methods have been tried by the Slovaks and their representatives. Deaf ears and unfriendly gestures have met all their demands, pleas, etc. How utterly the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact have been ignored is probably best revealed by the following message, which Dr. I.:udovit Bazovsky, a former member of the Revolutionary Parliament, sent to the Czecho-Slovak Parliament in Feburary, 1930: �36 SLOVAKIA HOUSE OF DEPUTIES National Parliament of the Czecho-Slovak Republic Prague. As a former member of the revolutionary National Parliament, 1 received your invitation to the celebration of the Tenth Anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. At this occasion it is necessary to present the following: WARNING The Slovak nation has been under the presumption, before and during the revolution, that it shall be able to retain its nationalistic independence. It tolerated the fiction of a "Czechoslovak" nation only under the enforced conviction, that this fiction is temporarily necessary for the purpose of a diplomatic situation. Otherwise, the Slovak nation has never renounced its independence and has never recognized the existence of a "Czechoslovak" nation. There is no such nation! There is a Czech nation and a Slovak nation; and so likewise, there is no "Czechoslovak" language, but there is a Czech language and a Slovak language. We must consider the state ideology which was in force in the former Hungary and which did not recognize a Slovak nation, but embodied us into a concept of the Magyar-Hungarian-nation, and in this way endeavored to Magyarize us, as completely outlived. It hurts us, that the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic does not recognize a Slovak nation, but a Czechoslovak nation, which of course, is then the basis for the practice of Czechization of the Slovak people in every field of public endeavor. The enforced idea about the non-existence of the Slovak nation and the fiction of a Czechoslovak nation has directly painful consequences for the Slovaks, and very advantageous economic results for the Czechs. Slovakia has been kept at a lower cultural and economic level than Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia ever since our revolution. The tax-paying people of Slovakia have been carrying a relatively and circumstantially greater burden than the ,people of the historical lands mentioned; expenditures, which should have been, and sometimes were, very meagerly allowed for Slovakia, were not directed hither; whereas, more and more was and is being systematically invested in the historical lands. The flourishing Slovak commerce was destroyed, diverted, railroad tariffs were retained to the disadvantage of Slovakia and only to the advantages of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. The land reform in Slovakia was conducted aimlessly and it frequently favored some of the otherwise unentitled centralist partisans and Czechs on political party principles alone. Agriculture in Slovakia is assisted in a small way only when the centralist party interests require it. The result of this is that, Slovakia is continually becoming poorer and poorer, and the historic lands are becoming richer and richer. The historic lands are enjoying prosperity. Slovakia is suffering poverty. It grieves the Slovaks very much that the very great numbers of Czech officials in Slovakia do not learn the Slovak language and that �SLOVAKIA 37 the official business is conducted either in Czech or in broken Slovak, which seems to be a definite Czechisizing tendency. Czech text-books are being principally used in the Junior High Schools and the native Slovak students have no scientific academic opportunity to educate themselves correctly in their mother tongue. The Slovak language is suppressed and the Czech language favored to the detriment of the former. There is not a single Slovak university, and the so-called Comenius University in Bratislava is an expressly Czechisizing institute of learning. This cultural oppression of the Slovak people has an economic background for the benefit of the Czech people. This is contrary to the principles of democracy. There is an awfully detrimental effect in the fact that, the administration of Slovakia is in the hands of the Czech center in Prague, which is not acquainted with the local Slovak conditions, and in the fact that the appointment of even the lowest employes in Slovakia depends on the Czech center in Prague. The Slovaks are not permitted to govern themselves. (Administration. ) The Slovaks cannot take their place in the legislative field because in the central parliament in Prague they are always subject to the tremendous odds against them and they are merely dependent on the favor or disfavor of the others. It is necessary to remark here that, it would be advantageous to refer many matters concerning Slovakia to a separate Slovak parliament. The judiciary in Slovakia is in a terrible condition. The lowest positions have such poor salaries attached to them that the average poor Slovak young man cannot set out upon a judical career, and these places are then filled by individuals of the wealthier Czech rising generation, who for the time being are able to have support from home. The conditions are similar in matters of the army where we can hardly find any Slovak officers even for the show of the thing. Conditions are not different in the foreign relations service. The conditions in the judiciary, particularly in reference to matters of political offenses, are very worthy of attention. Political offenses committed in Slovakia are tried by Czech judges who are unacquainted with the local conditions and the people, and who are ordering such tyrannical penalties as were never heard of during the former Hungarian regime. There are many more political punishments and jail sentences than there were during the Hungarian regime. -The demand that Slovakia should have its own courts, is totally justified. The Slovaks bear with great difficulty the fact that there is no freedom of the press in Slovakia. The eleven-year experience proves the need, and imperatively demands to-day more than ever, that the rights of the Slovak nation as they were contemplated in the Pittsburgh Pact be incorporated into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and that they be executed in practice as well. It is impossible to assure the cultural and economic prosperity of the Slovak nation without executing the Pittsburgh Pact. This is the desire of the Slovak nation. The Pittsburgh Pact is not only a historic Act, but is a binding '·Magna Charta" of the rights of the Slovak nation. �38 SLOVAKIA Perhaps the solicitude, even though exaggerated, of some of the Czech leaders who understand the sentiment of Slovakia very little. was un<U!rstandable in the beginning, that, whether or not the very pronounced recognition of the rights of the Slovak nation might not cause the state some damage in view of the surrounding foreign sentiment which understood our matters even less. But to-day, when the loyalty of the Slovak nation to the Republic does not bear any doubt whatsoever, it is not advisable to expose the nation to despair by refusing to guarantee its rights and to deprive it of the hope that it will be able to establish its rights in the Republic by constitutional means. The people in Slovakia cannot become a source of state power without the establishment of autonomy in Slovakia in accordance \\ith the minimal requirements set forth in the Pittsburgh Pact, and consequently it is impossible to imagine democl'acy, equality and freedom in Slovakia. THE VALIDITY OF THE PACT A. President Masaryk and His Attitude Toward the Pittsburgh Pact Just how the leaders-particularly the Czech leaders in the government of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, felt about the Pittsburgh Pact once the Republic was established and its Constitution drafted and ratified, is probably best exemplified by the opinions that Professor Masaryk voiced about the Pact on various occasions. Let us take up some of those opinions. 1.) On February 5, 1920, minister Tusar sent president Masaryk an official communication, asking for his version of the Pact and its significance, in view of the widespread discussion that the Pact was causing in those early days of the Republic. President Masaryk replied the same day: " .... Laws, too, are interpreted according to the circumstances under which they arose and the intentions of the legislators are sought for in the words. The Czechoslovak pact agreed upon in my presence on May 30, 1918, must be interpreted in a similar way. The leaders of the Slovak and Czech organizations in America agreed on the pact in order to frustrate the agitation against the union of the Slovaks and Czechs. The contract is made, I think, mostly between American citizens. The Pittsburgh program is one of the many pre-revolutionary programs made beyond the boundaries. It has its historical value. The Pittsburgh con- �SLOVAKIA 39 tract is made between Czechs and Slovaks, and if it could hold at all, it certainly would hold only if both parties would still agree with its contents. At the end of the contract itself it is stated that, the detailed arrangements ,_and regulations in the Czechoslovak State are being left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their empowered leaders. That was stated because the Czechs and Slovaks at the Pittsburgh meeting knew very well that American citizens have no right to decide about definite arrangements of the Czechoslovak State. The representatives of the Czechs and Slovaks for that reason also do not refer to the demands of the Pittsburgh Pact in their proclamations .. . etc." That letter by President Masaryk was his first public denial of the Pittsburgh Pact's validity. 2.) He made a similar statement when on December 15, 1922, replying to the senators and parliament members of the Slovak People's Party, who had visited him in the matter of autonomy for Slovakia, he said: "I came to America in the early part of May, 1918, and found the conditions not very pleasant in the Slovak camp and there was a faction, though insignificant, which advocated a utopian separatist program. The political situation and the situation at the battle front were pretty tense. The United States then were officially still in favor of some reform of Austria-Hungary ... In contrast to this, the Slovaks were little known in the political world, and the movement for a separatist Slovakia was doomed for the failure of its own and the joint cause in advance. "Under such circumstances I endeavored for an agreement, so that a detrimental division would not take place, and so that the fight would stop from which Austrian and Hungarian propaganda would profit. "The majority of the Slovaks, particularly the leaders, were against separatism, and so came the Pact in Pittsburgh on May 30th-which-it is understood-was valid all by itself for America and American conditions. For the Slovak side as well as the Czech side, the pact was signed by American citizens, and those naturally are not entitled to prescribe for Slovakia and their people at home, and the signers were fully aware of this. I signed the Pittsburgh Pact for that reason, too, that, it was specifically stated in �40 SLOVAKIA it that, detailed arrangements of the future State shall be made by the legal representatives of the people. And these representatives clearly voiced and politically decided the relations of Slovakia to the unified state by the ratification of the Constitution. This ratification and formal promise is binding upon the Slovak and Czech deputies and is equally binding upon me, too ... " 3.) President Masaryk voiced a still more damaging -in reality a more insulting opinion about the Pittsburgh Pact when on October 12, 1929, he wrote to Hlinka, leader of the People's Party and a deputy in parliament, as follows: " ... You yourself once admitted to me that you demand autonomy not for the present time, but for the time when the Slovaks shall be politically more mature. In accordance with that, you should endeavor that your voters should be informed and reared politically. Look at the mistakes you have made with the so-called Pittsburgh Pact. De facto you had your autonomy from the time of the revolution, and now you have all the stipulations of that pact (or rather verbal agreement) fulfilled. But the main thing is that, the document of that verbal agreement is forged, is a Jalsum, because, at the time when the American Slovaks wanted that verbal agreement, the League did not exist legally, it was recognized by the State until in 1919. For that reason a serious politician, a statesman, cannot and must not operate with such a paper. A falsification cannot become an act of State ... " B. CRITICISMS OF THE PACT ARE UNFOUNDED Time, space, nor the reader's patience, do not permit a careful analysis and refutation of all those statements by President Masaryk concerning the Pittsburgh Pact. To all, except the totally uninformed, the fallacy of those statements must be quite apparent. Few of the more glaring misstatements in these official communications, however, should be mentioned here. 1.) It seems ridiculous for the president to say that Slovakia has long had its autonomy, from the very foundation of the republic in fact, and that all stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact were in reality all fulfilled already in Slovakia. Why, if all that be so, should it be necessary that �SLOVAKIA 41 the deputies of the Slovak People's Party be forced to visit Masaryk and demand autonomy for Slovakia and demand that the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact be enforced in Slovakia? Why should it be necessary for the Slovak League to clamor for recognition of the Pittsburgh Pact? Why should Dr. L. Bazovsky be prompted by conditions in Slovakia to write a communication, as quoted in previous pages, in the twelfth year of the existence of the Republic? No, the facts are that Slovakia did not have its autonomy nor were the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact ever fulfilled. Slovakia did not have its home-rule. Slovakia was oppressed by detrimental effects of a centralized government, and the results were that, Slovakia was constantly being made commercially and economically poorer and poorer; that thousands and thousands were forced to leave their fatherland and emigrate to all parts of the world; and what is worst-that the very existence of the Slovak nation was being jeopardized by the forceful propagation of the "unified Czechoslovak nation" idea. The Memorandum which the Slovak League of America sent the Government and the National Assembly of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1922 in behalf of the embodying of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Republic, very clearly proved all the above conditions in Slovakia (as resulting from the disregard for the Pittsburgh Pact and the instituting of a centralized government.) 2.) But to return to some of the other statements made by President Masaryk. It is wholly untrue that there was an "insignificant faction which advocated a utopian separatist program." It would be closer to the truth had he said that there were a few individuals who contended that, cooperation with the Czechs, who have anti-Slovak tendencies, is impossible. And then it should be admitted that the Slovaks, at least some of the leaders, had reasons to doubt the sincerity of some of the Czech leaders, and that had not these doubts of the Slovaks been dispelled by such seemingly sound and earnest promises, made in writing and signed black-on-white as the Pittsburgh Pact, there is no telling whether the Czechs and Slovaks would really have come to establish a joint State. It was not the few individuals who were opposed to any combination with the Czechs, but the majority of the �42 SLOVAKIA recognized Slovak leaders, who were forced to be careful in their dealings with the Czechs because of the recent suspicious incidents, that Masaryk came to appease in America --and he did it in writing-in the Pittsburgh Pact. 3.) It is pointed out that the Pact was made and signed by American Slovaks and Czechs-American citizens. The fact that the pact was made between President Masaryk on one side and American Czechs and Slovaks on the other, seems to be passed over. The Czechs and Slovaks here in America certainly did not need such a Pact just for the sake of having it here, or for their own local conditions here. Was not the Czecho-Slovak Republic and its people constructed in that Pact? We deny that the Pittsburgh Pact is just a local Pact between the American Czechs and Slovaks, concerning which the Czecho-Slovak Republic government should have no interest. Then, too, Masaryk did not sign the pact as some sort of a mediator here. He was a representative of one of the parties of the Pact. The CzechoSlovak National Council of America--embodying the representative Slovak and Czech organizations in America, which called the Pittsburgh meeting at which the Pact was drafted, accepted and signed, issued a proclamation on November 7, 1919, and sent it to the government to the effect that the Pittsburgh Pact was made between President Masaryk and the representatives of the American Czechs and Slovaks. The Pact, too, could not be an agreement just to meet local conditions and drafted between American Czechs and Slovaks, since some of the signers of the Pact were not citizens of the United States of America. The Pittsburgh Pact was not intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in America, it was intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and therefore, is not valid only in America and for America. It is primarily valid in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Cleveland Agreement could be constructed as having local importance only. It was signed by American Czechs and Slovaks for the purpose of establishing the cooperation of these two nationalities in America in a joint cause. The Pittsburgh Pact, however, had more than local importance. The very fact that Professor Masaryk, the head of the temporary revolutionary government drafted it and signed it, gave it more than local importance. The Czechs �SLOVAKIA 43 and Slovaks in America were not doing all those things for themselves but for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks on the other side of the Ocean, and Masaryk, too, was not working for the welfare of the Czechs and Slovaks here in America, but for those over there. And he, as well as all others, signed the Pittsburgh Pact with the hope that they were helping to create a State where both nations might be free, contented, and where they could develop culturally, economically, etc. 4.) That the Pact may still hold good only if both sides should agree with its contents, certainly is not consistent with the very meaning, idea and intent of a pact or agreement. 5.) That the Pact is a forgery, a falsification, because the Slovak League did not exist legally at the time of the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact, and that the Pact is not valid, as Dr. srobar expressed it, because it was signed on a Legal Holiday in America, is undoubtedly best refuted by the following legal opinion: Law Offices George E . Alter 1012 Park Building Gifford K. Wright Pittsburgh, Pa. Alexander J . Barron George M. Swan ALTER, WRIGHT & BARRON Telephone James Milholland Atlantic 2211 William H. McNaugher Ralph D. McKee George F. Taylor, Jr. James K. Ruby Mahlon E. Lewis April 23, 1930 James Grove Fulton Slovak League of America Box 996 Pittsburgh, Pa. Gentlemen: You have submitted to me the following questions: 1. Is there - in the Untted States - a difference as to their legal rights between chartered and unchartered organizations which are not operated for pecuniary gain? 2. Has an unchartered organization the right to make legal and binding agreements in the United States? 3. Can an agreement, entered into by such an organization with a party of the second part - in this case Professor Masaryk - not made for the pecuniary gain �44 SLOVAKIA by the said organization, but closed on a legal holiday (Memorial Day) be declared a falsum by the party of the second part, after having received and enjoyed the benefits evolving out of that agreement? Replying to these questions, my opinion is as follo ws: ( 1) There is some difference between chartered and unchartered organizations not operated for pecuniary gain, but for such purposes as are involved in the subject of your inquiry, there is no difference. (2) I understand the organization in question at the time the " Pittsburgh Pact" was entered into was an organization having a Constitution, By-Laws, officers, etc., though not chartered by the State. For the purpose of taking the action which was taken, such an organization would have all the necessary power as fully as if it had been chartered. (3 ) The agreement entered into by the unchartered organization referred to would be just as effective as if entered into with a charter ed organization and just as valid if closed on Memo rial Day as on any other day. Very truly yours, Geo . E. Alter Karel Pergler, a Czech, an attorney, one of the signers of the Pact, later a member of the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, in discussing the validity of the Pact, said the following in the National Assembly on February 22, 1930: "The Pittsburgh Pact is not a "falsum." To circulate reports about the Pittsburgh Pact that it is a "falsum," is beside the point, is not right and does not coincide with the historical truth." 6.) The question whether the American Czechs and Slovaks-more specifically, the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact had a right to prescribe for Slovakia or the new Czecho-Slovak Republic could be expanded here to a lengthy discussion. Suffice it to say, if the signers of the Pact had no such right, why did Masaryk, as the head of the government, attempt to enter into a pact with a party or parties that had no such right? Did he himself have any right to make any prescriptions for the new State? If he had no such right, wasn't he conscious of that in Pittsburgh at the time that he drafted the Pact? And isn't it also a fact, that in the absence of any who might have the full right to make sueh prescriptions, the Czechs and Slovaks in America along with President Masaryk assumed that right upon themselves and actually did make prescriptions for the new State when they said in the pact: �SLOVAKIA 45 "The Czecho-Slovak State shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic," etc., etc. Are not these definite and clearly outlined prescriptions for the new State? Did not the temporary and provisional revolutionary Czecho-Slovak Government (Masaryk, Benes, Stefanik) assume certain rights and privileges which might be questioned by the same mode of reasoning? The Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hung ary were powerless to organize the revolution. The Czechs and Slovaks in America assumed the right to speak in behalf of their entire respective nations. The American Slovaks in issuing their Memorandum in 1914 clearly showed that they were assuming the leadership of the entire Slovak Nation of the world. Why then should their right be questioned when interpreting the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact? The Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic to this day believe that the Slovaks in America have a right to concern themselves with matters in the Czecho-Slovak Republic and have a right to exercise a voice in their ultimate disposition. The following matter clearly shows the attitude of the Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic: On May 15, 1934, deputy Andrej Hlinka and others delivered an objection to the government of Czecho-Slovakia because of the confiscations and censorship of the daily "Slovak." Among some of the articles censored in the daily "Slovak" was one by M. Mlynarovic, president of the Slovak Catholic Federation of America, quoted from Slovak newspapers in America. Hlinka and his colleagues said that they "consider the confiscation of that report (article) totally unwarranted " and that they "consider it a grave insult to the American Slovaks, who did their share in the Czechoslovak revolutionary movement and therefore have a right to speak in the matters of our State." 7.) That the Slovaks or their leaders never made demands in accordance with the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact, hardly tells the true story. The first revolutionary parliament in the new Republic was not a body representative of the people-the deputies were a more or less self-appointed group and these ratified the Constitution which ignores the Pittsburgh Pact. When in April of 1919 Hlinka learned of the Pittsburgh Pact which had been �46 SLOVAKIA signed a year previous, and when he learned of the various stipulations contained therein, which had been ignored by the Constitution, he held several mass meetings of the Slovak people, some of which were dissolved by Czech police, and the result was that, the Slovaks sent a delegation to Paris, where they might plead for the rights and privileges of the Slovak nation before the same tribunal which had permitted the establishment of a joint state of the Czechs and Slovaks. This visit to Paris in behalf of Slovak rights, those very rights outlined and guaranteed by the Pittsburgh Pact, resulted in the persecution of all Slovak autonomists and resulted in the jailing of Hlinka. The Slovaks were doing nothing more than demanding what the Pact guaranteed them. How then can anyone speak of the Slovaks as not making their demands of the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact? SOME REMARKS ABOUT THE PITTSBURGH PACT Something that was frequently hurled at the adherents of the Pittsburgh Pact-the autonomists-both here in America and in Czecho-Slovakia, was that they are traitors of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, enemies of the state etc. Nothing was farther from the truth. The Slovak autonomists were loyal friends of the State. They did not advocate separation from the Czechs, they did not advocate secession from the Czecho-Slovak Republic-they merely wanted for the Slovak nation what they believed it justly had coming to it,-its rights, its home-rule, as promised and guaranteed in the Pittsburgh Pact. The two major parties in Slovakia which demanded the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were: The Slovak People's Party, the largest party in Slovakia, a Catholic party, led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, and the National Party, non-denominational, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. The chief proponents of the autonomist endeavors here in America were: The Slovak League, comprising American Slovaks of all creeds, and the Catholic Slovak Federation. The chief opponents of the Pittsburgh Pact and the endeavors of the autonomists were the leaders of the Czech government and the political parties allied with the government. Included among these were a small percentage of Slovaks who had found it advantageous to side with the �SLOVAKIA 47 ruling government. These usually were afforded good positions, offices etc., etc., and naturally, their sincerity with the national Slovak welfare was doubted in Slovak circles. These had their followers here in America and although they comprise the minority of Slovaks here, aided and abetted by government circles, they had been well able to hold a strong position. The vast majority of the Slovaks in America, and the far greater portion of the Slovak press here were in sympathy with the autonomy movement, yet the centralist forces held the point of vantage, they had the strategic positions, as will always happen with those who hold sides with the government recognized in diplomatic circles. The Slovaks were not attempting to overthrow the state. They wanted their joint state with the Czechs, the work of the few discontended pro-Magyar workers to the contrary notwithstanding. The Slovaks felt that they voluntarily entered into the formation of the Republic under certain guarantees. They were to have their own administration, their own parliament, their own courts of justice. They had none of these. They were promised that the Slovak language would be the official language in their schools, in their offices and in their public life in general. They then found that the Slovak language was not the official language in their country. The numerous Czech officials who held positions in Slovakia refused to learn the Slovak language and they used the Czech exclusively. The Slovaks found that according to the accepted law, the official language of the State was the Czechoslovak language -a non-entity-there can be no such language, since there are two separate and distinct nations-the Czechs and the Slovaks-each with their own and distinct language. The schools and institutions of higher learning had a preponderance of Czech instructors and professors, notwithstanding the fact that many thousand Slovaks qualified to hold these positions were clamoring in vain to obtain these positions. All in all, some 300,000 Czechs had immigrated to Slovakia and held positions there, while intelligent and qualified Slovaks could find no place of employment. These Slovaks felt that they should be given preference for these positions in their homeland. Why should the young Slovak, ready and qualified to embark on a career, be forced to be �48 SLOVAKIA idle, to go hungry, or to emigrate, while 300,000 intruders find steady employment in his native Slovakia? Further discontent among the Slovak was caused by the methods of oppression exercized against them. Freedom of the press and speech were unknown. Jail sentences and financial penalties were imposed with great freedom and abandon by the Czech judges upon any and all who dared to criticize the government and the conditions for which the government was responsible. The republic supposedly had a democratic form of government. Yet, there is nothing in a democracy that is above criticism, not even the ruling government, and if it is, democracy certainly ceases to exist. The Slovaks objected too, to the Czechisizing policies adopted by those in control. They objected to having anyone forcefully thrust upon them the idea of a unified Czechoslovak nationality. They believed they comprise one nation, separate and distinct from the Czech nation, and though with the Czechs they form one Czecho-Slovak state, they still remain a separate and distinct nationality from the Czechs. The Czechs want to be and remain Czechs, and the Slovaks feel they are and want to be and remain Slovaks, not Czechs, not even Czechoslovak s. The Slovaks deny the existence of a unified Czechoslovak nationality, and anyone attempting to force such principles upon them is looked upon as an enemy of the Slovak people, who is jeopardizing their individual national existence and attempting to erase the Slovak nation off the face of the earth. The recognition and implementati on of the Pittsburgh Pact was the only solution of all these difficulties at that time. It certainly was a means of stopping the unrest and discontent among the Slovaks and it was the most efficient means of frustrating the propaganda of all enemies of the Republic, who relied on the unrest of the Slovaks as a means of revision of the peace treaties. The most ardent proponents of this revision were the Hungarians. They believed that injustice had been done them and one remedy that would act as a so~thing lotion on their imagined bruises would have been annexation of the fertile, productive and naturally wealthy territory of Slovakia back to Hungary. Their agents in the Slovak ranks fanned hatred �SLOVAKIA 49 against the Czecho-Slovak Republic. With those the Slovaks had no sympathies, even if a few exceptions were found here and there, which merely proved the rule. But, the stubborn Czechs could not see all of this and rather than yield to the entitled demands of the Slovaks they were willing to risk their future. 20th ANNIVERSARY OF THE PACT AND WHAT FOLLOWED: AUTONOMY, INDEPENDENCE, RESUBJUGATION AND COMMUNISM In 1938 the Slovaks in Slovakia, led by the two autonomist parties-Hlinka's People's Party Wudova strana), and Razus's National Party (Narodna strana ), decided to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact (Pittsburghska dohoda). The purpose of the celebration was to call attention of the world to the fact that the postulates of the Pact had not been fulfilled and complied with; that the Slovaks were very dissatisfied with such treatment on the part of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government; that they still insist and clamor for the fulfillment of all the promises that Masaryk and the Czechs made in the Pittsburgh Pact. And because Masaryk and some of his hench-men had claimed that in fact no such pact or agreement had ever been made and concluded, the Slovak League of America was asked by the Slovaks in Slovakia to bring the original lithographed copy of the Pittsburgh Pact, personally signed by president Masaryk after he had already been elected president of Czecho-Slovakia, and by the representatives of the Czech and Slovak organizations in the U.S.A. The Slovak League sent an official delegation to the Pittsburgh Pact anniversary celebration in Bratislava, Slovakia. The delegation consisted of Dr. Peter P. Hletko of Chicago, Illinois, the president of the Slovak League and the designated leader of the delegation; Jozef Husek, of Middletown, Pennsylvania, editor of 'Jednota,' the largest Slovak newspaper in America, and one of the original signers of the Pittsburgh Pact; Dominic Sloboda, of Lorain, Ohio, president of the Slovak Catholic Sokol, the largest Slovak gymnastic and athletic fraternal society in America; Andrew Novak, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, supreme treasurer of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest Slovak fraternal society in the world; Michael Sincak, former president of the Slovak Catholic �50 SLOVAKIA Sokol, and Rev. Andrej Rolik, of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, a Lutheran minister. The delegation attended a huge rally in Bratislava on June 5, 1938, attended by 100,000 Slovaks from all parts of Slovakia. Msgr. Hlinka, the leader of the People's Party, addressed the huge gathering. So did Dr. Hletko. And to prove Masaryk and some of the Czechs wrong when they had said that no such document was ever drafted and signed, and that no such agreement ever existed in writing and that Pittsburghska dohoda was a "falsum," Dr. Hletko unfurled the original copy of the agreement from the balcony of the National Theatre building for all to see. The enthusiastic assemblage became loud and hysterical and it vowed to demand fulfillment of all the promises made in writing to the Slovaks in this agreement. The determination of the Slovaks grew and increased immensely. They were now not to be denied! The Slovak League delegation visited President Benes and conferred with him at length in regards to the implementation of the Pittsburgh Pact. It visited the prime minister, Milan Hodfa, a Slovak, with definite centralist Czecho-Slovak leanings, who otherwise was powerless to force the fulfillment of the Pittsburgh Pact postulates. The delegation also visited the minister of foreign affairs, Krofta, the National Czecho-Slovak Council and many other government officials, reminding them that this is perhaps the eleventh hour for complying with all the guarantees contained in the Pittsburgh Pact, since omnious war clouds were gathering over Central Europe, Adolph Hitler was acting belligerent and brandishing a war sword and threatening Czecho-Slovakia with annihilation or annexation to the German Reich. But all this to no avail. The Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government officials would not commit themselves or promise to implement the Pact, even at such a late and dangerous hour. The result was that the Slovaks ran out of patience and after several additional provocative acts by the CzechoSlovak government, the Slovaks in a revolutionary move declared their autonomy in the Czecho-Slovak Republic on October 6th 1938. The Czechs were powerless and yielded under the tremendous international pressure, but only for a short time. They bided their time, waiting for an opportune occasion, and when they thought the time ripe, they struck and attempted to wrest autonomy from the Slovaks. �SLOVAKIA 51 Two Slovak Hlinka Guardsmen were shot and killed in the attempted coup. But the Czechs' attempt boomeranged. The Slovaks did not surrender their autonomy. Instead, now convinced that the Czechs were anything but sincere in yielding to the autonomy demand of the Slovaks, the Slovaks now struck even farther. They now were not satisfied with a semblance of autonomy from the insincere and scheming Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government, who wanted to destroy that autonomy at the earliest and the first opportune moment . The Slovaks now feared that even in the future the Czechs would attempt to destroy the autonomy they had yielded to the Slovaks under the duress and pressure of an international situation. The Slovaks, knowing that the Czechs were under considerable pressure from Hitler, decided they would utilize this situation for their own benefit and tear away from the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak Republic rather than go down to annihilation along with the Czechs. The Slovaks did just that and they set up their own independent state, a Slovak Republic. Hitler had no love for the Czechs, and while he had no special love or sympathies for the Slovaks, he too utilized the situation to disrupt the Czecho-Slovak, so-called democratic republic. He took over the Czechs into a protectorate along with Moravia. He recognized the independent state of Slovakia, in fact, guaranteed its existence and safety for the next 25 years. And this too, compromised the Slovaks in the eyes of their enemies. That made the Slovaks nazis, they said. The Slovak autonomous parliament voted unanimously and to a man to establish the independent state, a republic, on March 14, 1939. This move was also prompted by Hungarian threats of land-grabbing from the Slovaks, abetted by the Italian Mussolini and his son-in-law Count Ciano, who openly placed themselves on the side of the Hungarians and their unjust and irresponsible demands against the Slovaks and Czecho-Slovakia. The Slovaks felt that having control over their Slovak lands they would better be able to prevent any land-grabs and annexation of Slovak lands and people than would the unsympathetic Czechs be who had no particular interest to protect, save and conserve Slovak land and people. Msgr. Jozef Tiso was elected first president of the new Slovak Republic. �52 SLOVAKIA The Slovak state progressed and developed very nicely for the next 6 years. The state set up its own currency and monetary system, its own army, postal system and everything that qualifies a successful and prosperous independent state. It is not the purpose nor the area of this treatise to describe the Slovak Republic. Suffice it to say that independent Slovakia was a sharp thorn in the Czechs' eyes. They were burning with envy, hate and revenge and scheming every way to destroy the independence of Slovakia. The former president of Czecho-Slovakia, Eduard Benes, spent much time in Russia, convincing the Russians to strike against Slovakia under the ruse that it is an ally of Germany. Russia finally did strike and brought back Benes with arms to his throne in Prague, of course, as a Russian and communist puppet. The Americans, also under the illusion that they are thereby defeating Hitler and the Germans, took a hand in destroying the independent Slovak state and they helped to force the Slovaks back into Czecho-Slovakia, albeit now a communistic Czecho-Slovakia. It was the American armed forces and the American counterintelligence that ferreted out president Tiso and members of his government, hidden in Austria, after their forced departure from Slovakia when the Russian army invaded Slovakia and committed many atrocities, inhumanities and indecencies, particularly against the female population in Slovakia. The Americans turned over Msgr. Tiso and members of his government to the Russian communists and their Czech puppets in Prague, Benes included, because he was the prime puppet of the Russians. President Tiso was tried by a rump court, found guilty of treason against Czecho-Slovakia and hung on April 18, 1947. Yet, his guilt was no greater nor graver than that of our own George Washington against England when he strove to free the 13 American colonies from British rule, dominance and tax extortion. Of course, he was not caught and apprehended and his revolution succeeded. That's the difference. Washington threw off an English government that was ruling an English people in America-in an English colony. President Tiso threw off a government that was not a Slovak government, but the government of and by another people, the Czechs. President Tiso's attempt was more justified than George Washington's. Tiso was overpowered by the �SLOVAKIA 53 Russian communists and delivered to the gallows with the help of Americans, American officials. Yet, the Americans in Washington's day strove for their complete independence in the same way that the Slovaks did. In any event, the help that Americans gave to help destroy the independent, democratic Republic of Slovakia, and to. aid in bringing Tiso to the gibbet, does not serve to their credit and glory, and never will. I, as a native American of Slovak parentage and descent, am not proud of that record. No Americans should be proud of it. We Americans stand for democracy, liberty, independence-for everybody, everywhere. But very often that is but a lip service. We don't always mean it sincerely. The Americans-and that includes our government too, should make amends somehow, or at least try to make amends for this travesty, and attempt to correct the injustice they have helped perpetrate on the Slovaks. But, because of their injudicious procedure and handling of the war situation, things have gone so far that the U.S. cannot do anything about correcting this highly unjustifiable situation. The communists, now in command and control, will see to that. Incidentally, when asked, the puppet president, Benes, refused to commute the Tiso sentence or spare his life. Perhaps, as a mere puppet, he did not dare. Well, either way, the good Lord took care of him. This is the story of the Pittsburgh Pact. It was implemented for a short time and eventually led to Slovak independence and the Slovak state. It is still a great historical document that all sincere, conscious and loyal Slovaks revere and respect. The original copy is here in the U.S.A. The delegation of the Slovak League when asked to leave the document in Slovakia in 1938 refused to do so on orders of the entire organization. Even when asked during the existence of the Slovak state to send the document to Slovakia as a historical museum piece, the Slovak League refused, realizing that conditions were not permanent and stable enough and that opponents of the document would seek to destroy it and remove all evidence of the fact that the Slovaks had been promised and guaranteed their rights and autonomy. The Slovak League refused to part with the document and kept it here in America-in safety. And it is good that they kept it here, �54 SLOVAKIA where it still can and does serve as a grand document attesting to the perfidy of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government. Today, nothing will obliterate the memories of this perfidious behavior but a restoration of an independent Slovak state or the creation of an independent Slovakia in a constellation of Central European states, but not as a part of Czecho-Slovakia under any circumstances. Just prior to leaving for Slovakia in 1938 with the Pittsburgh Pact Dr. Hletko, as president of the Slovak League and as the leader of the delegation had the document registered, filed on record and photostated in the Cook County Recorder's office in Chicago, where that record exists to this day. BIBLIOGRAPHY Karol Sidor: Slovcici v Zahranicnom odboji. 1929. Bratislava. The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact, 1934. Published by the Slovak Catholic Federation of America. Author: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Vice President of t he SCF. at that time. K. (:ulen: Pittsburghskci Dohoda. 1937. Bratislava. Fr. Hrusovsky: Slovenske Dejiny. 1939. Published by Matica Slovenska, Turciansky Sv. Martin, Slovakia. Topix. November 5, 1951 issue. Vol. 10, No. 6. A cartoon magazine published by the Cathechetical Guild Educational Society, St. Paul, Minn. Joseph M. Kirschbaum LL.D. , Ph.D.: Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe. 1960. R. Speller & Sons, publ. , New York, N. Y. Gilbert L. Oddo : Slovakia and its people. 1960. Publ. R. Speller & Sons, New York. Joseph A. Mikus, J.D.: Slovakia - a political history: 1918-1950. 1963. Marquette University Press. THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA condemns and unequivocally opposes all forms of tyranny, every form of totalitarian political system. The Slovak League of America has always recognized the Godless philosophy of materialistic Communism for the dread evil and conspiracy against free humanity that it is, as the political system which threatens mankind with utter enslavement and, therefore, has fought resolutely against it in and out of season and, today, is still determined to fight against it with all the means at its command until the dread plague of Communism is wiped off the face of the earth. � 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 1968, Vol. 18 Description An account of the resource Vol. 18 (No. 41), 1968. 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 1968 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 5 THE SLOVAKS AND THE PITTSBURGH PACT Peter P. Hletko M.D. PREFACE None of the material in this article is new. The Slovaks are very well acquainted with it. It has been presented in book and pamphlet form, in newspaper articles etc. in the Slovak language many times. Our purpose here is to present this material to the American public and to acquaint it with the Pittsburgh Pact and all that the Pact guaranteed the Slovak nation in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. We feel that the American public is entitled to know all about the Pittsburgh Pact because the Pact is an American product and is in line with the principles of democracy and self-determination of small nations, for the defense of which principles this country, too, entered World Wars . We also feel that the American people, mindful of the fact that its own pioneers came here and founded a government on strong principles of democracy as opposed to aristocracy in an endeavor to escape the persecutions in their own land, shall lend the pleadings of the Slovak people a sympathetic ear. We present a few historical sketches so that the reader may know who the Slovak people are and that they have a glorious past; that they once had their freedom; how they regained their freedom; how they came to be in the CzechoSlovak Republic; how events developed and led to the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact; how the Slovaks seceded from Czecho-Slovakia and set up their own independent Slovak State. We want the reader to know what the Pact guaranteed, how the stipulations of the Pact were ignored, and what flimsy objections were raised relative to the validity of the Pact by those who were patrties to that Pact and who later became interested that the provisions of the Pact should be ignored. We hope that the reader will then understand why the Slovaks were clamoring for their autonomy-homerule-in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and now want "out" of the Communistic c-SSR and into their own independent State or Republic. 6 SLOVAKIA HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The Slovaks as a nation are not unknown in historical annals. They have a glorious past extending many centuries back. Stephen J . Palickar writes the following short synopsis: "The historical era of the Slovak Race marks its beginning at the time when the Slovaks are said to have reached Europe in the sixth century Before Christ. This period, of course, remains in such darkness as to leave us nothing but conjecture. Beginning with 335 A. D., we find that history reveals a. sufficient amount of facts pertaining to the Slovaks which leads us to believe that sometime during that period the Slovak Race had contacted with Byzantine influences and had already inherited a substantial share of Latin and German culture. This phase of Slovak life was next followed by periods of small rulers and that of King Svatopluk who was master of nearly the whole of Central Europe, whose land was known as the Great Slovak-Moravian Kingdom. During the period in which King Svatopluk ruled over this vast Slovakian territory, many enterprising feats had taken place among the Slovaks. Culture had made deep inroads among the people but it was not until Christianity was accepted by the Slovaks did history really begin to deal with them in any paramount way. The first Christian Church of the Slovaks was established by the Slovakian prince, Pribina, in the ancient city of Nitra about 830 A.D. Complete Christianization of the Slovak people was later effected by the Saints Cyril and Methodius (863-885). Church building and the acceptance of Christianity by the Slovaks antedates that of the Bohemians by 60 years; the Poles by 140 years; Russians by 160 years, and the Hungarians by 175 years." Just how powerful and influential this ancient Kingdom of the Slovaks was, may be judged from the description given by Joseph Skultety, outstanding Slovak philologist and historian. (Translation by 0. D. Koreff: 'Sketches from Slovak History'.) He writes: "The State of our ancestors, which even in Mojmir's days unto 846 had been built wisely and courageously, was already a power in the days of Rastislav. The Germans were then pushing down the Danube as they never did afterwards, and Greater Moravia, the young Slavonic State, bravely barred their way. True enough, their aggression only increased thereby. King Louis, surnamed the German, a grandson of Charlemagne, in 855, immediately after his accession, invaded Moravia with a great military force in order to rid himself of a danger which was growing there for his realm. But here the first resistance was so great that Louis decided rather to leave the opponent in peace than to expose his whole army to a catastrophe ... Rastislav pursued Louis, the German, invaded his territory and devastated a large area ... Under Svatopluk, after Rastislav, Greater Moravia represented a still greater military power. The defeat of the Germans in 870, beneath Devin (where Rastislav had his castle described as 'a mighty fortress with which not even one of the most ancient can compare'), was crushing. Their army perished in the battle; very few saved themselves by flight. There were few families in Bavaria, Austria and Carinthia who did not mourn the loss of some of their members ... Later in his reign Svatopluk com- SLOVAKIA 7 pletely stopped the onslaught of the Germans down the Danube, towards the East. In German annals a record is preserved stating that when he went against Arnulf in 884 his army was seen in one place to pass all day, from morning until evening. Svatopluk already had extended his sovereignty to the North, over Bohemia, where the first historic prince, Borivoj, ruled, and over the Polish Slavs on the Upper Vistula; in the South his sovereignty extended even farther ; far beyond the frontier of Slovak territory. "To found such a state, a Slav state on the middle Danube at that time-in the second half of the ninth century-certainly was a great accomplishment; history will never cease speaking of it. There were indeed indications that a center was originating here around which a considerable part of the Slav would unite. But a young state, in order to fortify itself, to consolidate, must needs have favorable conditions. Our Slovak ancestors, at the end of the ninth century, were not so fortunate. The Germanic world still lived in a condition of fermentto have it as a neighbor was not good. It would yield, retreat, only under duress, as under Svatopluk. After Svatopluk's death the nomadic Magyars came as another neighbor on the southern bank of the Danube and to the Tisa river. Under such circumstances, after the first weak• ening, caused by internal, domestic strife, a young organization is apt to fare badly. This strife, this discord among the sons of Svatopluk, was incited by their German neighbors and Greater Moravia perished. The Magyars came to the Danube in 896, two years after Svatopluk's death, Mojmir II, Svatopluk's successor, in 900 petitioned for and procured from Rome two bishops and one archbishop, thus still organizing the Church. In 902 he still proved to his trans-Danubian neighbors that he is a son of Svatopluk, but not long afterwards he was no more .. . Greater Moravia perished." What happened to the Slovaks after the downfall of their Moravian kingdom is obscure and that part of history is rather nebulous. However, eventually we again find them coming to the fore. Palickar writes: "From the time of Matus cak .. . who in 1301 succeeded in restoring part of the lost Kingdom for the Slovaks, under whose rule thirty fortified castles were preserved, the Slovaks retained their spirit of nationalism and racial identity. Nor did culture cease to exist amongst the Slovaks during the Middle Ages, though it is often said that about• this time the real link to Slovakian history became lost and obscured in the pages of time. Contrary to that belief, however, the fact remains that Slovak history had never ceased to be written for a period of years until the well known revolution of 1848." · In all those Middle Age centuries we see the Slovaks attacked and their territory invaded and devastated by the Huns, the Tartars, the Turks and other tribes. And we also see the gradual coming over of the Magyars across the Danube and domesticating themselves on Slovak soil, until after centuries, the Magyars assumed control. What occured around 1848 is well synopsized by Palickar: "The Hungarians at this time waged war against Austria, while the Slovaks, after years of anticipation mixed with bitterness and resentment for the Hungarians, saw their opportunity and likewise rose against 8 SLOVAKIA the Hungarians for their Slovak language and national rights. The conclusion of war between Austria and Hungary, while reuniting the two people, threw the Slovaks back under the Hungarian rule with none of their rights recognized, particularly because of their support to the Austrians in this war. After presenting their famous Memorandum to the Imperial Throne of Austria in 1861, the Slovaks were granted the right to open several high schools ... the 'Matica Slovenska,' an institution for the fostering of Slovak culture wherein special study was encouraged in Slovak history, Art and Language . . . The Empire of the Austrians and Hungarians was again split in two so that in 1878 a more active crusade of Magyarizing the Slovaks had begun." It is at this point that we wish to enter into more detailed dis cussion of the modern Slovak nation and its struggles. HUNGARIAN PERSECUTION OF THE SLOVAKS The persecutions that the Slovak nation suffered in the old Austro-Hungarian Empire at the hands of the Hungarian regime are a matter of historical record. The Slovaks were denied the rights of free speech and assemblage. Their literature and schools were suppressed and forbidden. The Slovak was considered anything but a human being, and the Magyar regime did not make secrecy of its attitude toward the subordinate Slovak people. "Tot nem ember" (Slovak is not a human being) and "Buta Tot," (Ignorant Slovak) were favorite expressions that the pompous and ruling Magyar people used in referring to the Slovak people. And yet, Slovakia, as Palickar remarks, "known as a 'subordinate' nation but always the equal of those who would assume superiority over her, she can, nevertheless, boast of the fact that Slovak blood gave to the Hungarians 20 of the most famous and outstanding characters that Hungary ever had, without whom there would have been very little Hungarian history today." (Petofi, Kossuth, Cardinal Czernoch, Petian, etc.) The Slovak, however, has an inherent love for liberty and freedom, and enjoys fostering his national spirit. The thousand years that the Slovak people lived under gradually developing Magyar rule, nor the fifty years of severe persecution at the hands of the Magyars just prior to the World War I, did not succeed in effacing the national consciousness of the Slovaks. On the contrary, the policy of forcible Magyarization served only to enhance the nationalistic feeling of the Slovak people. This policy of forcible Magyarization of the Slovaks SLOVAK.IA 9 was undoubtedly the greatest reason for Slovak immigration into America. The Slovaks are essentially a homeloving and peaceful people, but the quest for a land of true liberty made them turn their attentions to this glorious land, the home of "The brave and the free." And even after they settled here, established their colonies, acclimated themselves to their new surroundings and began to live according to local customs, they were always mindful of the injustices that had driven them out of the land of their birth, their fatherland. Every bit of news that they received about new acts of persecution at the hands of the Magyars of their brethren left behind, stirred them anew, and made them vow vengeance all over again. The Hungarian government, on the other hand, viewed with some alarm the efforts of the Slovaks in America to stir up their countrymen in Slovakia to concentrated action, and certainly did everything in its power to frustrate the further expansion and development of Slovak national consciousness in America. It sent its emissaries to America to keep the good-will of the American political and diplomatic circles, and to indirectly undermine influences of the Slovaks. The Slovaks in America, however, could no longer be controlled by forces across the ocean, and they utilized all their own opportunities to call the attention not only of the proper influential sources in America, but the whole world at large, to the prosecution and injustice that the Slovaks were suffering at the hands of the Magyars in Austria-Hungary. Then came World War I, with the crumpling of Empires and fall of Kingdoms. Austria-Hungary was not enjoying solid footing and the Slovaks in America saw in the fall of the dual-monarchy their only chance of liberation and the only ray of hope for the restoration of their long-lost freedom . THE EARLY RELATIONS OF SLOVAKS AND CZECHS What the Slovaks suffered at the hands of the Magyars, the Czechs suffered at the hands of the Austrians-the Germans, although perhaps in somewhat lesser degree. Germanic influences were making their noticeable inroads into the ranks of the Czech people, and those with weaker convictions, naturally, succumbed. The Czechs and Slovaks did not have direct close con- 10 SLOVAKIA tacts. They lived apart. They had no common meeting ground. The literati, it is true, had their mutual contacts and they wrote and dreamed of the brotherhood of the Czech and Slovak, but no closer union between the two peopies was ever established. Some were so enthusiastic in their writings that they saw the Czech and Slovak peoples as branches of one Slovanic people, but the people themselves lived as two different nations . After the large immigration of the Czechs and Slovaks into this country, both peoples continued to live and develop here as two separate nations. Each built its own churches, schools and institutions. Each founded its own fraternal and social organizations. In places the Czechs and Slovaks lived in close proximity to each other, but at no time was there any marked intermingling. Both realized that the other is his closest Slavonic brother, but the lines of demarcation between the two peoples remained very definite and well established in this country. NATIONALISTIC MOVEMENT OF SLOVAKS The Slovaks have had their fraternal and social organizations here since about 1890, or slightly previous to that. The nationalistic spirit was fostered in all of them, but because here and there small leaders, who had originally succumbed to Magyar influences while still over there in the fatherland, managed to place themselves here in strategic positions, it was necessary to convince the wide masses of Slovaks here, that it is the duty of every Slovak in America to rid himself of every bit of Magyar influence, develop a real Slovak consciousness, and help his downtrodden brethren over there, who were struggling against overwhelming odds and disadvantages to keep the Slovak nation as such on the face of the earth. Every bit of news regarding new atrocities against the Slovak people there stirred the Slovak people here and helped to engender a better Slovak consciousness, and a willingness to rise in defense of the nation. But, the one most striking incident that finally completely awakened the Slovaks in America, was the massacre in Cernova, in Slovakia: Rev. Andrej Hlinka had been suspended by His Eminence Bishop Parvy because of his political activi- SLOVAKIA 11 ties. The Hungarian government also took steps to make Hlinka harmless and the result was that he was sentenced to 2 years in jail. He was an ardent Slovak nationalist and in some of his political campaign speeches he had exhorted his Slovak followers to fight against the policies of Magyarization. In the meantime, the inhabitants of cernova, the birthplace of Hlinka, had succeeded in completing the building of their little church with the funds that Hlinka had collected, and preparations were made for a proper dedication and blessing of the church. The villagers appealed to the Bishop that Hlinka be re-instated and that he be delegated to perform the blessing of the church. The Bishop, however, appointed someone else and the date was set for October 27, 1907. The inhabitants of cernova then notified the Bishop that they do not wish to have the blessing performed on that date. Their wishes, however, were not to be respected and on the date set the proper appointee rode into town to perform the blessing of the Church. The villagers were congregated in the street in front of the Church and refused to admit the Church dignitaries, insisting that they wish Hlinka to bless their Church and no one else. A scuffle occured, and in the turmoil that followed, the gendarmes, standing nearby, were ordered to fire into the mob. They did! The street cleared in a hurry and 9 dead, 3 dying, 12 seriously injured and 80 less seriously injured persons were left lying there. That night 14 Slovak martyrs were found dead as the result of that salvo of bullets. And some months later numerous Slovaks were given jail sentences because of their participation in the c ernova uprising. The Slovaks ,in America realized that such atrocities must not go on unnoticed and rmprotested. The world at large must be informed about them. Many protest mass meetings followed. The Catholic Clergy called its first Cat:p.olic Slovak Congress on September 3, 1906, to WilkesBarre. The Slovak newspapermen and journalists met in December, 1906, in Pittsburgh. Everything was being worked up for a concentrated action of all the Slovaks, irrespective of their religious or political beliefs. This effort to unify the Slovaks was also responsible for the pamphlet: 12 SLOVAKIA "Political criminal trial against the Rev. Father Andrew Hlinka, the Rev. Father Joseph Tomik, Dr. srobar and others, in Ruzomberok, Liptov Comitat, Hungary, November 26 to December 26, 1906," published by the Slovak journalists. A benefit fund was also created, and thousands of dollars were sent to the old country for the support of the loyal and nationalistically conscious Slovaks who were imprisoned and otherwise mistreated by the Magyars. The outstanding result of the atrocities in Slovakia was the founding of the Slovak League of America. The Slovak Newspapermen's Association at the instigation of Rev. Stefan Furdek called the First Slovak Congress to Cleveland May 26, 1907. The representatives of all the Slovak organizations came to Cleveland for that meeting. Along with them came 7,000 other Slovaks, of all creeds, beliefs and dialects. None cared about anything else than that they are Slovaks, that their people are being cruelly mistreated under Magyar rule, and that they must come to the rescue of their brethren. Amid such enthusiasm the Slovak League was founded at that meeting in Cleveland. The Rev. Stefan Furdek was elected president, Albert Mamatey, secretary, Rev. John Porubsky, financial Secretary. Dr. M. Francisci, treasurer. The aim of the organization was. embodied principally in the following sentence of the By-laws: "That the Slovak nation may take its place among the older nations as an equal among equals." A National Fund was created from which the nationalistic movements of the Slovaks in the Fatherland were to be supported. Numerous mass meetings, under the auspices of the new Slovak League, followed all over the United States. Resolutions were adopted at these mass meetings, the contents of which in the main verse : 1. We protest against the massacre and imprisonment of our leading Slovak men in Hungary. 2. We strenously protest against the unfounded indictment of our Slovak peasants; against the unfounded procedure. of the courts, which are hurling our people into investigative imprisonment, as it has recently occured so many times. 3. We demand, that the Laws in Hungary be abided by and that they serve the Magyar as well as the Slovak, and not that the Slovak would get imprisonment and heavy fine on the least provocation. LIBRARY SLOVAKIA 13 THE EARLY MOVEMENT FOR FREEDOM Such then was the stage-setting among the Slovaks here in America and in Hungary when World War I, broke out. The original gun-shot, in fact, which was to precipitate the world catastrophe, had really not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovaks in America had already prepared a Memorandum, intended for all the parliaments of the civilized world. Ivan Daxner, Sr., the Secretary of the Slovak League at the time, was just making the final corrections of the Memorandum, when first fire broke out in Europe, fore-telling the coming of the World War. With this sudden turn of affairs in Europe, many thought that the contents of the Memorandum should be changed. Sox:ne thought that it should definitely express the thought: "We want to break away from the Magyars." Others thought that it should express the idea: "We want to be with the Czechs." A middle course was chosen, and the Memorandum, delivered to all members of Congress of the United States asked, that "The Slovaks in Hungary should obtain their natural privileges of life, freedom and pursuit of happiness, which they have been deprived of by the dynasty; that the Slovaks be given an opportunity to develop their national spirit, their abilities, and the natural resources of their native land ; that the Slovaks be guaranteed the realization of their national ideals and efforts, which have been mercilessly trodden by the tyrannical Hungarian Government. " The Memorandum set forth in detail a description of the Slovak nation and a description of the land that the nation inhabits. It set forth a description of the Magyar atrocities: How the nation is oppressed by the Magyars, particularly since 1863; how its language is being expelled not only from governmental offices and schools, but even from the home circles of government officials and employes of Slovak descent. The Magyar government wilfully avoids Par. 44 of the Laws of 1868, according to which Slovak schools were to be . built by government funds . The government not only does not respect this law, but it has gone even further, and has forcefully closed schools which the Slovak people have established out of their own funds and voluntary contributions. The government has suppressed the "Matica Slovenska"-"The Slovak Foundation"the highest cultural and scientific institute of the Slovaks, 14 SLOVAKIA founded for their own advancement and uplift. The Magyar government has forcefully taken thousands of children during the years 1863-86 away from their parents, and sent them to Magyar territories for the purpose of complete Magyarization of these youthful Slovaks. The Slovaks are paying their taxes, but not one cent is being expended from government funds for Slovak culture and Slovak social welfare. For these and many other reasons the Slovaks in America, as free citizens of a great country, petitioned all influential political factors in Europe and all over the civilized world, in the name of justice and humanity, to see to it, when future new political units would be established and when fates of nations were to be decided that all the injustices perpetrated on the Slovak nation would be erased, and that the Slovak people be considered as an equal and free nation among the other nations of the world. The Slovak League asked that the Slovak people be granted their complete self-government and the freedom of self-determination in the field of politics as well as in the field of culture and commerce. This Memorandum was signed by all the officials of the Slovak League, by the representatives of twenty-three Slovak newspapers, by the representatives of twenty organizations, by fifty-two Catholic priests and forty Protestant Ministers. This Memorandum, published in five languages, besides the English, reached the most influential political and diplomatic factors in America. It did much to bring the Slovak cause before the World. It attracted attention to the Slovaks, who already up to that time, certainly were not an unknown quantity, as may be witnessed by the long conversation that President Taft had with the representatives of Slovak organizations in 1910. The main significance of this Memorandum, however, lies in the fact that the Slovaks of America, immediately after the outbreak of the War, were publicly taking upon themselves the role of a leader of the entire Slovak nation of the World-and they were doing it independently, without ties with anybody. They took upon themselves the duty of formulating the policies of the entire nation-and they demanded the right of self-determination and self-government in behalf of their entire nation. The Memorandum SLOVAKIA 15 clearly showed that immediately after the outbreak of the War, the Slovaks in America had visions of liberating the Slovak nation from the control of all other nations. The signatures on the Memorandum were likewise significant, and they show just why the Slovaks of America assumed the leadership of the entire nation. The Slovak masses of America were organized, and the number of Slovaks in America standing in organized ranks exceeded the number of organized Slovaks that were ever known in their own fatherland. The number of publications represented on the Memorandum by signature also exceeded the number that the Slovaks had in their native country. All this clearly shows that the more progressive portion of the nation was found here in America, and that this portion had a full privilege, moral and financial, to speak in behalf of the entire nation. COOPERATION OF THE SLOVAKS AND CZECHS It is unnecessary to go into much detail to show how the Slovaks struggled for their cause and their liberation during those early years of World War I. They were fully united here-all the Slovaks-but they were carrying on the battle practically single-handed. Very often, at the meetings of their common organization, the Slovak League, they considered the question, whether they should find an ally and unite with him in their struggle, or whether they should continue to work single-handedly and independently for the brighter future of their nation. They were unanimous in their effort to tear the Slovaks across the sea from Magyar rule. There were no dissenters and no objectors to that idea. But in order that the Slovaks may come to bask in the sunshine of freedom, it was .necessary that Austria-Hungary be disrupted, and for such work they necessarily had to find an ally. Several proposed combinations developed. Some favored the Czechs as the ally to be sought. Others favored the Russians. Others favored the Poles, who already had promises from the Allies for a restoration of Poland. Gradually the Czechs came to be selected as the most logical ally to be sought. By what process of reasoning the Czechs came to be generally favored is probably best expressed in a letter written by Rev. Matus Jankola, Bridgeport, Connecticut, December 11, 1914, to Joseph Rusek, Editor of "Jednota." 16 SLOVAKIA "Our battle-cry must be: 'Away from the Magyars.' We must work for the self-government of Slovakia. Never, however, in the confines of Hungary, united with the Magyars! Their sentence over us is fatal: 'Tot nem ember.' It's in their blood ... We should ally ourselves with our Slav brothers. But with whom? The Russians are in part orthodox, and in part, too powerful. They would devour us. The Poles are closer to us, but they too , are too powerful in everything. We can ally ourselves with the Czechs only. There are two Czechs to every Slovak. We have just about the same language. The people would not have to learn another language ; their financial , commercial etc. abilities will benefit our weakness and inability. Austria-Hungary may serve as an example for our alliance. The higher government, diplomatic corps and army, all common. Let all the rest remain separate, whether is shall be a republican, or monarchistic confederation." Notice how Rev. Jankola, a popular leader of the Slovaks, and undoubtedly expressing the concensus of opinion of the Slovaks in that letter, visioned the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. Anot}:ler letter of his (December 15, 1915, from Bridgeport, Connecticut) again brings an interesting opinion about the Czechs, which no doubt was not only his own, but the more or less established opinion about the Czechs among the Slovaks generally, and how he pictured the future relations of the Slovaks and Czechs. He wrote: "We shall mean nothing in a monarchy, and absolutely nothing in a great Russia. But we would stand on a footing of equality with the Czechs a-la Austria and Hungary, or formerly, Norway and Sweden ; with our own self-government , our own parliament, our own Slovak language. Can we ever obtain this under Russia, or Austria-Hungary ? "In regards to the Czechs: Their supremacy can only be temporary ; until the time that we rear one generation in our own spirit. I do not consider the Czech liberalism so dangerous. Our nature and character are different. The Slovaks-I mean the common people-shall retain their character." These were Father Jankola's unofficial letters, but they express the predominant sentiment among the greater portion of the Slovaks in America, and practically the unanimous sentiment among the Catholic Slovaks in America, which, expressed in other words, meant: We favor cooperation with the Czechs, we must unite with them, but before we do, it is necessary to agree with them, that we are forming a state, where both nations-the Czech and the Slovak-will be equal factors with their own selfgovernments. SLOVAKIA 17 ORGANIZATION OF THE CZECHS IN AMERICA The Czechs were not as well prepared to take up the cause of their liberation when the war broke out as were the Slovaks. The Czechs were divided into many small lodges and into a number of varying factions. Their press, too, was not as unanimous in its attitude toward the War and in its stand toward one side or the other. Some of the Czech newspapers, and among them were several of the more influential, favored the retention of old Austria. They looked with much disfavor on the attempts of some energetic Czech patriots who took up the standard against the old regime. They ridiculed all attempts to tear down old Austria. They considered all such attempts futile. Those favoring the old regime were found principally in the ranks of the Czech socialists and Czech free-thinkers. The Catholic Czechs had a smaller percentage of those who favored adherence to the old regime. Most of the Catholic Czechs immediately became enthused with the cause of liberation, even though they were frequently censured for it on the grounds that they were directly playing into the hands of Professor T . G. Masaryk, an enemy of the Church. The foundations of a united Czech revolutionary organization were laid on March 13th and 14th, 1915, in Cleveland, at a joint meeting of local Czechs with representatives from Chicago and New York. The immediate results were very mediocre. It was only in August, 1915, when Vojta Benes, a teacher, came to this country with an appeal from Professor Masaryk and his own brother, Dr. Eduard Benes, and when he himself began working on the organization, that the Czech National Alliance began to take root and spread. Then first the Czech public responded to the appeals of its leaders with generous contributions to the cause of liberating the Czech nation. The National Czech Alliance was actually founded on September 1, 1915. Its main office was in Chicago. Its first prominent and zealous workers were such as were known for their free-thinking and anti-Church ideas. These, naturally, did not entice the Catholic Czechs into their ranks. The Catholic Czechs remained unorganized for some time, but they worked independently, although many of them contributed funds and otherwise assisted the cause sponsored by the National Czech Alliance. Finally, on February 18 SLOVAKIA 6, 191 7, the Catholic Czechs organized too. They formed their Alliance of Czech Catholics. On May 5, 1917, the first steps were taken to coordinate the efforts of the two groups of Czechs, and on July 4, 1917, they affected a compromise and decided on ways and means of cooperating. The representatives of the two factions or organizations then issued a joint appeal to the Czechs of America asking for support of the movement to establish an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic, at the same time advising the Czech public that the two factions from now on would work and cooperate for this one high ideal and admirable cause. THE CLEVELAND AGREEMENT The Cleveland Agreement was the fore-runner of the Pittsburgh Pact. Perhaps the latter would never have been drafted and signed, had not certain difficulties arisen which gave the Slovaks reason enough to suspect that the Czechs were not altogether sincere when they suggested and submitted the original Cleveland Agreement. But, let us see how the Cleveland Agreement came to be and what it contained. In the foregoing chapter, it was related that the Czech National Alliance was organized on September 1, 1915. The National Alliance of Czech Catholics did not come to be organized until in 1917, and up to that time the Czech National Alliance, naturally, was appearing as the only representative of the Czech people in America in this revolutionary movement, which was ultimately to spell the overthrow of the Austria-Hungarian monarchy and an establishment of an independent Czecho-Slovak Republic. While the Czechs were laying the foundations of their organization in America, similar Czech organizations were being formed in France, Switzerland and Russia, which embodied in their programs a representation of the Slovaks too. That these Czech organizations could take upon themselves the representations of the Slovaks, too, was made possible only by the fact that, outside of Russia, there were too few Slovaks in any of the other countries, and these few Slovaks hardly could deal on an equal basis with the Czechs, who outnumbered them. All this time Professor T. G. Masaryk was very active SLOVAKIA 19 in the revolutionary movement. Other leaders in the Czech movement were also busy and difficulties arose, but after all these were ironed out, T. G. Masaryk became the recognized head of the movement for the liberation of the Czechs and the alliance of the Slovaks with the Czechs. In order, however, that the visible and recognized head of the revolutionary movement could have the right to speak in behalf of the Slovaks too, it was necessary that at least one recognized portion of Slovak immigration express itself clearly and distinctly in favor of the joint effort with the Czechs. The Slovak group in America was the logical group to be sought and its favor gained. The Czech National Alliance in America was asked from Paris by Professor T. G. Masaryk himself to gain the cooperation of this Slovak group in America. Joseph Tvrzicky, the Secretary of the Czech National Alliance, officially invited the Slovak League of America to a meeting, the purpose of which was to be: "That we could unite for combined political work." Along with this invitation Tvrzicky sent a proposed draft on an Agreement, which later the Slovaks accepted in Cleveland, on October 22, 1915, just as Tvrzicky had drafted it. The Cleveland Agreement contained the following points: "1. Independence of Czech lands and Slovakia ; 2. A union of the Czech and Slovak nations in a federative alliance of states with a complete national autonomy of Slovakia, with its own parliament, its own state government, its own complete cultural freedom, and therefore, its own complete use of the Slovak language, its own financial and political government and with a Slovak state language. 3. Voting power: General, secret and direct. 4. Form of Government: A personal union with a democratic form of State, the same as in England. 5. These points form the basis of a mutual agreement and can be enlarged or expanded only with the approval of both parties. The Czech National Alliance reserves the right of making possible changes, and the Slovak League has the same right." These five points of the Cleveland Agreement were the basis on which all the various factors of Slovak public life in America agreed to cooperate with the Czechs for the one and mutual cause. Everything was clearly defined, the program very definitely set forth, and both parties of the agreement could 20 SLOVAKIA undertake their first steps with complete confidence to each other. It is worth mentioning that the Cleveland Agreement was accepted by the Slovaks with the firm conviction that T. G. Masaryk was fully informed in advance about this Agreement and each and every point of its contents, or that he shall be fully informed. Ignac Gessay, one of the active Slovak workers, writes of this as follows: "It is important to note that we Slovaks did not draft the Cleveland Agreement, but our brother Czechs did, the representatives of the Czech National Alliance. They offered it to us in a brotherly way in return for our fraternal help to them. Mr. Emanuel Voska, one of the representatives present there in behalf of the Czech National Alliance, arose and amidst great applause announced that, the Text of this Agreement is known to Professor Masaryk-the President of the National Council and that he agrees with it." With the field all set for a fine close cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks, further work was to follow. But the very first act, the purpose of which was, to announce that the Czechs and Slovaks are working for a common aim already threw a "monkey wrench" into the machinery, and caused some uneasiness and the first little suspicion in the minds of the Slovaks. This first act was issued in Paris, on November 14, 1915. It was a proclamation against Austria-Hungary. The Czecho-Slovak National Council did not formally exist at the time, so Professor Masaryk simply signed the proclamation: "The Foreign Czech Committee." Four representatives of the Czechs in America were signed on that Proclamation, as well as two representatives of the Slovaks in America, yet it was a "Czech Committee" not a Czecho-Slovak Committee. In this very first act the Slovaks saw a wilful attempt to deprive them of all their due rights and privileges, and so already at such an early date after the enthusiastic acceptance of the Cleveland Agreement, which heralded the closest cooperation, understanding and mutual help of the Czechs and Slovaks, the difficulties of that cooperation with the Czechs became quite plain to the Slovaks. DIFFICULTIES BETWEEN THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS The Cleveland Agreement, which had been so enthusiastically accepted and signed by both parties, was being adhered by the Slovaks to the very letter. Still, difficulties SLOVAKIA 21 between the Czechs and Slovaks kept cropping up. Those must be attributed to an erronerous Czech understanding of the Slovak question and the Slovak attitude in the whole matter. For, certainly, had the Czechs fully understood just how the Slovaks felt about their alliance with the Czechs, had they realized that the Slovaks were full-heartedly in favor of an honest and sincere cooperation with the Czechs, but that they were suspicious of every move that was not in keeping with the Agreement, these misunderstandings would never have come to pass, and the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact would never have been necessary. The situation became such that the Slovak League called its Ninth Congress to Chicago on February 22, 1916, and in the call for the session, Albert Mamatey, the president, and Ivan Daxner, the Secretary, made the following statement: "It is unavoidably necessary to hold a joint conference with our Czech brethren in order that we may avoid misunderstandings and perhaps even conflicts with them, which could arise if our Czech brethren did not take the Agreement made with the Slovaks in the same light as it was made and signed by the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance." The Congress met and ironed out many difficulties, but this did not suffice. The Slovaks wanted to have direct information from their own people about the progress of the revolutionary movement in Europe. In order that they may not depend entirely on the Czech National Alliance for all their information, they decided to send two representatives, Dr. G. Kosik, Editor of the Catholic Sokol, and Dr. Stefan Osusky, an attorney and minister, to Europe. The intention of sending these two Slovaks was of the best, but the Czechs in America were very disappointed over this step. The result of it was that they began supporting and encouraging M. Getting, Editor of Slovak Sokol, and a few others who began showing and expressing dissatisfaction over the management of affairs of the Slovak League. It may be remarked here that Getting was one of the original ultra-enthusiasts for a complete union with the Czechs. All his efforts in this direction were rewarded later. He became Czechoslovak consul in Pittsburgh. Such behavior of the Czechs was, of course, anything but appreciated by the Slovaks. It had a tendency to tear down the unanimity of the Slovak spirit which had been 22 SLOVAKIA established at a conference of the Slovak League on April 12, 1916, in Pittsburgh. The minutes of that session tell that Mr. Kompis called attention of those present to the fact that Masaryk, who is a Moravian Slovak, never mentioned the Slovaks in any of his lectures, speeches and proclamations, and that a periodical like the "ceskoslovenska Samostatnost" (Czecho-Slovak Independence) published items which were deragatory to the Slovak people, and which in spirit and in fact were in direct contradition to the intentions of the Cleveland Agreement. A strong Slovak spirit pervaded this session of the Slovak League. Mr. Daxner expressed himself that the Slovaks did not wish to raise small questions of formalities against the Czechs, but they did wish to call the attention of the Czechs to the violations of the basic principles of their agreement with them. "Yes," said Mr. Daxner, "we want to tear away from the Magyars and be with the Czechs, not under the Czechs." The Slovaks again felt united among themselves, and they adopted the following resolution, which even M. Getting signed very willingly: Adopted at the joint session of the Slovak organizations, newspapers , Slovak clergy and other National workers, called by the Slovak League to Pittsburgh on April 12, 1916: We, the representatives of the Slovak organizations and newspapers, gathered here this day, admit the necessity of harmonious cooperation in all nationalistic undertakings intended for the benefit of liberating Slovakia from a political, cultural and economic yoke; We further attest that we will avoid all disturbances which might harm the above mentioned cooperation in the interest of the nation ; We bind ourselves to assist with all our abilities the political program expressed in the "Agreement" between the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance, adopted in Cleveland, Ohio, on October 22, 1915. JAN PAJ'fKUCH, Hlas ; GUSTAV KOSfK, Katolicky Sokol; JOZEF RUSEK, Jednota ; IVAN BIELEK, Narodne Noviny ; KAROL BELOHLAVEK, Slovensky Hlasnik; MILAN GETTING, Slovensky Sokol; NIKOLAJ S. BIELIK, Bratstvo; C. L. ORBACH, Slovak v Amerike ; J"OLIUS BUCKO, Narodny Dennik. Getting signed this resolution, but he continued his activity against the Slovak League nevertheless. The Czechs supported him, much to the disappointment of the Slovak leaders and the officials of the League, as the official correspondence of Albert Mamatey, the president of the SLOVAKIA 23 League, shows so clearly. These, as well as the many other difficulties that arose here, in Russia and elsewhere, between the Czechs and Slovaks, prompted many of the Slovaks to lose faith in the Cleveland Agreement, and in the Czechs, and prompted them to turn in quest of new allies for the Slovaks. PRESIDENT WILSON, THE ALLIES AND THE RIGHTS OF SMALL NATIONS Perhaps the quest of some of the discontented Slovaks may have taken firmer footing, hact not important things occured in the diplomatic world. President Wilson was reelected on November 8, 1916, and soon after his re-election (December 21, 1916) he issued a proclamation to the warring nations in which he asked for a statement of their conditions of peace. The Allies answered January 12, 1917, and in the conditions which they enumerated, the folloving sentence was found: "Liberation of the Italians, Slavs, Roumanians, Czecho-Slovaks from foreign government control." The Slovaks up to that time abhorred the term "Czecho-Slovak." They were Slovaks, and the Bohemian brethren were Czechs. The term "Czecho-Slovak" was one that was condemned because it was fraught with dangers for the retention of the individuality of the Slovak people. Yet, the reply of the Allies gave the Slovaks as well as the Czechs great joy, and in their great enthusiasm over the ray 0f hope that the Allies gave them, the Slovaks temporarily overlooked the use of the term "Czecho-Slovaks." How the term "Czecho-Slovaks" came to be embodied in the Allies' reply is also an interesting episode. T. G. Masaryk explains that the term "Czecho-Slovak" was written into the Allies' reply after the reply had been all written. "The word Czecho-Slovaks"-he writes-"contained in the proclamation, has its own interesting internal history. There were three suggestions: 'liberation of the Czechs''the Czech nation'-'the Czecho-Slovaks.' The latter suggestion was accepted at a conference of Dr. Benes (Czech), Stefanik (Slovak) and Osusky (Slovak).''-Dr. Benes on the other hand writes that he conferred with Osusky and Sychravy about the matter, since Stefanik was then in Russia, and he further states U:1at, "Osusky expressed fear that 24 SWVAKIA the Allies' reply to President Wilson might name the Czechs only, not the Slovaks"-and for that reason he insisted on the term "Czechoslovak." Be it as it may, the above explanations automatically leave the impression that the two Slovak leaders-or the one, if we are to accept Benes's explanation-feared that only the Czechs or the Czech nation would be mentioned and made special note of in the Allies' reply to President Wilson, and they were therefore glad to reach even such a compromise that, mention should be made of Czecho-Slovaks. Doesn't it make one wonder about the real sincerity of the Czech leaders who worried more about their own cause than the joint cause of both nations? JOINT VENTURES OF THE CZECHS AND SLOVAKS Despite all the discrepancies that had arisen, the Slovak League and the Czech National Alliance continued with their work and progressed side by side. They actually combined in undertakings only when occasion called for it. But the necessities of the turbulent times forced both sides to greater cooperation. The Slovak League held another Congress in Cleveland on February 22, 1917. Much of the discussion concerned the attitude of the Czechs, who had caused many misunderstandings because of their failure to adhere to the contents of the Cleveland Agreement. After all was said and done, however, the Congress adopted a resolution, whereby the League again promises the Czech National Alliance its full cooperation, at least up to such time as the Slovaks will gain their freedom. A "Joint Czecho-Slovak Proclamation" was also issued, in which gratitude is expressed to the United States and the Allies for the attention that these have given the Czech and Slovak efforts up to that time. The proclamation also contained one sentence, which probably very fully expressed the hopes and desires of the Slovaks: "Therefore, we request an independent Czecho-Slovak state with complete self-government for the Slovaks." This Congress also noted and considered the dangerous work of several newspaper and advertising agencies, which had been getting articles into the press that were hurting the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks. The result was that in March, 1917, the Slovak League and the Czech Na- SLOVAKIA 25 tional Alliance opened the Slav Press Bureau in New York for the purpose of spreading more favorable propaganda about the joint cause and warding off propaganda that was intended to do harm. This was the first real venture of the Czechs and Slovaks jointly. Others had to follow, and they did. Particularly was it necessary to raise funds to carry on the work, and the Czechs and Slovaks went about it enthusiastically. The Slovaks, believing that it was their cause as much as the Czechs', and believing that after the battle was over, they were to receive as much consideration as the Czechs, worked very zealously, and at every occasion contributed their share of work and finances. Even in the number of volunteers who joined the Czecho-Slovak army forces, the Slovaks did their full share of duty, and it is significant that the first volunteers who applied to the Czecho-Slovak forces were Slovaks. The popular General Milan Rastislav Stefanik, an ardent Slovak leader in the fight for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks, visited America and first asked for volunteers. This may perhaps explain why the Slovaks were among the first volunteers, but whatever the reason, the Slovaks were not wanting in their zeal, enthusiasm and willingness to work for the joint cause of the Czechs and Slovaks, even when it came to recruiting men, who were to face death on the battle fields. That the Slovaks were willing to contribute their share of the burden was also proved by the following incident: Since the Czechs up to that time had their two organizations : The Czech National Alliance and the Alliance of Czech Catholics, and the Slovaks had their one joint organization, The Slovak League, it was thought feasible to combine all these three into one formal organization. All three had been cooperating together, but it was thought that a joint council of the three may do much toward coordinating all work and effort. Accordingly, a Czecho-Slovak National Council of America ( or later called: American Czecho-Slovak Board) was organized in which all three organizations were to be represended. Each side--the Czechs and the Slovaks-were to be represented equally-each by eight representatives. The Czechs thought, however, that since they had two organizations (both were working under one name as though one organization: Bohemian National Al- 26 SLOVAKIA liance) they should be entitled to twice eight representatives in the joint Czecho-Slovak Council. The Slovaks refused to yield on this point. "How do you wish to arrange this?" one Czech asked. "We want to be represented in this body equally with you brother Czechs," the Slovaks replied. "And will you contribute to the common cause on a fifty-fifty basis?" "Yes, we will." And so it was arranged that if the Slovaks are to get equal representation with the Czechs in their joint bodies, they are to bear one-half of the burden. And from that time up to the conclusion of the joint movement, the Slovaks always contributed at least one-half of the finances necessary to carry on the work. T. G. MASARYK IN AMERICA The year 1918 found the Slovaks in America busy with their work. They were tremendously enthusiastic. Their efforts seemed to be leading to success. Their goal-the liberation of Slovakia, and the founding of a Czecho-Slovak state, in which the Slovaks would enjoy all the privileges of freedom, seemed so close at hand. From time to time, however, little incidents would keep occuring that would cool the enthusiasm of the Slovaks. There seemed to be an undercurrent which made the Slovaks feel that the Czechs are not fully sincere with the Slovaks, that they are considering themselves and their well-being first, and that they are neglecting the Slovaks everywhere, except where the Slovaks insist on their recognition and their share of privileges. Some of this difficulty was no doubt caused by the many letters that the Slovak legionaries from America, serving in the Czecho-Slovak Army, sent here from France. They complained that the official language of the Czecho-Slovak Army is the Czech. That they are not receiving the Slovak newspapers and Slovak books which are being sent to them, but that they are being supplied with Czech books and Czech newspapers exclusively. The Slovaks tried to overlook all these small incidents. They were imbued with the spirit of their freedom, so close at hand, and anything that occurred which might dampen their enthusiasm, confidence etc. was passed on and at- SLOVAKIA 27 tributed to human short-comings of individuals. Here was a noble joint cause, and what else mattered! On April 29, 1918, T. G. Masaryk arrived in Vancouver. Much was expected of him. He was looked upon as the person who could settle most of the small differences and suspicions and discrepancies that had arisen. He was the president of the Czecho-Slovak National Council and therefore, the leader of the revolution, the leader working for the liberation of Czech lands and Slovakia. He was enthusiastically received by the Slovaks. They hoped that he would positively assure them that any suspicions about the insincerity of the Czechs were absolutely unfounded. Masaryk made his first public appearance at an enthusiastic mass meeting of 50,000 Slavs in Chicago on May 5, 1918. The Czech newspapers, however, published such reports about this meeting and about Masaryk's address that the Slovak periodicals complained immediately. The "Jednota"-the ©fficial weekly of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest and one of the oldest Slovak organizations in America-was fast to catch up with this ignoring of the Slovaks in these reports, and it criticized Masaryk. It showed its discontent over the fact that, while he kept mentioning the 'Czech lands,' 'the Czech army,' 'the Czech fight,' 'Czech future ' etc., etc., he never mentioned Slovakia, he forgot the Slovak volunteers, he completely ignored the Slovak participation in the struggle. The "Jednota" kept calling attention to the fact that the Czechs, in other ways, too, were forgetting about the Slovaks, that they were misinforming the Americans about the Czech and Slovak relations, that they were picturing the Slovaks as subordinates to the Czechs, or as a people who really are a part of the Czech nation. The "Jednota" kept warning the Slovak public that, unless the Slovaks were not careful, the Czech people would assume complete control of the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, create a large Czech State, and the Slovaks would not gain the real independence and freedom that they were dreaming of. Masaryk finally came to Pittsburgh and on May 30, 1918, the Slovaks there made a tremendous celebration over his visit. Masaryk spoke there first in English, then in Czech. He said beautiful things. He was proud that by birth he really is a Slovak. He prided himself on working many 28 SLOVAKIA years for the cause of bringing the Czechs and Slovaks closer together. He said that there should be no differences among us. The National Council and all its branches in Russia and America have Slovak representatives as well as Czechs. Dr. Stefanik, a Slovak, he said, has done so much thus far in this struggle. Both sides, he said, have cooperated beautifully. The Slovaks and Czechs are united, and the differences that creep in are being artificially produced by the German and Magyar influences, who have reasons to wish for difficulties between the Czechs and Slovaks. The relations of Slovakia to the Czech lands in the proposed new Czecho-Slovak State, he pictured very favorably. There will be a free Bohemia and a free Slovakia. Political control, education, courts of justice and all else in Slovakia shall be Slovak, in Bohemia it shall be Czech. We would be "silly" if we thought anything else, or if we did not wish each other well. There should be no difficulties among us because of languages. We understand each other and what more could we wish for? The Czech majority need not be feared. It will be found in Bohemia. In Slovakia the majority shall be Slovak. Each branch, or each nation, shall be boss in its own home. Everyone shall have his personal liberty guaranteed. The huge gathering received Masaryk's address with a tremendous ovation. The Slovaks, present there in very large numbers, were overjoyed. These were all the things they had been wishing for. THE PITTSBURGH PACT That same evening Masaryk had a conference with the representatives of the Slovaks in the Moose Temple on Penn Avenue. It was a confidential conference. Those present were asking Masaryk about the various proposed arrangements in the new State. He answered all questions to the complete satisfaction of all present. He convinced everybody that he meant everything well, and the Slovaks left the conference thoroughly convinced that here is their real leader under whose guidance the Slovak people would be led into the promised land. The next day, May 31st, according to the official report of the Slovak League Press Bureau-The Czecho-Slovak National Council met in the same building and Masaryk at- SLOVAKIA 29 tended the session. "At this session," says the report, "Prof. Masaryk performed an act which shall always have historical significance in the history of the Czechs and Slovaks. This act consisted of a new agreement between the Czechs and Slovaks. Professor Masaryk wrote the new agreement himself, and it establishes the relations between the two nations. According to this agreement, Czecho-Slovakia shall be a Republic in which Slovakia shall form a completely self-governed part with its Slovak capitol, its Slovak parliament, its Slovak schools, its Slovak courts of justice and its own (public) control. Albert Mamatey, president of the Slovak League shall get a copy of this agreement. He shall publish it in the near future. Masaryk concluded his mission among the Slovaks in Pittsburgh in this way." And that the Slovaks were completely satisfied over such an outcome may be judged from the same report of the Slovak League Press Bureau which said: "There are no reasons anymore for further fearing, for any prejudice, for any suspicion. Everything is now clear between us and the brother Czechs. From to-day on we must refrain from talking about anything which would separate us for, there is nothing which really separates us. Let us put forth all our strength from to-day on and let us work to gain the one big and holy aim, which is: The liberation of Czecho-Slovakia." Even though the entire text of this Pittsburgh Pact was not known to the Slovaks in detail, they were satisfied when they read the short description of its contents. Even the "Jednota," which had more or less led the opposition and utilized every opportunity to warn the Slovaks to be careful, was now satisfied. It said: "Professor Masaryk is an ardent friend of the Slovaks and the Slovak language . We had our doubts about that. Today there is not a shadow of doubt. We respect him and recognize him as our leader in the struggle for our liberty. We have confidence in him, we believe him and we thank God that we have a man of his character and ability at the head of our Czecho-Slovak revolution. May God give him health and strength." Albert Mamatey, the president of the Slovak League, describing what had taken place at the conference with 30 SLOVAKIA Masaryk and how the Pittsburgh Pact came to be drafted, wrote as follows: "In order that all reasons for the mistrusting of the Czechs by the Slovaks should be ended, be these reasons well founded or imagined, this matter was brought up for consideration at the last session of the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Pittsburgh on May 30, where our leader, Professor Masaryk, was also present. "We Slovaks brought up the matter, and requested Professor Masaryk to examine well that famous Cleveland Czecho-Slovak Agreement of ours, and to approve it and see to it that the leaders among the Czech brothers respect it in their relations to the Slovaks, or that he himself draft a new Agreement, which would better suit the changing conditions, since some points of that Cleveland Agreement had to be changed because of the changes in conditions caused by the war. "Professor Masaryk examined our Cleveland Agreement thoroughly, and seeing that in some details it really is not "up-to-date," he wrote a new Pact, in which he outlined very concisely, yet very clearly, the relations of the Czechs and Slovaks in this fight for liberty and later in the hopedfor Czecho-Slovak State." According to the arrangement at this conference, this Pittsburgh Pact-being a very important document, was not merely to remain in its original crude shape, but was to be lithographed and then signed by all those concerned. In the meantime, things were happening in rapid succession. The United States Government and the governments of the Allies recognized the fight of the Czechs and Slovaks for their freedom and in fact, made their independence one of the conditions of peace. The Czecho-Slovak Republic was formally proclaimed on October 28, 1918, and was in reality recognized by the Allied powers some time previous to that. An event, however, that is of utmost importance to us is, that in the meantime, Professor Masaryk, the chairman of the recognized Czecho-Slovak National Council, the temporary government of the new CzechoSlovak State, was elected first President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic by that Council. Immediately Masaryk was asked to leave America and come to the scene where activity was greatest, and where his presence, as of the Presi- SLOVAKIA 31 dent, was now needed most. Masaryk left for the CzechoSlovak Republic on November 20, 1918, from New York on the SS. Carmen. As soon as the news reached America that Professor Masaryk was elected president and that he was to leave :soon, Mamatey, at the insistence of some of the Slovak leaders, went to see Masaryk in Washington before his departure, and there in Washington on November 14, 1918, as the qualified President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact. The Pittsburgh Pact, which he signed, read as follows: CZECHO-SLOV AK PACT Agreed Upon In Pittsburgh, Pa. , on May 30th, 1918 Representatives of the Slovak and Czech Organizations In the United States The Slovak League, the Czech National Alliance And the Alliance of Czech Catholics discussed the Czecho-Slovak question in the presence of the' chairman of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, Prof. Masaryk, and the program declarations made up to this time and resolved the following: We approve the political program which endeavors to unite the Czechs and Slovaks in an independent state of the Czech lands and Slovakia; Slovakia shall have its own administration, its own parliament and its own courts. The Slovak language shall be the official language in the school, in office and in public life in general. The Czecho-Slovak state shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic. The organization of the cooperation of the Czechs and Slovaks in the U.S. shall be intensified and arranged with mutual understanding as necessity and the changing conditions shall require. The detailed regulations for the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak state are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks: and their legal representatives. 32 SLOVAKIA Who were the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact? The first and foremost signature is that of Masarykthe President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Then the following: Czechs: 1. Karel Pergler, attorney, who was chairman of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council, first Czecho-Slovak ambassador in Washington, D.C., later in Japan. A member of the Czecho-Slovak parliament, lately a "man without a country" since the Czecho-Slovak Republic revoked his citizenship. 2. Dr. L. Fisher, physician, who at that time was president of the Bohemian National Alliance. 3. B. Simek, professor, Chicago, a member of the American division of the Czecho-Slovak National Council. 4. J. J. Zmrhal, professor, Chicago, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 5. Hynek Dostal, Editor of "Hlas," St. Louis, Missouri, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 6. Rev. Oldrich Zlamal, Cleveland, representative of Catholic Czech Alliance. 7. Vojta Benes, Secretary Bohemian National Alliance. 8. Rev. Innocent Rest!, Chicago, president Catholic Czech Alliance. 9. Jan Straka, Secretary Catholic Czech Alliance. 10. Dr. G. Pecival, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 11. Jos. Martinek, Editor, member of Bohemian National Alliance. Slovaks: 1. Albert Mamatey, President Slovak League, later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 2. Ivan Bielek, Editor "National News," member Czecho-Slovak National Council, later President Slovak League. 3. Milan Getting, Editor "Slovak Sokol," later Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. SLOVAKIA 33 4. G. H . Mika, attorney, Bridgeport, Connecticut, member of Slav Press Bureau. 5. Ignac Gessay, Editor official organ of Slovak League, member of Czecho-Slovak National Council. 6. Jozef Rusek, Middletown, Pa., Editor "Jednota," official weekly publication of the First Catholic Slovak Union, and member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 7. Rev. L. J. Karlovsky, New York, minister, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 8. Jan Jancek, Jr., Secretary Slovak League, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 9. Marus Gazdik, an officer of Slovak League, later Assistant Czecho-Slovak Consul in Pittsburgh. 10. Jan Pankuch, Cleveland, Ohio, owner of "Denny Hlas." Later vice-president National Slovak Society. 11. Michal Bosak, Scranton, Pennsylvania, banker, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 12. Rev. Jozef Murgas, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, chairman of publicity committee for "Million Dollar Fund" collection. Clergyman. Pioneer experimenter in wireless telegraphy. 13. Andrej Schustek, Chicago, local Slovak League official, member Czecho-Slovak National Council. 14. Rev. Pavel J. Siska, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, vicepresident Slovak League. 15. J. A. Feriencik, Cleveland, Ohio, writer and editor. 16. Ivan Daxner, former secretary Slovak League. 17. Rev. Jan Kubasek, a Catholic priest. President Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact as the President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. That he was a fully qualified president of the Republic, having the powers of president and recognized as such, is best attested by the fact, that in November, at the time that he affixed his signature to the Pact, Masaryk negotiated a ten million dollar loan for his State from American financiers, under the protectorate of the United States Government, of course. Another significant event that is worth recording here is the stamp of approval given all actions of President 34 SLOVAKIA Masaryk by a resolution of the temporary government adopted in Geneva on November 11, 1918, whereby "everything done by Professor Masaryk, chairman of the CzechoSlovak National Council, all agreements and promises (made by him) remain in force." The Pittsburgh Pact, drafted by Professor Masaryk, then chairman of that Council, some five months previous, and signed by him then as President, three days after this Geneva resolution was passed, was one of the "Agreements" or "promises" that must be included and intended by this resolution. And yet, as we shall see, that was one "agreement" or "promise" that has not remained in force, has not been respected, has not been honored. THE PITTSBURGH PACT DISREGARDED It is unnecessary to go into detail about all that transpired in the early days of the new State. The Czechs and Slovaks back home-in the old Austria-Hungarian State, were aware of the movement beyond the borders of the old Empire, the purpose of which was the setting up of a joint State of the Czechs and Slovaks. They, too, became imbued with enthusiasm and in due time, Czech and Slovak deputies announced in the Austrian and Hungarian parliaments that the Czechs and Slovaks no longer would be domineered by alien groups. That they were seceding from the old Empire and setting up a State of their own. Aided, abetted and controlled by Masaryk and his National Council, the end was finally achieved and the Czecho-Slovak Republic established. A constitution was drafted and accepted, temporary rules outlined, and the Republic was soon enjoying the first days of its free existence. The Slovaks, as well as the Czechs, could hardly realize that their long fought battle for liberty and freedom was at last won. Here they were-two fraternal nations-setting out with a truly mutual and fraternal spirit with their own ship of state. How mutually fraternal the two peoples regarded themselves! The Slovaks looked upon the Czechs as their long lost, more experienced brethren, who came back to help them, to aid them, and to establish a country where both could enjoy liberty at last. Under such circumstances, some small gathering in Turciansky Sv. Martin, which was supposed to be representative of the entire Slovak nation (but which was anything but that), was so overcome with SLOVAKIA 35 enthusiasm that, unaware that anything like the Pittsburgh Pact existed in America, it adopted a long resolution voicing this enthusiasm, and going so far in this spirit of joy, that it proclaimed the Slovaks and Czechs to be one nation-the Czechoslovak people. Nothing more was necessary! That settled all disputes! The Slovaks consider themselves politically, racially and by language one people with the Czechs! The Pittsburgh Pact has no leg to stand on. It is superfluous! Therefore, it should be ignored. And after all was said and done, and the early government established with all its provisions, the crafty Czech politicians, aided by a handful of Slovak individuals aspiring for government positions, arranged all matters so, that the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were totally ignored and not embodied in the Constitution. Little did it matter that the Slovaks, after learning of the Pittsburgh Pact and all that it provided for the Slovaks, did everything in their power to enforce the Pact's provisions. The Pact was ignored, and all that it provided meant nothing. Nor did it avail the Slovaks any to point out that according to the Pact, the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives-duly elected to represent them, never had a voice in establishing the details and arrangements of the Czecho-Slovak State, and that the Sv. Martin gathering was not a legal representative body of the Slovaks. The Pittsburgh Pact continued to be ignored. The Slovak League, as one of the parties to the Pact, has clamored for the recognition of the Pact. In 1922 it directed a Memorandum to the government and the House of Deputies. The representatives of the largest Slovak political party-the People's Party-have presented a motion in parliament to have the Pittsburgh Pact recognized and embodied in the Constitution. Other methods have been tried by the Slovaks and their representatives. Deaf ears and unfriendly gestures have met all their demands, pleas, etc. How utterly the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact have been ignored is probably best revealed by the following message, which Dr. I.:udovit Bazovsky, a former member of the Revolutionary Parliament, sent to the Czecho-Slovak Parliament in Feburary, 1930: 36 SLOVAKIA HOUSE OF DEPUTIES National Parliament of the Czecho-Slovak Republic Prague. As a former member of the revolutionary National Parliament, 1 received your invitation to the celebration of the Tenth Anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. At this occasion it is necessary to present the following: WARNING The Slovak nation has been under the presumption, before and during the revolution, that it shall be able to retain its nationalistic independence. It tolerated the fiction of a "Czechoslovak" nation only under the enforced conviction, that this fiction is temporarily necessary for the purpose of a diplomatic situation. Otherwise, the Slovak nation has never renounced its independence and has never recognized the existence of a "Czechoslovak" nation. There is no such nation! There is a Czech nation and a Slovak nation; and so likewise, there is no "Czechoslovak" language, but there is a Czech language and a Slovak language. We must consider the state ideology which was in force in the former Hungary and which did not recognize a Slovak nation, but embodied us into a concept of the Magyar-Hungarian-nation, and in this way endeavored to Magyarize us, as completely outlived. It hurts us, that the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic does not recognize a Slovak nation, but a Czechoslovak nation, which of course, is then the basis for the practice of Czechization of the Slovak people in every field of public endeavor. The enforced idea about the non-existence of the Slovak nation and the fiction of a Czechoslovak nation has directly painful consequences for the Slovaks, and very advantageous economic results for the Czechs. Slovakia has been kept at a lower cultural and economic level than Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia ever since our revolution. The tax-paying people of Slovakia have been carrying a relatively and circumstantially greater burden than the ,people of the historical lands mentioned; expenditures, which should have been, and sometimes were, very meagerly allowed for Slovakia, were not directed hither; whereas, more and more was and is being systematically invested in the historical lands. The flourishing Slovak commerce was destroyed, diverted, railroad tariffs were retained to the disadvantage of Slovakia and only to the advantages of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. The land reform in Slovakia was conducted aimlessly and it frequently favored some of the otherwise unentitled centralist partisans and Czechs on political party principles alone. Agriculture in Slovakia is assisted in a small way only when the centralist party interests require it. The result of this is that, Slovakia is continually becoming poorer and poorer, and the historic lands are becoming richer and richer. The historic lands are enjoying prosperity. Slovakia is suffering poverty. It grieves the Slovaks very much that the very great numbers of Czech officials in Slovakia do not learn the Slovak language and that SLOVAKIA 37 the official business is conducted either in Czech or in broken Slovak, which seems to be a definite Czechisizing tendency. Czech text-books are being principally used in the Junior High Schools and the native Slovak students have no scientific academic opportunity to educate themselves correctly in their mother tongue. The Slovak language is suppressed and the Czech language favored to the detriment of the former. There is not a single Slovak university, and the so-called Comenius University in Bratislava is an expressly Czechisizing institute of learning. This cultural oppression of the Slovak people has an economic background for the benefit of the Czech people. This is contrary to the principles of democracy. There is an awfully detrimental effect in the fact that, the administration of Slovakia is in the hands of the Czech center in Prague, which is not acquainted with the local Slovak conditions, and in the fact that the appointment of even the lowest employes in Slovakia depends on the Czech center in Prague. The Slovaks are not permitted to govern themselves. (Administration. ) The Slovaks cannot take their place in the legislative field because in the central parliament in Prague they are always subject to the tremendous odds against them and they are merely dependent on the favor or disfavor of the others. It is necessary to remark here that, it would be advantageous to refer many matters concerning Slovakia to a separate Slovak parliament. The judiciary in Slovakia is in a terrible condition. The lowest positions have such poor salaries attached to them that the average poor Slovak young man cannot set out upon a judical career, and these places are then filled by individuals of the wealthier Czech rising generation, who for the time being are able to have support from home. The conditions are similar in matters of the army where we can hardly find any Slovak officers even for the show of the thing. Conditions are not different in the foreign relations service. The conditions in the judiciary, particularly in reference to matters of political offenses, are very worthy of attention. Political offenses committed in Slovakia are tried by Czech judges who are unacquainted with the local conditions and the people, and who are ordering such tyrannical penalties as were never heard of during the former Hungarian regime. There are many more political punishments and jail sentences than there were during the Hungarian regime. -The demand that Slovakia should have its own courts, is totally justified. The Slovaks bear with great difficulty the fact that there is no freedom of the press in Slovakia. The eleven-year experience proves the need, and imperatively demands to-day more than ever, that the rights of the Slovak nation as they were contemplated in the Pittsburgh Pact be incorporated into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and that they be executed in practice as well. It is impossible to assure the cultural and economic prosperity of the Slovak nation without executing the Pittsburgh Pact. This is the desire of the Slovak nation. The Pittsburgh Pact is not only a historic Act, but is a binding '·Magna Charta" of the rights of the Slovak nation. 38 SLOVAKIA Perhaps the solicitude, even though exaggerated, of some of the Czech leaders who understand the sentiment of Slovakia very little. was un<U!rstandable in the beginning, that, whether or not the very pronounced recognition of the rights of the Slovak nation might not cause the state some damage in view of the surrounding foreign sentiment which understood our matters even less. But to-day, when the loyalty of the Slovak nation to the Republic does not bear any doubt whatsoever, it is not advisable to expose the nation to despair by refusing to guarantee its rights and to deprive it of the hope that it will be able to establish its rights in the Republic by constitutional means. The people in Slovakia cannot become a source of state power without the establishment of autonomy in Slovakia in accordance \\ith the minimal requirements set forth in the Pittsburgh Pact, and consequently it is impossible to imagine democl'acy, equality and freedom in Slovakia. THE VALIDITY OF THE PACT A. President Masaryk and His Attitude Toward the Pittsburgh Pact Just how the leaders-particularly the Czech leaders in the government of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, felt about the Pittsburgh Pact once the Republic was established and its Constitution drafted and ratified, is probably best exemplified by the opinions that Professor Masaryk voiced about the Pact on various occasions. Let us take up some of those opinions. 1.) On February 5, 1920, minister Tusar sent president Masaryk an official communication, asking for his version of the Pact and its significance, in view of the widespread discussion that the Pact was causing in those early days of the Republic. President Masaryk replied the same day: " .... Laws, too, are interpreted according to the circumstances under which they arose and the intentions of the legislators are sought for in the words. The Czechoslovak pact agreed upon in my presence on May 30, 1918, must be interpreted in a similar way. The leaders of the Slovak and Czech organizations in America agreed on the pact in order to frustrate the agitation against the union of the Slovaks and Czechs. The contract is made, I think, mostly between American citizens. The Pittsburgh program is one of the many pre-revolutionary programs made beyond the boundaries. It has its historical value. The Pittsburgh con- SLOVAKIA 39 tract is made between Czechs and Slovaks, and if it could hold at all, it certainly would hold only if both parties would still agree with its contents. At the end of the contract itself it is stated that, the detailed arrangements ,_and regulations in the Czechoslovak State are being left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their empowered leaders. That was stated because the Czechs and Slovaks at the Pittsburgh meeting knew very well that American citizens have no right to decide about definite arrangements of the Czechoslovak State. The representatives of the Czechs and Slovaks for that reason also do not refer to the demands of the Pittsburgh Pact in their proclamations .. . etc." That letter by President Masaryk was his first public denial of the Pittsburgh Pact's validity. 2.) He made a similar statement when on December 15, 1922, replying to the senators and parliament members of the Slovak People's Party, who had visited him in the matter of autonomy for Slovakia, he said: "I came to America in the early part of May, 1918, and found the conditions not very pleasant in the Slovak camp and there was a faction, though insignificant, which advocated a utopian separatist program. The political situation and the situation at the battle front were pretty tense. The United States then were officially still in favor of some reform of Austria-Hungary ... In contrast to this, the Slovaks were little known in the political world, and the movement for a separatist Slovakia was doomed for the failure of its own and the joint cause in advance. "Under such circumstances I endeavored for an agreement, so that a detrimental division would not take place, and so that the fight would stop from which Austrian and Hungarian propaganda would profit. "The majority of the Slovaks, particularly the leaders, were against separatism, and so came the Pact in Pittsburgh on May 30th-which-it is understood-was valid all by itself for America and American conditions. For the Slovak side as well as the Czech side, the pact was signed by American citizens, and those naturally are not entitled to prescribe for Slovakia and their people at home, and the signers were fully aware of this. I signed the Pittsburgh Pact for that reason, too, that, it was specifically stated in 40 SLOVAKIA it that, detailed arrangements of the future State shall be made by the legal representatives of the people. And these representatives clearly voiced and politically decided the relations of Slovakia to the unified state by the ratification of the Constitution. This ratification and formal promise is binding upon the Slovak and Czech deputies and is equally binding upon me, too ... " 3.) President Masaryk voiced a still more damaging -in reality a more insulting opinion about the Pittsburgh Pact when on October 12, 1929, he wrote to Hlinka, leader of the People's Party and a deputy in parliament, as follows: " ... You yourself once admitted to me that you demand autonomy not for the present time, but for the time when the Slovaks shall be politically more mature. In accordance with that, you should endeavor that your voters should be informed and reared politically. Look at the mistakes you have made with the so-called Pittsburgh Pact. De facto you had your autonomy from the time of the revolution, and now you have all the stipulations of that pact (or rather verbal agreement) fulfilled. But the main thing is that, the document of that verbal agreement is forged, is a Jalsum, because, at the time when the American Slovaks wanted that verbal agreement, the League did not exist legally, it was recognized by the State until in 1919. For that reason a serious politician, a statesman, cannot and must not operate with such a paper. A falsification cannot become an act of State ... " B. CRITICISMS OF THE PACT ARE UNFOUNDED Time, space, nor the reader's patience, do not permit a careful analysis and refutation of all those statements by President Masaryk concerning the Pittsburgh Pact. To all, except the totally uninformed, the fallacy of those statements must be quite apparent. Few of the more glaring misstatements in these official communications, however, should be mentioned here. 1.) It seems ridiculous for the president to say that Slovakia has long had its autonomy, from the very foundation of the republic in fact, and that all stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact were in reality all fulfilled already in Slovakia. Why, if all that be so, should it be necessary that SLOVAKIA 41 the deputies of the Slovak People's Party be forced to visit Masaryk and demand autonomy for Slovakia and demand that the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact be enforced in Slovakia? Why should it be necessary for the Slovak League to clamor for recognition of the Pittsburgh Pact? Why should Dr. L. Bazovsky be prompted by conditions in Slovakia to write a communication, as quoted in previous pages, in the twelfth year of the existence of the Republic? No, the facts are that Slovakia did not have its autonomy nor were the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact ever fulfilled. Slovakia did not have its home-rule. Slovakia was oppressed by detrimental effects of a centralized government, and the results were that, Slovakia was constantly being made commercially and economically poorer and poorer; that thousands and thousands were forced to leave their fatherland and emigrate to all parts of the world; and what is worst-that the very existence of the Slovak nation was being jeopardized by the forceful propagation of the "unified Czechoslovak nation" idea. The Memorandum which the Slovak League of America sent the Government and the National Assembly of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1922 in behalf of the embodying of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Republic, very clearly proved all the above conditions in Slovakia (as resulting from the disregard for the Pittsburgh Pact and the instituting of a centralized government.) 2.) But to return to some of the other statements made by President Masaryk. It is wholly untrue that there was an "insignificant faction which advocated a utopian separatist program." It would be closer to the truth had he said that there were a few individuals who contended that, cooperation with the Czechs, who have anti-Slovak tendencies, is impossible. And then it should be admitted that the Slovaks, at least some of the leaders, had reasons to doubt the sincerity of some of the Czech leaders, and that had not these doubts of the Slovaks been dispelled by such seemingly sound and earnest promises, made in writing and signed black-on-white as the Pittsburgh Pact, there is no telling whether the Czechs and Slovaks would really have come to establish a joint State. It was not the few individuals who were opposed to any combination with the Czechs, but the majority of the 42 SLOVAKIA recognized Slovak leaders, who were forced to be careful in their dealings with the Czechs because of the recent suspicious incidents, that Masaryk came to appease in America --and he did it in writing-in the Pittsburgh Pact. 3.) It is pointed out that the Pact was made and signed by American Slovaks and Czechs-American citizens. The fact that the pact was made between President Masaryk on one side and American Czechs and Slovaks on the other, seems to be passed over. The Czechs and Slovaks here in America certainly did not need such a Pact just for the sake of having it here, or for their own local conditions here. Was not the Czecho-Slovak Republic and its people constructed in that Pact? We deny that the Pittsburgh Pact is just a local Pact between the American Czechs and Slovaks, concerning which the Czecho-Slovak Republic government should have no interest. Then, too, Masaryk did not sign the pact as some sort of a mediator here. He was a representative of one of the parties of the Pact. The CzechoSlovak National Council of America--embodying the representative Slovak and Czech organizations in America, which called the Pittsburgh meeting at which the Pact was drafted, accepted and signed, issued a proclamation on November 7, 1919, and sent it to the government to the effect that the Pittsburgh Pact was made between President Masaryk and the representatives of the American Czechs and Slovaks. The Pact, too, could not be an agreement just to meet local conditions and drafted between American Czechs and Slovaks, since some of the signers of the Pact were not citizens of the United States of America. The Pittsburgh Pact was not intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in America, it was intended for the Czechs and Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and therefore, is not valid only in America and for America. It is primarily valid in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Cleveland Agreement could be constructed as having local importance only. It was signed by American Czechs and Slovaks for the purpose of establishing the cooperation of these two nationalities in America in a joint cause. The Pittsburgh Pact, however, had more than local importance. The very fact that Professor Masaryk, the head of the temporary revolutionary government drafted it and signed it, gave it more than local importance. The Czechs SLOVAKIA 43 and Slovaks in America were not doing all those things for themselves but for the liberation of the Czechs and Slovaks on the other side of the Ocean, and Masaryk, too, was not working for the welfare of the Czechs and Slovaks here in America, but for those over there. And he, as well as all others, signed the Pittsburgh Pact with the hope that they were helping to create a State where both nations might be free, contented, and where they could develop culturally, economically, etc. 4.) That the Pact may still hold good only if both sides should agree with its contents, certainly is not consistent with the very meaning, idea and intent of a pact or agreement. 5.) That the Pact is a forgery, a falsification, because the Slovak League did not exist legally at the time of the drafting of the Pittsburgh Pact, and that the Pact is not valid, as Dr. srobar expressed it, because it was signed on a Legal Holiday in America, is undoubtedly best refuted by the following legal opinion: Law Offices George E . Alter 1012 Park Building Gifford K. Wright Pittsburgh, Pa. Alexander J . Barron George M. Swan ALTER, WRIGHT & BARRON Telephone James Milholland Atlantic 2211 William H. McNaugher Ralph D. McKee George F. Taylor, Jr. James K. Ruby Mahlon E. Lewis April 23, 1930 James Grove Fulton Slovak League of America Box 996 Pittsburgh, Pa. Gentlemen: You have submitted to me the following questions: 1. Is there - in the Untted States - a difference as to their legal rights between chartered and unchartered organizations which are not operated for pecuniary gain? 2. Has an unchartered organization the right to make legal and binding agreements in the United States? 3. Can an agreement, entered into by such an organization with a party of the second part - in this case Professor Masaryk - not made for the pecuniary gain 44 SLOVAKIA by the said organization, but closed on a legal holiday (Memorial Day) be declared a falsum by the party of the second part, after having received and enjoyed the benefits evolving out of that agreement? Replying to these questions, my opinion is as follo ws: ( 1) There is some difference between chartered and unchartered organizations not operated for pecuniary gain, but for such purposes as are involved in the subject of your inquiry, there is no difference. (2) I understand the organization in question at the time the " Pittsburgh Pact" was entered into was an organization having a Constitution, By-Laws, officers, etc., though not chartered by the State. For the purpose of taking the action which was taken, such an organization would have all the necessary power as fully as if it had been chartered. (3 ) The agreement entered into by the unchartered organization referred to would be just as effective as if entered into with a charter ed organization and just as valid if closed on Memo rial Day as on any other day. Very truly yours, Geo . E. Alter Karel Pergler, a Czech, an attorney, one of the signers of the Pact, later a member of the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, in discussing the validity of the Pact, said the following in the National Assembly on February 22, 1930: "The Pittsburgh Pact is not a "falsum." To circulate reports about the Pittsburgh Pact that it is a "falsum," is beside the point, is not right and does not coincide with the historical truth." 6.) The question whether the American Czechs and Slovaks-more specifically, the signers of the Pittsburgh Pact had a right to prescribe for Slovakia or the new Czecho-Slovak Republic could be expanded here to a lengthy discussion. Suffice it to say, if the signers of the Pact had no such right, why did Masaryk, as the head of the government, attempt to enter into a pact with a party or parties that had no such right? Did he himself have any right to make any prescriptions for the new State? If he had no such right, wasn't he conscious of that in Pittsburgh at the time that he drafted the Pact? And isn't it also a fact, that in the absence of any who might have the full right to make sueh prescriptions, the Czechs and Slovaks in America along with President Masaryk assumed that right upon themselves and actually did make prescriptions for the new State when they said in the pact: SLOVAKIA 45 "The Czecho-Slovak State shall be a republic, its constitution shall be democratic," etc., etc. Are not these definite and clearly outlined prescriptions for the new State? Did not the temporary and provisional revolutionary Czecho-Slovak Government (Masaryk, Benes, Stefanik) assume certain rights and privileges which might be questioned by the same mode of reasoning? The Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hung ary were powerless to organize the revolution. The Czechs and Slovaks in America assumed the right to speak in behalf of their entire respective nations. The American Slovaks in issuing their Memorandum in 1914 clearly showed that they were assuming the leadership of the entire Slovak Nation of the world. Why then should their right be questioned when interpreting the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact? The Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic to this day believe that the Slovaks in America have a right to concern themselves with matters in the Czecho-Slovak Republic and have a right to exercise a voice in their ultimate disposition. The following matter clearly shows the attitude of the Slovaks in the Czecho-Slovak Republic: On May 15, 1934, deputy Andrej Hlinka and others delivered an objection to the government of Czecho-Slovakia because of the confiscations and censorship of the daily "Slovak." Among some of the articles censored in the daily "Slovak" was one by M. Mlynarovic, president of the Slovak Catholic Federation of America, quoted from Slovak newspapers in America. Hlinka and his colleagues said that they "consider the confiscation of that report (article) totally unwarranted " and that they "consider it a grave insult to the American Slovaks, who did their share in the Czechoslovak revolutionary movement and therefore have a right to speak in the matters of our State." 7.) That the Slovaks or their leaders never made demands in accordance with the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact, hardly tells the true story. The first revolutionary parliament in the new Republic was not a body representative of the people-the deputies were a more or less self-appointed group and these ratified the Constitution which ignores the Pittsburgh Pact. When in April of 1919 Hlinka learned of the Pittsburgh Pact which had been 46 SLOVAKIA signed a year previous, and when he learned of the various stipulations contained therein, which had been ignored by the Constitution, he held several mass meetings of the Slovak people, some of which were dissolved by Czech police, and the result was that, the Slovaks sent a delegation to Paris, where they might plead for the rights and privileges of the Slovak nation before the same tribunal which had permitted the establishment of a joint state of the Czechs and Slovaks. This visit to Paris in behalf of Slovak rights, those very rights outlined and guaranteed by the Pittsburgh Pact, resulted in the persecution of all Slovak autonomists and resulted in the jailing of Hlinka. The Slovaks were doing nothing more than demanding what the Pact guaranteed them. How then can anyone speak of the Slovaks as not making their demands of the stipulations of the Pittsburgh Pact? SOME REMARKS ABOUT THE PITTSBURGH PACT Something that was frequently hurled at the adherents of the Pittsburgh Pact-the autonomists-both here in America and in Czecho-Slovakia, was that they are traitors of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, enemies of the state etc. Nothing was farther from the truth. The Slovak autonomists were loyal friends of the State. They did not advocate separation from the Czechs, they did not advocate secession from the Czecho-Slovak Republic-they merely wanted for the Slovak nation what they believed it justly had coming to it,-its rights, its home-rule, as promised and guaranteed in the Pittsburgh Pact. The two major parties in Slovakia which demanded the provisions of the Pittsburgh Pact were: The Slovak People's Party, the largest party in Slovakia, a Catholic party, led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, and the National Party, non-denominational, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. The chief proponents of the autonomist endeavors here in America were: The Slovak League, comprising American Slovaks of all creeds, and the Catholic Slovak Federation. The chief opponents of the Pittsburgh Pact and the endeavors of the autonomists were the leaders of the Czech government and the political parties allied with the government. Included among these were a small percentage of Slovaks who had found it advantageous to side with the SLOVAKIA 47 ruling government. These usually were afforded good positions, offices etc., etc., and naturally, their sincerity with the national Slovak welfare was doubted in Slovak circles. These had their followers here in America and although they comprise the minority of Slovaks here, aided and abetted by government circles, they had been well able to hold a strong position. The vast majority of the Slovaks in America, and the far greater portion of the Slovak press here were in sympathy with the autonomy movement, yet the centralist forces held the point of vantage, they had the strategic positions, as will always happen with those who hold sides with the government recognized in diplomatic circles. The Slovaks were not attempting to overthrow the state. They wanted their joint state with the Czechs, the work of the few discontended pro-Magyar workers to the contrary notwithstanding. The Slovaks felt that they voluntarily entered into the formation of the Republic under certain guarantees. They were to have their own administration, their own parliament, their own courts of justice. They had none of these. They were promised that the Slovak language would be the official language in their schools, in their offices and in their public life in general. They then found that the Slovak language was not the official language in their country. The numerous Czech officials who held positions in Slovakia refused to learn the Slovak language and they used the Czech exclusively. The Slovaks found that according to the accepted law, the official language of the State was the Czechoslovak language -a non-entity-there can be no such language, since there are two separate and distinct nations-the Czechs and the Slovaks-each with their own and distinct language. The schools and institutions of higher learning had a preponderance of Czech instructors and professors, notwithstanding the fact that many thousand Slovaks qualified to hold these positions were clamoring in vain to obtain these positions. All in all, some 300,000 Czechs had immigrated to Slovakia and held positions there, while intelligent and qualified Slovaks could find no place of employment. These Slovaks felt that they should be given preference for these positions in their homeland. Why should the young Slovak, ready and qualified to embark on a career, be forced to be 48 SLOVAKIA idle, to go hungry, or to emigrate, while 300,000 intruders find steady employment in his native Slovakia? Further discontent among the Slovak was caused by the methods of oppression exercized against them. Freedom of the press and speech were unknown. Jail sentences and financial penalties were imposed with great freedom and abandon by the Czech judges upon any and all who dared to criticize the government and the conditions for which the government was responsible. The republic supposedly had a democratic form of government. Yet, there is nothing in a democracy that is above criticism, not even the ruling government, and if it is, democracy certainly ceases to exist. The Slovaks objected too, to the Czechisizing policies adopted by those in control. They objected to having anyone forcefully thrust upon them the idea of a unified Czechoslovak nationality. They believed they comprise one nation, separate and distinct from the Czech nation, and though with the Czechs they form one Czecho-Slovak state, they still remain a separate and distinct nationality from the Czechs. The Czechs want to be and remain Czechs, and the Slovaks feel they are and want to be and remain Slovaks, not Czechs, not even Czechoslovak s. The Slovaks deny the existence of a unified Czechoslovak nationality, and anyone attempting to force such principles upon them is looked upon as an enemy of the Slovak people, who is jeopardizing their individual national existence and attempting to erase the Slovak nation off the face of the earth. The recognition and implementati on of the Pittsburgh Pact was the only solution of all these difficulties at that time. It certainly was a means of stopping the unrest and discontent among the Slovaks and it was the most efficient means of frustrating the propaganda of all enemies of the Republic, who relied on the unrest of the Slovaks as a means of revision of the peace treaties. The most ardent proponents of this revision were the Hungarians. They believed that injustice had been done them and one remedy that would act as a so~thing lotion on their imagined bruises would have been annexation of the fertile, productive and naturally wealthy territory of Slovakia back to Hungary. Their agents in the Slovak ranks fanned hatred SLOVAKIA 49 against the Czecho-Slovak Republic. With those the Slovaks had no sympathies, even if a few exceptions were found here and there, which merely proved the rule. But, the stubborn Czechs could not see all of this and rather than yield to the entitled demands of the Slovaks they were willing to risk their future. 20th ANNIVERSARY OF THE PACT AND WHAT FOLLOWED: AUTONOMY, INDEPENDENCE, RESUBJUGATION AND COMMUNISM In 1938 the Slovaks in Slovakia, led by the two autonomist parties-Hlinka's People's Party Wudova strana), and Razus's National Party (Narodna strana ), decided to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the drafting and signing of the Pittsburgh Pact (Pittsburghska dohoda). The purpose of the celebration was to call attention of the world to the fact that the postulates of the Pact had not been fulfilled and complied with; that the Slovaks were very dissatisfied with such treatment on the part of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government; that they still insist and clamor for the fulfillment of all the promises that Masaryk and the Czechs made in the Pittsburgh Pact. And because Masaryk and some of his hench-men had claimed that in fact no such pact or agreement had ever been made and concluded, the Slovak League of America was asked by the Slovaks in Slovakia to bring the original lithographed copy of the Pittsburgh Pact, personally signed by president Masaryk after he had already been elected president of Czecho-Slovakia, and by the representatives of the Czech and Slovak organizations in the U.S.A. The Slovak League sent an official delegation to the Pittsburgh Pact anniversary celebration in Bratislava, Slovakia. The delegation consisted of Dr. Peter P. Hletko of Chicago, Illinois, the president of the Slovak League and the designated leader of the delegation; Jozef Husek, of Middletown, Pennsylvania, editor of 'Jednota,' the largest Slovak newspaper in America, and one of the original signers of the Pittsburgh Pact; Dominic Sloboda, of Lorain, Ohio, president of the Slovak Catholic Sokol, the largest Slovak gymnastic and athletic fraternal society in America; Andrew Novak, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, supreme treasurer of the First Catholic Slovak Union, the largest Slovak fraternal society in the world; Michael Sincak, former president of the Slovak Catholic 50 SLOVAKIA Sokol, and Rev. Andrej Rolik, of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, a Lutheran minister. The delegation attended a huge rally in Bratislava on June 5, 1938, attended by 100,000 Slovaks from all parts of Slovakia. Msgr. Hlinka, the leader of the People's Party, addressed the huge gathering. So did Dr. Hletko. And to prove Masaryk and some of the Czechs wrong when they had said that no such document was ever drafted and signed, and that no such agreement ever existed in writing and that Pittsburghska dohoda was a "falsum," Dr. Hletko unfurled the original copy of the agreement from the balcony of the National Theatre building for all to see. The enthusiastic assemblage became loud and hysterical and it vowed to demand fulfillment of all the promises made in writing to the Slovaks in this agreement. The determination of the Slovaks grew and increased immensely. They were now not to be denied! The Slovak League delegation visited President Benes and conferred with him at length in regards to the implementation of the Pittsburgh Pact. It visited the prime minister, Milan Hodfa, a Slovak, with definite centralist Czecho-Slovak leanings, who otherwise was powerless to force the fulfillment of the Pittsburgh Pact postulates. The delegation also visited the minister of foreign affairs, Krofta, the National Czecho-Slovak Council and many other government officials, reminding them that this is perhaps the eleventh hour for complying with all the guarantees contained in the Pittsburgh Pact, since omnious war clouds were gathering over Central Europe, Adolph Hitler was acting belligerent and brandishing a war sword and threatening Czecho-Slovakia with annihilation or annexation to the German Reich. But all this to no avail. The Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government officials would not commit themselves or promise to implement the Pact, even at such a late and dangerous hour. The result was that the Slovaks ran out of patience and after several additional provocative acts by the CzechoSlovak government, the Slovaks in a revolutionary move declared their autonomy in the Czecho-Slovak Republic on October 6th 1938. The Czechs were powerless and yielded under the tremendous international pressure, but only for a short time. They bided their time, waiting for an opportune occasion, and when they thought the time ripe, they struck and attempted to wrest autonomy from the Slovaks. SLOVAKIA 51 Two Slovak Hlinka Guardsmen were shot and killed in the attempted coup. But the Czechs' attempt boomeranged. The Slovaks did not surrender their autonomy. Instead, now convinced that the Czechs were anything but sincere in yielding to the autonomy demand of the Slovaks, the Slovaks now struck even farther. They now were not satisfied with a semblance of autonomy from the insincere and scheming Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government, who wanted to destroy that autonomy at the earliest and the first opportune moment . The Slovaks now feared that even in the future the Czechs would attempt to destroy the autonomy they had yielded to the Slovaks under the duress and pressure of an international situation. The Slovaks, knowing that the Czechs were under considerable pressure from Hitler, decided they would utilize this situation for their own benefit and tear away from the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak Republic rather than go down to annihilation along with the Czechs. The Slovaks did just that and they set up their own independent state, a Slovak Republic. Hitler had no love for the Czechs, and while he had no special love or sympathies for the Slovaks, he too utilized the situation to disrupt the Czecho-Slovak, so-called democratic republic. He took over the Czechs into a protectorate along with Moravia. He recognized the independent state of Slovakia, in fact, guaranteed its existence and safety for the next 25 years. And this too, compromised the Slovaks in the eyes of their enemies. That made the Slovaks nazis, they said. The Slovak autonomous parliament voted unanimously and to a man to establish the independent state, a republic, on March 14, 1939. This move was also prompted by Hungarian threats of land-grabbing from the Slovaks, abetted by the Italian Mussolini and his son-in-law Count Ciano, who openly placed themselves on the side of the Hungarians and their unjust and irresponsible demands against the Slovaks and Czecho-Slovakia. The Slovaks felt that having control over their Slovak lands they would better be able to prevent any land-grabs and annexation of Slovak lands and people than would the unsympathetic Czechs be who had no particular interest to protect, save and conserve Slovak land and people. Msgr. Jozef Tiso was elected first president of the new Slovak Republic. 52 SLOVAKIA The Slovak state progressed and developed very nicely for the next 6 years. The state set up its own currency and monetary system, its own army, postal system and everything that qualifies a successful and prosperous independent state. It is not the purpose nor the area of this treatise to describe the Slovak Republic. Suffice it to say that independent Slovakia was a sharp thorn in the Czechs' eyes. They were burning with envy, hate and revenge and scheming every way to destroy the independence of Slovakia. The former president of Czecho-Slovakia, Eduard Benes, spent much time in Russia, convincing the Russians to strike against Slovakia under the ruse that it is an ally of Germany. Russia finally did strike and brought back Benes with arms to his throne in Prague, of course, as a Russian and communist puppet. The Americans, also under the illusion that they are thereby defeating Hitler and the Germans, took a hand in destroying the independent Slovak state and they helped to force the Slovaks back into Czecho-Slovakia, albeit now a communistic Czecho-Slovakia. It was the American armed forces and the American counterintelligence that ferreted out president Tiso and members of his government, hidden in Austria, after their forced departure from Slovakia when the Russian army invaded Slovakia and committed many atrocities, inhumanities and indecencies, particularly against the female population in Slovakia. The Americans turned over Msgr. Tiso and members of his government to the Russian communists and their Czech puppets in Prague, Benes included, because he was the prime puppet of the Russians. President Tiso was tried by a rump court, found guilty of treason against Czecho-Slovakia and hung on April 18, 1947. Yet, his guilt was no greater nor graver than that of our own George Washington against England when he strove to free the 13 American colonies from British rule, dominance and tax extortion. Of course, he was not caught and apprehended and his revolution succeeded. That's the difference. Washington threw off an English government that was ruling an English people in America-in an English colony. President Tiso threw off a government that was not a Slovak government, but the government of and by another people, the Czechs. President Tiso's attempt was more justified than George Washington's. Tiso was overpowered by the SLOVAKIA 53 Russian communists and delivered to the gallows with the help of Americans, American officials. Yet, the Americans in Washington's day strove for their complete independence in the same way that the Slovaks did. In any event, the help that Americans gave to help destroy the independent, democratic Republic of Slovakia, and to. aid in bringing Tiso to the gibbet, does not serve to their credit and glory, and never will. I, as a native American of Slovak parentage and descent, am not proud of that record. No Americans should be proud of it. We Americans stand for democracy, liberty, independence-for everybody, everywhere. But very often that is but a lip service. We don't always mean it sincerely. The Americans-and that includes our government too, should make amends somehow, or at least try to make amends for this travesty, and attempt to correct the injustice they have helped perpetrate on the Slovaks. But, because of their injudicious procedure and handling of the war situation, things have gone so far that the U.S. cannot do anything about correcting this highly unjustifiable situation. The communists, now in command and control, will see to that. Incidentally, when asked, the puppet president, Benes, refused to commute the Tiso sentence or spare his life. Perhaps, as a mere puppet, he did not dare. Well, either way, the good Lord took care of him. This is the story of the Pittsburgh Pact. It was implemented for a short time and eventually led to Slovak independence and the Slovak state. It is still a great historical document that all sincere, conscious and loyal Slovaks revere and respect. The original copy is here in the U.S.A. The delegation of the Slovak League when asked to leave the document in Slovakia in 1938 refused to do so on orders of the entire organization. Even when asked during the existence of the Slovak state to send the document to Slovakia as a historical museum piece, the Slovak League refused, realizing that conditions were not permanent and stable enough and that opponents of the document would seek to destroy it and remove all evidence of the fact that the Slovaks had been promised and guaranteed their rights and autonomy. The Slovak League refused to part with the document and kept it here in America-in safety. And it is good that they kept it here, 54 SLOVAKIA where it still can and does serve as a grand document attesting to the perfidy of the Czechs and the Czecho-Slovak government. Today, nothing will obliterate the memories of this perfidious behavior but a restoration of an independent Slovak state or the creation of an independent Slovakia in a constellation of Central European states, but not as a part of Czecho-Slovakia under any circumstances. Just prior to leaving for Slovakia in 1938 with the Pittsburgh Pact Dr. Hletko, as president of the Slovak League and as the leader of the delegation had the document registered, filed on record and photostated in the Cook County Recorder's office in Chicago, where that record exists to this day. BIBLIOGRAPHY Karol Sidor: Slovcici v Zahranicnom odboji. 1929. Bratislava. The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact, 1934. Published by the Slovak Catholic Federation of America. Author: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Vice President of t he SCF. at that time. K. (:ulen: Pittsburghskci Dohoda. 1937. Bratislava. Fr. Hrusovsky: Slovenske Dejiny. 1939. Published by Matica Slovenska, Turciansky Sv. Martin, Slovakia. Topix. November 5, 1951 issue. Vol. 10, No. 6. A cartoon magazine published by the Cathechetical Guild Educational Society, St. Paul, Minn. Joseph M. Kirschbaum LL.D. , Ph.D.: Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe. 1960. R. Speller & Sons, publ. , New York, N. Y. Gilbert L. Oddo : Slovakia and its people. 1960. Publ. R. Speller & Sons, New York. Joseph A. Mikus, J.D.: Slovakia - a political history: 1918-1950. 1963. Marquette University Press. THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA condemns and unequivocally opposes all forms of tyranny, every form of totalitarian political system. The Slovak League of America has always recognized the Godless philosophy of materialistic Communism for the dread evil and conspiracy against free humanity that it is, as the political system which threatens mankind with utter enslavement and, therefore, has fought resolutely against it in and out of season and, today, is still determined to fight against it with all the means at its command until the dread plague of Communism is wiped off the face of the earth.  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 the Pittsburgh Pact Description An account of the resource Peter P. Hletko, M.D. Slovakia, Vol. 18 (No. 41), 1968 pp. 5-54 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hletko, Peter P., 1902-1973 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1968 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/e26395098503e9145779b9594b2e3ed9.pdf f52f8a6221be5fc5cc87761f0ba0db9e PDF Text Text 32 SLOVAKIA The Slovaks of Chicago DR. PETER P. HLETKO The first Slovaks in Chicago While the records are vague, according to some pub lic and official records it would seem that probably the first Slovak who came to Chicago was one G. Michalovic alias Mihal6cy (a Magyar spelling). He took active part in the Civil War. He joined the forces of Abraham Lincoln and supposedly organized an artillery battalion consisting of various Slavic nationalities. He was cited by President Lincoln, who wrote Michalovic a personal letter, thanking him for his services. Around 1872 another Slovak named Dorocak same to Chicago from County Spis in Slovakia. He was followed by Daniel Schustek, whose name was well known in the life of the early Chicago Slovaks. Then more Slovaks came and by 1892 there were some 300 in Chicago. That is not a very big number but already then they began to organize into a fraternal system. In that year-two years after the National Slovak Society was organized in Pennsylvania, the Slovaks in Chicago organized an assembly (Odbor 65) of the N. S.S., a non-denominational society. After the First Catholic Slovak Union ( the Jednota) was founded in Cleveland, the Chicago Catholic Slovaks organized St. Stephen's Society as Branch 224 of the FCSU. The third society organized was the "First Slovak Sokol," an independent and nondenominational gymnastic society. The group no longer exists. In 1893 these Slovak fraternal groups participated in the parade arranged by the committee of the Columbian Exposition held in Chicago. They paraded under the Slovak banner, and they had some difficulty in obtaining a Slovak flag. They had one made. The early Slovaks in Chicago By 1900 the Slovaks kept coming from the old country, from all parts of Slovakia. It is well-nigh impossible to find records about all of them but at least the following �SLOVAKIA 33 are definitely known to have been here between 1890 and 1900. The year of their arrival is in parentheses: · Andrej Adamcik (1894), Jan Balek (1894), J . Bavlsik, Jan Belcik (1893), Jan Bugajsky (1898), Jan Canik (1894) , Jan Druska, Jozef Gabaj 1886), Karol Grohovsky (1893), Andrej Gura (1899) ), Anton Gura (1899), Karol Gura (1889), stefan Gura (1889), Jan Haluska, Martin Hletko (father of Dr. Peter P. Hletko and Dr. S. J . Hletko 1899) , Jan Horvat (1899), Jan Ivorik, Imrich Jezisik (1877), Jozef Juranka (1894), Jan Keblusek (1890), Klinovsky (1888) , Florian Kojis (1898), Mikulas Krajci (1889), Peter Krajci (1889), Samuel Krc (1896), Pavel Kvorka (1890), Frantisek Kubis (1898), Pavel Kubis (1888), Frantisek Kuna (1899), Pavel Kurucar, Stulik (1892), Michal Laca (1892), Jan Majer (1893), Jozef Mally (1891), Karol Mally (1893 ), Jan Matejicko (1898), stefan Meliska (1898), Andrej Micuda (1899), Gustav Micuda (1899), Jozef Novota (1898), Jan Orendac (1899), Samuel Papanek (1890), Jan Paur 0893), Jan Pavelcik (1886), Pavel Pavelcik (1893), Jozef Pircoft (1889), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan slahor (1891), Imrich Podkrivacky, Jan Podmajersky (1896), Juraj Pucik (1884), Daniel Samuel (1898), Andrej Sedory (1888), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan Schustek, Jan slahor (1891), Jan Sokolik, Andrej Sokolik, Jan Svehla, Adam Trubacek (1890), Juraj Vatral, Jozef Zahumensky (1897), Adam Ziska, Frantisek Ziska and Jozef Ziska, Stefan Kovac (1897), Martin Dujmovic (1897). Others known to be here prior to 1900 were: M. Vitko, (father of the late Rev. Joseph Vitko, who died in Omaha. Nebraska). J. Madeja, John Lipovsky, J. Hajzus, J. L'e hocky, J. Jurik, John Micus, Kollarik, candar, Ducaj, Podhorsky, Pelikan and others. Because the Slovaks are a religious people, whether they are Catholic or Lutheran, they began attending their respective church services in the churches existing here already. But they were not satisfied with Latin or English services. They yearned for their own. Many of them attended St. Procopius Church, a Czech church at 18th and Allport St. Many of the Slovak Catholics settled on the West side in the vicinity of De Keven St., St. Wenceslaus parish ( site of Mrs. Oleary's barn where the cow kicked over a lantern and started the great Chicago fire of 1871. A humorous story has it that the cow was owned �34 SLOVAKIA by a Czech women, Mrs. Uhlir, but because the newspaper reporters could not spell or pronounce "Uhlir", it became Mrs. O'Leary, because that seemed close enough.) Another contigent gravitated south and west where they found the first Catholic Slovak church in Chicago, St. Michael's, at 48th and Winchester. Originally land was purchased for a church on Archer Ave., but this was given up. Church services began to be held every Sunday in a hall back of a tavern at 49th St. and Paulina St. Father Bronkala was the first pastor. A church was built at 48th and Winchester with two rooms in 1900. Sisters Walburga and Paulina, both of the Czech Benedictine convent in Lisle, Ill., and both being Slovaks, were the first two teachers in the school. The next pastor was Rev. S. Pavolcik, but when financial troubles arose, the Bohemian Benedictine Fathers in Lisle, Ill., were appointed in charge of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB., became the pastor and he did much to build the parish and put it on solid foundation . He left about 1911 and was followed by Rev. Thomas Vopatek, OSB., and eventually by Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., the so-called "first Slovak Benedictine in America", who later organized the Slovak Benedictine Fathers in Cleveland, Ohio. The Slovaks in Chicago have 8 Slovak Catholic parishes St. Michael's at 48th and Darnen Avenue_ A new combination church and school building was built in 1907. A few years later another school building was erected to accomodate a total of some 1,200 school children. SL Michael's parish at one time was the largest Slovak Catholic parish in America. Recently the original old church was taken down and a fine new social center was erected. Rev. Armand Gress, OSB., pastor, Rev_ L. Hudak, OSB. , and Rev. Maruskin, OSB., asistants. The parish has a large convent and a large rectory. After Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSR left for Cleveland, the late Rev. Charles Florek, OSB., was pastor for many years and his assistant for 22 years was the Rev. Ambrose Ondrak, OSB., who later became abbot of the Bohemian Benedictine Abbey in Lisle, Ill., and had to leave St. Michael's to assume his new duties as abbot. �SLOVAKIA 35 Assumption of the B. V. M. at 24th St. and California. Organized in 1903, at about the same time as St. Joseph's parish was being organized. The parish has a combination church and school building, a Sisters' convent, a rectory and an assembly hall under the church, besides several meeting halls. Msgr. Chvojka, pastor emeritus, Rev. J . Spitkovsky, acting pastor. St. Joseph's parish. Organized in 1904. Has a combination church and school building on 17th Pl., near Halsted St. Recently a new school building was built, with a large auditorium and bowling alleys in the basement. The area is becoming a changing neighborhood in recent years and the Slovak parishioners are leaving the locality and moving to newer neighborhoods. For that reason the parish is on the decline. The new school has been turned over to combined classes from a neighboring Lithuanian parish and the former rectory has been loaned to the Lithuanian sisters after the Slovak sisters from the Bohemian Order of St. Benedict in Lisle, Ill., gave up the school. The administrator of the parish, Rev. Slosarcik, lives at the nearby Lithuanian rectory. Msgr. John Rondzik, now retired, has been pastor for many years. The latest report is that parish will cease to exist. Holy Rosary parish at 108th and Perry Sts. Organized in 1907. The parish built a new church in recent years . A school, convent and rectory complete the properties of the parish. Rev. Andrew Valcicak is pastor, Rev. J . Dilla is assistant. The parish is located in the Pullman-Roseland area. St. John the Baptist. Organized in 1909 at 91st and So. Burley Ave., in the South Chicago district. The parish purchased an existing church in 1910. The property consists of this original church, with a hall in the basement and a rectory adjoining. The parish has no school. This parish has never prospered too much and is in a declining neighborhood but Rev. J. Petrik, the present pastor, has given the parish a big lift. Sacred Heart parish. Organized in 1910. At Huron and Oakley Blvd. A combination church and school building and a new rectory adjacent. For years, Rev. Victor Blahunka, who became the first Slovak Monsignor in America, was pastor. The present pastor is Rev. Francis Kosjak. �36 SLOVAKIA SS. Cyril and Methodius parish. At Walton St. and Kildare Ave. Organized January 3, 1914. Rev. Michael Bajor, pastor of the Sacred Heart parish, was the one who promoted the idea of organizing this parish. Rev. Victor Blahunka became the Slovak pastor on March 2, 1915. The parish used the hall of the Guardian Angels parish at Avers and Iowa Sts. as a temporary church. Other pastors who followed were Rev. Michael Bue, Rev. John Fedor and now Rev. A. Chisek. The church is a combination school and church building. St. Simon parish. This is the youngest Slovak parish. Organized October 1, 1926 at 52nd and So. California Ave., after many years of effort. Rev. E. Sendek was the first pastor. The parish has a combination school and church building, a rectory, a sisters' convent and recently an additional new school building. Rev. Joseph Job, a good Slovak nationalist, was pastor for many years, until his death there. He followed Rev. Sendek, who was transferred to St. Paul's parish in Chicago Heights, Ill. a suburb of Chicago. Father Job was popular and successful as a pastor of St. Simon's. He left a portion of his estate to the Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., the Slovak League and the St. Adalbert Society of Slovakia. The present pastor is Rev. D. Romancik and Rev. Richard skriba is assistant. Slovak Protestant Churches in Chicago Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church is the oldest Lutheran Slovak congregation. It was founded in 1893 and incorporated in 1897. The original church was in the vicinity of Noble St., and Chicago Ave. In time the old neighborhood began declining and the parishioners moved to Mayfair and Jefferson Park so that an auxiliary church was built in Mayfair in 1924. But in 1948 the congregation built a large, modern new church on the north side on Foster and Lacrosse Sts., with an outlay of some $400,000. SS. Peter and Paul Lutheran Church. Originally located on 19th St., near Halsted St. on the West Side. Organized in October 1901. With the neighborhood also undergoing changes for the worst, the congregation moved to Riverside into a new church about 10 years ago. Just recently the congregation celebrated 10 years of this moving to Riverside in appropriate church services assisted by some �SLOVAKIA 37 of the local Catholic clergy, in a real spirit of ecumenism. Rev. Kalny is pastor. Rev. John Body was pastor of the church when it was on the West Side. He is now retired in California. Zion Slovak Lutheran Church organized in 1909 at Huron St. and Bickerdike. The Bethlehem church merged with the Zion church in about 1926. Later they bought their present church at Iowa St. and Springfield Avenue. Slovak Evangelical Lutheran Cl?,urch of Dr. Martin Luther. Its first permanent church was at 50th and Honore Sts. from April 1918 to December 1947. In 1949 a new church was built at 54th and Francisco Ave. At one time Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., was pastor, who later became involved in "Czecho-Slovak" politics and then transferred to Holy Trinity. The present pastor, after Rev. Roh, is Rev. Figuly. The son of the original pastor, Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., who is Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan also, is a respected teacher of the history of religion at Yale University. He wrote the "Riddle of Catholicism" which was well received in Catholic circles, and he is a weekly contributor to the Catholic News Register. Slovak Baptist New Covenant Church. The beginings of the Slovak Baptists date back to 1908 when the first Slovak woman, Miss Catherine Nikodem, later Hudacek, became a Baptist by being baptized by immersion. She had been influenced by Vaclav Hlada, a Czech preacher from the Bohemian Baptist Emmanuel congregation. During some of his visits to the homes in the neighborhood he visited the Nikodems and left some books written by the Slovak authoress, Kristina Roy. Young Miss Catherine Nikodem began reading these books and she eventually received the Lord and accepted his truths. The early services were held in the Nikodem home and the newly accepted members belonged to the Czech congregation. In 1915 the Slovak Baptists, numbering 64, met to organize an independent organization of Slovak Baptists. Out of respect to the Czech mother church they accepted the name Emmanuel Slovak Baptist church. Public services were held regularly until 1925 in a synagogue at 1410 W. Augusta Blvd., and from 1925 to 1930 at 2015 W . Augusta Blvd. In 1930 they dedicated a new church at 5857-59 W. Giddings, corner of Marmora Ave. Up to the year 1929 �38 SLOVAKIA half of the congregation lived on the south side. In that year they became independent and assumed the name Czechoslovak Baptist Church, but later changed it to Trinity Church. Their church was at 5845 So. Rockwell St. The new name, Covenant, was accepted in 1947. The Slovak Baptist church is entirely independent from 1944. Up to that time it was helped and the pastor's salary financed by American Baptists. Some of the names that have appeared in the list of officers over the years include Michal Stancik, Jan Dinga, Pavel Kubik, Michal Placko, Michal Frano, Pavel Hanko and Jan Firak. The Greek-Catholics There are any number of Greek-Catholic churches in Chicago, but the Slovaks belong principally to two of them-St. Mary's , 49th and So. Seeley, is one. The members of this parish are all Slovaks of the Byzantine Eastern Rit~, headed by and directly connected with the Holy See, the Roman Catholic Church. The parish has a large church, a school, a rectory and a Sister's Convent. Rev. J. Kurty is pastor. SS. Peter and Paul Church at 53rd and So. Western is a split-off of St. Mary's parish, and the split-off was so complete that they broke ties with Rome, and joined the Greek-Russian Orthodox Church. Rev. Shimkoff is pastor and his son has been his assistent. Like many of the parishioners of St. Mary's, many in the SS. Peter and Paul Church mistakenly call themselves "Russians," "Sub-Carpatian Russians," "Greek Catholics," "Rusins," "Rusnaks" etc. Many belligerently deny that they are Slovaks. It's a case of faulty bringing up and lack of proper information or education along these lines . Yet, the members of both of these parishes are Slovaksfrom the Spis, saris and Zemplin counties in Slovakia. They are Slovaks who profess the Byzantine Rite, or the Orthodox Rite. Neither of these rites makes them "Russians" or anything else but Slovaks, no more than the Lutheran faith makes our Slovak Lutherans Germans or anything but Slovaks. These Lutherans are Slovaks whn profess the Lutheran faith, and they are Slovaks. The "Rusnaks" are Slovaks, who profess the Byzantine rite or Orthodox rite. There are other ethnic groups who profess �SLOVAKIA 39 these rites or faiths, like the Magyars, but their faith does not change them from Magyars to "Rusnaks," "Russians" or anything else but Magyars. The "Rusnaks" should call a spade and admit that ethnically they are Slovaks. Societies and Lodges Although there is a noticable decline in society and lodge activity in Chicago in the last 25 years, in the main it has remained stable. A few lodges, and even whole societies merged (Tatran Slovak Union, based in Chicago merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol, Slovak Evangelical Society, also based in Chicago, merged with The Slovak Lutheran Union now called United Lutheran) . Others, like the "Veniec Katolickych Slovakov (Wreath of Catholic Slovaks) just plainly liquidated and stopped existing. But in the main, the lodges have remained in existence. In 1930, at the height of our lodge activity, the following Societies were represented by their lodges as follows: First Catholic Slovak Union - 26 assemblies; Total 6,811 members. First Catholic Slovak Ladies' Union - 19 lodges; Total 10,549 members. Slovak Catholic Sokol - 5 male assemblies and 4 female Wreaths; Total 2,906 members. Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 4 local assemblies ; 24 7 members. Ladies Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 3 branches ; 704 members. National Slovak Society - 11 assemblies; 2,726 members. Tatran Slovak Union - 15 of its 27 assemblies were in Chicago; The Society merged with S. G. U.S. Catholic Order of Foresters - 9 Slovak Courts; Catholic Order of Ladies Foresters- 4 Slovak Courts; First Slovak Wreath of Free Eagle - 3 groups (based in Bridgeport, Conn.); Western Slovak Union - 2 assemblies; Independent Society of St. Martin - 1 assembly; Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol - 5 assemblies; 2,82b members. �40 SLOVAKIA Club " Furdek" Club "Furdek" was a social and educational Club designed to unite the intelligentia of the Chicago Catholic Slovaks. Started in 1930 by Dr. Peter P. Hletko, it lasted some 25 years, then went into abeyance. During its existence it exerted much good influence on the life of the Chicago Slovaks and Slovaks in America, as well. All the local Catholic Slovak priests were members, so were many of the lawyers, physicians and other professional people and the formal annual installation dinners were an outstanding feature of the social season. Many college students and professional people were thus given an opportunity to meet and become mutually acquainted. Savings and Loan Associations One of the more profitable businesses of industries in which some of our Chicago Slovaks are engaged is the savings and loan business. The Slovaks, next to the Czechs, were the earliest entrants into this business. No other nationality ·was in that business any earlier. However, none of our savings and loan institutions controlled and managed by Slovaks ever rose to such gigantic multimillion dollar institutions as have some of those controlled b y other ethnic groups. They came into this business much later but have passed up Slovak people and they have built financial giants. But the Slovak S & L's are doing very, very well. Their accounts are insured by the FSLIC to S15,000 and practically all of them pay 4}'1 % on regular passbook accounts and more on certificate deposits. How early our Slovaks were in the savings and loan business in Chicago may be seen from the history of the First Slovak S & L in Chicago - the " Dunaj" (Danube). It was organized on April 1, 1907 in St. Michael's parish on the south side of the city - some 7 years after the founding of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB. , a Czech, friendly to the Slovak people, was then pastor and it was he who saw the need for a savings and loan association for his parishioners. His theory was that if the association helped his parishioners to buy and acquire homes in the vicinity of the church, the parishioners would be apt to stay in the neighborhood longer, around �SLOVAKIA 41 the church, and they would not run off to other areas and to other parishes and churches. This would help keep the parish stable and intact, it would thus help the parish and it would also help the parishioners to home ownership. Father Kvitek called a few parishioners for consultation, they then called a meeting and founded the "Dunaj" S & L Assoc. The men present at the meeting and elected as members of the first board of directors were: Albert Vincek, President; John Dluhy, a local retail butcher shop owner, Treasurer; Vaclav Pesicka, a fine Czech gentleman and a banker, Secretary; Anton Charvat, Thomas Griglak ( then organist and choir director at St. Michael's ), Martin Skorupa (a builder ), Joseph Adam, a local tavern owner, and Joseph Tomala (real estate and insurance broker ) , as directors. Soon after its founding, the parishioners and others in the locality applied for membership in the "Dunaj " in big numbers. The association helped many to save their money and it helped many others to home ownership. "Dunaj" kept graving rapidly every year and in a short span of a few years it was the second largest saving and loan association in Chicago, and the largest Slovak association in all America, just as St. Michael's parish became the largest Slovak parish in America at that time. In 1931 the association opened its 99th series and its directors at that time were ( just to get their names on paper ) : Joseph Trubiroha, Paul Havlicek, John Dluhy, Charles Tupy, Andrew Valachovic, Matthew Vadovsky, Peter Hello, A. B. Suhany, John M. Nemec. For years the association held weekly meetings on Tuesday evening in the basement of the old church, until the time of an attempted hold-up, which, happily, was unsuccessful. But the management of the "Dunaj" decided to transfer it into Depositors State Bank, of which Vaclav Pesicka was then president. But "Dunaj " stopped prospering in the bank. It was merely vegetating. Finally, John M. Nemec, an employee of the bank managed to extricate the association from the bank and move it closer to the church, its original location. He housed it in his newly set up insurance and real estate office and he became "Dunaj 's" secretary. But even this did not help and did not save the association from demise. Pressure of the Great Depression brought about eventual liquidation and the "Dunaj," �42 SLOVAKIA the daddy of them all, became a happy and revered memory. "Gage Park S & L. Assn. " was organized in February 1921 by Joseph Tomala, who became secretary. Some of the names of officers and directors associated with "Gage Park" in the early years were: Joseph L. Reppa, Michael Cerny (a business man), John Slovinec (an architect), John Massura and Joseph Massura (mason-build ers), Fr. steffek, sanitation, John Bomba, Jr. (a timekeeper), Vincent 0. snep, Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Joseph Hubalik (insurance agency); John Bomba and others. The first office of the association was at 2650 West 51st Street. It moved to its present location in 1938. The association is now in its 48th year and has assets over 22 million dollars. It pays the highest permissible dividend rate. It maintains a nice office at 2740 W. 55th St. Its present officers and directors are: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, President; Wendell Tylka, Vice-Presiden t; Michael S. Rehak, Secretary-Tre asurer; John Keblusek, Joseph Hubalik, Joseph Karas and George Galos are the other directors. All the officers and directors are Slovaks. Office hours are 5 days per week, Tuesday and Friday evenings and till noon on Saturday. The " Darnen S & L. Assn." is another early entrant. It was organized in September and held its first meeting on October 4, 1916. John Gurka, a tavern-owner and later a soft drink manufacture r and distributor, was its first moving spirit, and the weekly meetings were held in the hall to the rear of Gurka's Tavern at 45th and S. Fairfield. It was originally organized under the name "Slovenska Wlast'" (Slovak Fatherland). When A. B. Tabola became secretary after a few years, he legally changed the name to the correct Slovak spelling, "Slovenska Vlast' ," since the Slovak language has no consonant like "w" in its alphabet. In 1922 the association moved its headquarters into St. Michael's parish hall where it continued for several years, until A. B. Tabola again legally changed the name to "Darnen" after the street on which his real estate office was located and he moved the association there, later to 51st St., just west of Darnen Ave. Assets are $13,099,366.00. Other names connected with this successful association: John M. Kubina (deceased, an undertaker for 50 years, long time President), V. Dobias, Stefan Pastyak, �SLOVAKIA 43 Thadeus Macejak, Joseph Kempiak, all now deceased. Its present officers are: Mary Tabola-Poronsky, President; Joseph Judickas, Vice-President; Dr. John Poronsky, Secretary-Treasurer; Frank Bohula, Michal Mladucky and Frank Kacmarcik, directors. The association is housed in a beautiful new office at 51st and Darnen Avenue. All officers and directors except one are Slovaks. " National Security" was also an early entry. Organized in 1907 as "Choe" S & L. Assn. For many years it was the "baby" of the late Steve s kriba, Sr., on the west side of Chicago. Later it was moved from S . California Avenue to 26th and Troy St., and eventually to its own beautiful building at 6859 W. Archer Ave. Its assets are over $121/~ million. Office hours are 5 days a week, closed on Wednesday. Its officers and directors are practically all Slovaks: William skriba, President; Andrew Babka, 1st Vice-President, Joseph Demko, Secretary-Treasurer, and Thomas Chuhak, Ernest Cibira, John Skultety and Edward Skriba, directors . Security Federal, organized in 1907. Address: 1209 Milwaukee Ave. Total assets: $30,042, 279. 83 . Officers are: Sam s lahor, President; John Janae, Vice-President; Ivan Kovac, Executive Vice-President; Elizabeth Andrisek, Assistant Secretary. Other directors are: Joseph Zilka, Joseph s andrik and William Machacek. " American Home" S & L. Assn. - 3924 W. North Ave. Organized in 1910. Assets $3,017,391.00. All of its officers and directors are Slovaks: John Bilka, President; Albert Jancovic, Executive Secretary; John Homola, Vice-President; Joseph Peterka, Treasurer. Other directors are : Edward Jancovic and Joseph Flaska. " Economy" S & L . Assn. is the latest entry. It was organized by Attorney Frank Matavovsky in 1949. It owns its very nice office building at 2650 W. 51st St., the original home site of Gage Park S & L. Assn. Assets: $11,921 ,865.00. Officers: Frank Matovsky, President; Marie Matovsky (Frank's wife ) is Secretary-Treasurer. Anthony Matavosky (a brother ) is Vice-President, George skodon, comptroller. Other directors : Michael Rusnak, Dr. Wendel Kapustiak ( an eye specialist ) . All the officers and two directors are Slovak. Two additional directors are : D. Varraveto and 0. J. VanMale. �44 SLOVAKIA " Andrej Hlinka" S & L. Assn., named after the national hero and political leader in Slovakia, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, P.A., existed for some 35 years at 2234 W. Chicago Ave. The association was managed by Vencel Roth ands. Velba. Eventually the association was taken over by Oran Mensik and its name changed to City Savings. After some additional 15 years, the supervisory authorities stepped in and began liquidating the institution. Oran Mensik had not applied for insurance of accounts by the FSLIC. " Hemlock" Federal S & L . Assn., while not a typically Slovak institution as far as the make-up of its board of directors, is managed and supervised by a Slovak, Joseph P. Gavron, its President. Its assets are: $40,601 ,000.00. Founded in 1904 by Czechs. Its office is at 5140 South Ashland Avenue. " Talman Federal," founded in 1922 by Ben F. Bohac and other Czechs on West 51st St., near Talman Avenue . This association is one of the giants in the industry. Its assets : £476,209,255.01. Its Assistant Secretary is Joseph Seliga, Slovak. His brother, Emil, was president of the association for a number of years, but later resigned and went to California. The president of "Talman" is Bernard A. Polek, the son-in-law of Ben F . Bohac. Present address: 55th and So. Kedzie Avenue. Other Slovaks in savings-loan work are: Attorney John Dluhy - in the legal department of "Home Federal S & L., a $362,000,000.00 institution; Mr. Dluhy was retired recently. J . Batis of Joliet, Ill., with Olympic Federal in Berwyn, Ill., and Miss Irene Kocur, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer of "American S & L." on West 47th Street. Dr. Joseph Mitric is a director in Midlothian S & L. Assn. In the past, two Slovak Savings-Loan associations existed on the West Side-' 'Bratstvo" and" Ferdis Juriga". Steve Balek was the secretary of "Bratstvo" but when the depression hit the country, "Bratstvo" went into voluntary liquidation and paid all its depositors in full and ceased to exist. "Ferdis Juriga" began having much the same diffi. culties at that time and it merged with another association, the "Oak", and passed out of Slovak control, despite the fact that a few of the Slovak directors were retained for a while. In that way "Ferdis Juriga" ceased to exist also. �SLOVAKIA 45 Joseph Pokora had been the moving spirit during its existence. "stefdnikova Dvorana" (stefdnik's Court) Already on December 13, 1899 the Chicago Slovaks held a meeting to organize a "Slovensky Dom" (Slovak Home), a social center, where they could meet, hold lodge meetings and other social affairs. By activity they raised money and soon bought a building on Canalport Street, near Halsted St. There they continued until 1924. This original venture was started by 4 assemblies of the National Slovak Society. Later they renamed the Home as "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" (National Slovak Court). In the meantime, on October 26, 1921, representatives of Assembly 39 Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol met with representatives of the "Slovenska Beseda" for the purpose of discussing the possibilities of erecting a "stefanik's Court", named after the big Slovak hero, Gen. Milan R . Stefanik, a French general, an astronomer and one of the organizers of Czecho-Slovakia. With again much activity, this group raised money by various endeavors and ultimately built the Court at 24th and S. Pulaski. On January 8, 1925, the original "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" merged with M. R. Stefanik Dvorana. The Stefanik Dvorana contains a large auditorium, meeting halls a dining hall, bar-room, etc. The building houses a 5,000 volume Slovak library, catalogued according to the A. L.A. classification system, which was donated to the Chicago Slovaks by the "Matica Slovenska" (Slovak Institute of Slovakia) and accepted in their behalf by the chairman of the welcoming Chicago committee, Dr. P. P. Hletko. The library, as well as the "Dvorana" itself were a bee-hive of activity for many years. But with balls and dances becoming more scarce in our Slovak community, no stage plays being put on, various lectures or celebrations and banquets also being less profitable whatwith radio, television and motor cars taking over, stefanik's Court is falling into disuse. Many of our lodges, as well as some individuals hold shares in this venture. Radio hours The late Vincent Kalnik was the originator of "Slovak Hours" in Chicago when he established one on WHFC in �46 SLOVAKIA the early 30's. Then others followed like Eden Radie, Macharek, ·Lutheran religious hours, the broadcast of the pro-labor group, the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol broadcast hour, etc. At present Rudolf Reis-Cerven conducts a full hour of Slovak music, songs, news and entertainment every Sunday morning 9-10 A. M. from station WXRT-FM - 93.1 kc. Chicago Slovaks have two Charitable organizations The Catholic group has the Katolicka Slovenska Dobrocinna Spolocnost' ( Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. ) which has been conducting the Catholic Slovak Days for over 33 years. The proceeds accrue to the Charitable Assn., originally organized to conduct charity among the poor of the community, but with the decline of poverty, money that accumulated has been turned over by the Charitable Assn. to the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill. The Association turned over some $65,000.00 for the purchase of the original building for the Convent. Additional contributions have also been made. The Association at one time owned a picnic grove with necessary building and accomodations, but the Argome National (Atomic) Laboratory took over the site. With the proceeds, the Association purchased "McDermott's Oaks Grove" on 119th and Archer Ave. The grove was improved and the buildings renovated and much activity ensued. But with changing times, picnics are no longer being held, the venture is less and less profitable and the Charitable Assn. is considering the selling of the grove. Rev. Richard skriba is president. The other group of Chicago Slovaks have their "Slovenska Americka Dobrocinna Spolocnost"' (The Slovak American Charitable Assn.), a non-denominational association. They too have been doing charity, but lately they are accumulating funds for construction of an Old Peoples' Home. They have purchased a site for the future home on North Ave., in Glen Ellyn, Ill., some 15 miles west of Chicago. There is still another group, the Slovak Catholic Old Peoples Home (Katolicko-Slovensky Starobinec) which is raising funds towards building or purchasing a home for our Senior citizens. This group has about $100,000.00 �SLOVAKIA 47 available for this purpose. Various moves are under consideration, even the possibility of the Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. and this Old Peoples Home group merging into one joint organization. Their pooled assets might give the proposed Old Peoples' Home a very good and promising start. Both groups are actually composed of the same and identical people and there is very little use to keep the two groups apart. Mrs. Julia Krajcovic, who originated the Slovak Catholic Charitable Assn., was its President for years, then organized the Starobinec group and was its President for years. After her recent death Dr. Peter P. Hletko was drafted as President. Permanent Slovak Theatre in Chicago Slovak enthusiasts for the theatre have fostered the "Americke Slovenske Narodne Divadlo" (The American National Theater) for very many years. It was organized in 1919. It has produced some 250 Slovak stage plays. Some of those active in this undertaking over the years were: Jesensky, Ondrejkovic, the Lesaks, the Matises, stevkova, Lamos, Matuskova, Letrich, Tibensky and many others. Most of their plays were produced at their "home" - the stage of the OSPS, hall at 18th and May Sts. With changing times and the loss of national consciousness in the youth, and the departure of the older folks, the need for a permanent Slovak theater died out. Slovak Days The so-called "National Slovak Days", conducted by a non-de.--,ominational group and back-boned by the Slovak American .'fational Charitable Assn., these "Days" are the older. But in 1931, the Slovak Catholics put on their First Catholic Slovak Day in Pilsen Park, 26th and Albany on October 11, 1931, which turned out to be a huge moral and financial success. The proceeds at that time, in times of the depression, were $5,100.00 in clear money. These "Days" have been held every year since then, and while some of them in subsequent years were even more successful than the first one, their attraction is also losing out. They have been a source of much money for the various causes of the Chicago Slovaks and the Slovaks of the USA. The "National Days" have been keeping up better �48 SLOVAK.IA in the last several years than the "Catholic Slovak Days" in Chicago. Slovak Catholic Cemetery In the early years, Slovak Catholics were being buried in Resurrection Cemetery, Justice, Ill. (a cemetery serving Czech, Polish and Slovak people ) , and in St. Adalbert's Cemetery, Niles, Ill., which also served the three nationalities. Those on the very far South Side used their local cemeteries there. On May 30, 1923, the Slovak Cemetery of Seven Dolors was dedicated in Hillside, Ill. It was adjacent to the newly forming diocesan Queen of Heaven cemetery but with the expansion of both cemeteries, Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery will soon be a part of Queen of Heaven. Msgr. V. Blahunka was the chief moving spirit in organizing the Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery. Across the road (Roosevelt Rd.) from our Slovak Cemetery is the huge diocesan Mt. Carmel Cemetery. Slovak A. A. For many years, the Slovaks maintained the "Mudron Athletic Club" (Mudron AC.) on the West Side. They participated in many sports, but also in social activities . Years later they re-organized and formed the "Slovak A. A." (Slovak Athletic Assn.) . The main activity of this club is soccer. They have produced very good, championship teams, and they participated in a soccer league which comprises teams of many ethnic groups- the Poles, the Germans, the Sweedes and others. The club maintains a clubhouse at 27th St. and So. Hamlin for social purposes. The public is invited to their club rooms. Slovak Newspapers in Chi cago Over the years many Slovak newspapers were founded and published in Chicago. Some had a very short existence, others lasted a long time. Prior to 1900 there was actually no need for a Slovak newspaper, and one could hardly have succeeded since the number of Slovaks here at that time was insufficient to support a newspaper. The earliest attempt to publish one was in 1902 by one Chudatsik, a controversial character because he had strong leanings towards the Magyars, whom the Slovaks �SLOVAKIA 49 despised because it was the Hungarian government under which the Slovaks have suffered a thousand years, being denied all rights and privileges of a nation, which forced many Slovaks to emigrate to this country in quest of a little liberty, a piece of bread and pursuit of happiness. Chudatsik with his pro-Magyar proclivities was not favored very much by the Slovaks and for that reason his newspaper, the "Katolicke N oviny" ( Catholic Slovak News), and the half dozen other papers which he founded under various names in subsequent years, never found wide acceptance. He began publishing his "Katolicke Slovenske Noviny" on the South Side in the vicinity of 46th and So. Marshfield Ave. The paper was a weekly. Later he founded dailies, publishing some two or even three simultaneously, with the news contents identical in all of them, only the advertizing being different from one paper to the other, thus being a source of revenue. At times some of these newspapers had no circulation and no readers. All his newspapers ceased publication in about 1926. The last known address was 2117 W. Grand Avenue. "Nove Casy" (New Times) was established at 1702 So. Halsted St. in 1918, after the establishment of CzechoSlovakia, with which the Catholic Slovak People's party (Hlinka's autonomist party), and most of the Catholic Slovaks became disenchanted. The editor was Stephen Huska. Ceased publication in 1942 because the Catholic Slovaks in Chicago refused to support the paper and to subscribe for it. "Narodny Slovensky Dennik" (National Slovak Daily), established in 1913 on Milwaukee Ave., was a pretty serious attempt to establish a good daily in Chicago. Some of its editors were S . Huska, Michael Laucik, then Gustav Marsal Petrovsky, John Feriencik and others. It lasted only four years and ceased in 191 7. "Katolicky Slovak" (Catholic Slovak) was a weekly, established in 1921 by V. Tylka and Louis Kycko at 17th and So. Union Ave. It lasted a few years and was eventually converted into a daily, the " Chicagsky Dennik" ( Chicago Daily) and moved to St. Michael's parish, at 48th and So. Winchester Ave. It lasted only one year, 1921-22, almost to the day, and failed because the new owner, �50 SLOVAKIA Rudolph Pollak, a real estate operator and insurance broker, got himself into a tight financial squeeze in his own private business and the revenue from the daily was not sufficient as yet to bail him out of his own troubles. Dr. Peter P. Hletko, then a college student, was the editor, later M. Bozek, Florian Tylka and Rudolph Pollak himself served as assistant editors. The daily was Catholic in its ideologies. After the "Chicagsky Dennik" ceased publication the Chicago Catholic Slovaks felt a big void. They had become accustomed to the services of the "Katolicky Slovak" and the "Chicagsky Dennik" and now felt they must again have a newspaper. The Tylka Brothers (Florian and Wendel), operators of a tiny printing shop at 830 W. 18th started publishing the weekly "Osadne Hlasy" (Slovak Parish News) amid much enthusiasm among the Chicago Slovaks, and with the moral support of Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., pastor at St. Michael's (he is the one who suggested the name "Osadne Hlasy", Parish News). But shortly after the start, Rev. Gregory left for Cleveland, Ohio, to begin his work of organizing the Slovak Benedictine monastery there as its first prior. "Osadne Hlasy" continued and prospered for many years, 36 to be exact, from 1928 to April 1963. Dr. Peter P. Hletko became contributing editor in 1928 and lasted to the end. Florian Tylka was the editor, and when he died, Vendel Tylka assumed ownership and editorship. This was undoubtedly the most successful venture in the newspaper publishing business that the Chicago Slovaks ever had. The paper, through the contacts of Dr. Hletko became an influential force in the life of the Slovaks all over America, not only in Chicago. It should never have ceased publication. Another void followed the demise of "Osadne Hlasy" in the life of the Chicago Slovaks. The Slovak Catholic Charitable Association sensing the lack of contact among the Chicago Slovak Catholics, decided to help in a small way, and it established and promised to subsidize a small monthly news-pamphl et, the "Nase Hlasy" (Our Voice). It is being published in the Tylka Bros. printery at 2548 W. 63rd St. Much different in its politics from the "Osadne Hlasy," the new paper is totally non-controve rsial and feeble in its editorial program leadership of its readers. �SLOVAKIA 51 Other newspapers and publications which have appeared in Chicago over the many years: "Pravda" (The Truth), a labor weekly, established in 1933. Publishers: Pravda Publishing Co., 1510 W. 18th St. "Rovnost' Ludu" (Peoples' Equality), labor, pro-Socialist, later pro-Communist, established 1926, by the same people and at the same address as "Pravda". "Slovensko-Americky Dennik" (Slovak American Daily ) established 1904 in the Chudatsik newspaper chain on Grand Ave. "Slovensko--Americke Noviny" (Slovak American News), another in that chain. "Slovenske Slovo" (The Slovak Word), weekly, established in 1914. Ceased in 1916. Gustav Marsal Petrovsky editor. Publisher Slovak Printing Co., 19th and So. Halsted Street. "Tatran" (Tatranian), fraternal monthly, was the official organ of the Tatran Slovak Union (a Chicago-based fraternal society), until the organization merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol of New Jersey. John Matlocha was editor since its beginning in 1916 and it was printed in the Mally Press Printing shop, 1702 S. Halsted, where the "Nove easy" had been published for many years. "Viestnik" (a Slovak monthly) established in 1913 for the parishioners of St. Michael's. Publishers: Hurban Bros. Press at 47th St., near Darnen Ave. Editor: Ladislav Hurban. Lasted until 1918 when L. Hurban ceased being organist at St. Michael's. "Ludovy Dennik" (Peoples' Daily), pro-Communist, published by the same people and at the same address as "Rovnost' Ludu," "Pravda," etc. "Nas Svet" (Our World) was published on North Ashland Avenue, as a non-denominational weekly for a number of years. Its owner, editor and publisher was John Dend'ur, now in New York City. "Slovenska Zena" (The Slovak Woman) was a nice, illustrated monthly catering to the needs of Slovak women, but it lasted only a short time. The editor was Mrs. John Dend'ur, and the publisher her husband John. �52 SLOVAKIA Slovak newspapermen Besides the Slovak newspapermen mentioned in connection with the above Slovak newspapers over the years, we now have Slovaks engaged in American newspaper work. One is Ronald Kotulak, science editor of the Chicago Daily Tribune, who frequently writes medical and health articles for the Chicago Tribune. At the annual awards luncheon of the Chicago Heart Association held in June 1968 at the Palmer House, Mr. Kotulak received the meritorious service award. He was cited for his outstanding role in making· the public aware of the progress against heart disease and heart association programs and accomplishments. The guest speakers were Jimmy Durante and Jim Conway, radio and television personality. Mr. Kotulak is well known in Chicago and North-West Indiana for his outstanding articles on the latest advancements in scientific research. His late mother, Mary Kotulak was a long time officer of the 403 Branch of the Catholic Slovak Ladies Association branch in Chicago. John Husar is a sports writer for the Chicago Daily Tribune, covering football games and practically all other sports. He is the son of John 'Firpo' Husar of Chicago, well known for his sports activities at St. Procopius College, Lisle, Ill. and Purdue University. John Jr. also conducts a weekly column in the Tribune called the "Locker Room" on golf topics. Lawyers and Judges The Slovaks of Chicago have produced and developed a fine group of lawyers. Most of them are native born. The first to achieve a position on the judicial bench was the late Michael Tremko as a Judge of the Municipal Court. A present day Judge is Judge John Pavlik, a St. Michael's school graduate, University of Chicago law school graduate, elected in Calumet City, Ill., but sitting in the Chicago courts practically every day. We have had two assistant State's Attorneys, Sam Papanek and Rudolph Janega, who is still serving. Judge Louis Hyde (Hajdusek), son of the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek, is Probate Judge. Among the attorneys, past and present, we find such names as these: Michael S. Rehak, John Hlavacka, Joseph Hlavacka, J. Hlavacka, Jr., Paul Dolenak, Frank Matavov- �SLOVAKIA 53 sky, Edward Kerpec, John Skultety, R. Ptacin, E. Haranta, W. Lesak, John Golosinec, Sam Susina, Steve Svatik, John Svatik, Vlado Hojsa, Ann Kubicek, St. Schostok, John Dluhy, Igor Kovac, Thos Chuhack, Anton Mikula, Edward Fusek, Joseph Steller (former vice-president of the National Slovak Society), now in Milwaukee, Wis., S . Michuda (was also an engineer and Chicago City Bridge engineer ) now out of Chicago, and the late attorneys: Adam Poliak, J. Slifka, Anna Svatik and John Balko. Physicians and Surgeons The Slovaks of Chicago are well represented in the medical field with their proportionate share of good, adequate, dedicated and able physicians, who minister well to the health needs not only of Chicago Slovaks but also Chicagoans of all ethnic groups. The first Slovak comers to this city had to depend on various other group physicians for their medical needs and care. Eventually they developed their own as time went on. One of the first Slovak physicians here was Dr. f>uro Guca on the West Side, an immigrant from the southern part of Slovakia. Soon others-some foreign born, most native born, followed. Thus, the late Dr. Joseph Gazda at 52nd and S. Darnen Ave., now his son, Dr. Mace Gazda. Also, the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek in Town of Lake on W. 47th St., Dr. Raymond on W. 18th St. (his wife is also an M.D.). Dr. Peter P. Hletko (former clinical instructor in clinical neurology at Loyola U. Strich School of Medicine, former Cook Co . Hospital interne); Dr. Paul Hletko, psychiatrist, former assistant Managing Officer of the State Hospital in Manteno, Ill., now chief Medical Officer of the State Welfare Dept.; Dr. Louis Wajay (his wife is also an M.D.), Dr. John Turcan, Dr. Fr. Soltis, Dr. Wendell Kapustiak (specializing in ophthalmology), Dr. Louis Dvonch and Dr. Wm. Dvonch ( these two are brothers of Fred Dvonch, the orchestra leader on Broadway), Dr. John Vyboch (an orthopedic surgeon now in Los Angeles, Cal.,), Dr. Joseph Mitrick, Dr. Mary Patras (former instructor in Loyola U. Medical School-now she lives and practices in Miami, Fla); Dr. Michael Vanecko (his son is also a physician-the young Vanecko is son-in-law of Mayor Daley); Dr. William Rurik and others. �54 SLOVAKIA The following physicians have died: Dr. Raymond Jezisik, Blue Island, Ill.; Dr. Emil Zidek, Dr. Martin t>asko (his wife also an MD.), Dr. John Belensky, Dr. L. J. Hajdusek and Dr. Martin Kostelny. Dentists Right along with the physicians-surgeons Slovaks in Chicago have a fine crop of capable dentists. We should mention the following: Dr. Steve J . Hletko (former English editor of the Slovak Catholic Sokol "Falcon," now sports director of National Slovak Society, Secretary of the Slovak Bowling Congress and recent president of the Illinois Bowling Congress, a former Lt. Col. of the U. S . Army at Ft. Hood, Texas ), Dr. Richard Remijas, Dr. George Matula, Dr. G. Tilley, three Bunta brothers (Albert, Paul and Joseph ), Dr. Michael Rak, Dr. Michael Orth, Dr. Michael Vitek, Dr. Joseph F. Solus and his wife Dr. Eleanor Solus, Dr . Joseph Biel, Dr. Joseph Tisoncik, Dr. John Poronsky (Secretary of "Darnen" S & L. Assn.), and Dr. Daniel Tylka, now practising in Toledo, Ill. Pharmacists The drug profession is not quite as well represented as the physicians, dentists and lawyers, but at least the following are known: the late four Lesko brothers, Joseph Duleba and his son, Messrs (two ) zibrida (Bernard died since this article was written ), Mr. Grigus, B. Mensik and John Miklian on West 63rd St. The Arts In the arts the Slovaks here have produced such stars as Mary Halama from the neighborhood of Chicago Ave., and Frederick Sts., an operatic concert singer whose career was rather short. She moved to New York, married and apparently gave up her career. Lillian Michuda from Roseland was a splendid singer and entered the movies. One of her first movies was with Jack Benny, under the movie name of "Lillian Cornell." Other movies followed but she too married and forsook the cinema and settled down. The one real luminary is Frederick Dvonch, a graduate of the Juilliard School of Music in New York. He is an orchestra leader and composer. He conducted the �SLOVAKIA 55 orchestra for Allegheny-Ludlum Steel in a series of radio musical programs. He also conducted for "Show Boat," "Song of Norway," "Carousel" and other Broadway musicals, both on and off Broadway. Freddie Dvonch is a real talent and an artist, descended from a musical family-his father, a tailor, was a band musician, his uncle, Anton Olach, was a band musician, and Freddie's two brothers , the physicians, were also good violinists at early ages. Freddie has a doctorate in music. Other good singers are Irene Kocur and Mary ( skriba ) Koys, who at one time had short season appearances with the chorus in Chicago opera. Orchestra leaders Besides many small local bands and orchestras and combos, some amateur, some semi-professional, Joe Pat(erek) has a popular polka band, much like the wellknown Frankie Yankovich. They play polkas, waltzes, schottisches etc. He plays Slovak, Czech, Polish and international numbers. He puts on quite an act. One of his parents was Slovak, the other Polish. - Frankie Slaboda is a good violinist, a good entertainer and a good orchestra leader. - Dr. Isidore Mlecko, a chiropodist from Chicago Heights, originally came from Roseland, was much like Frankie Slaboda. But unfortunately he died a short time ago. R el i gi ous orders The "Our Lady of Sorrows Convent" is the Convent of the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago. They branched off the Czech Benedictine Convent in Lisle, Ill. Mother Theresita, OSB., was the first prioress. The present Rev. Mother is Mother Geraldine, OSB. Besides the old convent building, they have a new Convent, built and dedicated only two years ago . Rt. Rev. Abbot Kojis, OSB., from St. Andrew's Abbey in Cleveland, is chaplain. Chicago Slovaks contribute heavily. The Slovak Franciscan Fathers in Valparaiso, Indiana, although a short distance from Chicago, are close to the hearts of many Chicago Slovak Catholics and they support the Franciscan Fathers very generously. The Chicago Slovak Catholics hold annual pilgrimages to the Seven �56 SLOVAKIA Dolors Shrine on the grounds of the monastery. A new Church has been built there recently. Old peoples' and nursing homes The Slovak Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius from Danville, Pa., conduct the St. Cyril Villa, in Highland Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, Ill. Some Chicago Slovaks avail themselves of this service. Others support the Villa financially. The Daughters of St. Francis, a Slovak Sisters Franciscan order, conduct the Nursing Home of St. Joseph in Lacon, Illinois. Many Chicago Slovaks have contributed generously to these Sisters since they came from Slovakia as immigrants and also contributed to the building of the Nursing Home. The home accomodates 50 patients. A new addition is being built to accomodate another 50 patients. Also a new million dollar mother-house. These Sisters also run a hospital in Mountainview, Mo. Undertakers Of these, the late John M. Kubina was probably the first Slovak undertaker here. He celebrated his 50th anniversary as a funeral director four years ago, shortly before his death. He was active in many extra-curricular fields, including fishing and bowling (he was President of the Slovak Bowling Congress and savings and loan work, President and Chairman of the board at "Darnen S & L.). Many other Slovak undertakers have died here: Sam Kostelny, Steve Kostelny, John Zidek (his son is carrying on), Martin Mensik (son is continuing the business), Charles Machacek, Thomas Barosko, John Palenica and John Lattyak. Well known names were also Paterek and John Posuch. Some of those still active today are: John Satala, Edward Tybor, William Machacek, B. Mensik, John t>Oltis, Miss Judy Tybor, John Palenica, Jr., and Fred Kubasak, now in California. Edward Dluhy in now in Florida. Theater Owners There have not been many of these from the Slovak ranks. In 1913 the late John Remijas and the late Charles Kobilak teamed up and conducted the theater business in the "Gaelic Theater" on W. 47th St., near Western �SLOVAKIA 57 Ave. Mr. Kobilak died and Mr. Remijas carried on, in fact expanded when he built the "Acadia Theater" at 55th and Fairfield Ave. in 1929 and kept both theaters going for many years, even during the depression. He was the father of Dr. Richard Remijas, a dentist, and father-in-law of Dr. Peter P . Hletko (wife Anna). With advancing years and failing health, he eventually sold both theaters but did not live too long after that. He died in 1947. Both theaters are now converted to other businesses. Brokers In the investment field we have at least two account representatives with brokerage houses: Milan Blazek with Francis Du Pont Co., 122 So. LaSalle St., and Godfrey Labda, with Howe, Barnes & Co., 208 S . LaSalle Street. Banks and bankers Some of Chicago Slovaks even tried banking as a business, but did not have much success. Perhaps the earliest was John Haluska on the West Side shortly after the turn of the century. He never attained great success, but he enjoyed a good folloving among his people. Later Papanek-Kovac State Bank operated for a few years at 886 Milwaukee Ave., but the Great Depression took its toll here. It was said that if the supervisory state authorities had not been so quick on the draw and had they been just a little more lenient, the P. K . Bank would have worked out its temporary squeeze. John S. Jurik was perhaps the most successful Slovak banker in Chicago, while it lasted. For years he had been a real estate and insurance broker on West 47th St. near Darnen Avenue ( then called Robey St. ) . Eventually he organized the Robey State Bank, on West 47th St., just west of Robey St. The bank enjoyed pretty good success for a long time . The writer of this article worked in this bank for several summers (during student vacations ) as a bookkeeper and teller. Just before the depression, Robey State Bank merged with Depositors State Bank at 47th and Ashland Ave. and Mr. Jurik became one of the vice-presidents of the merged bank. Mr. Vaclav Pesicka, former secretary of "Dunaj" S & L. Assn., was the president of Depositors. But the depression eventually cut down Depositors Bank �58 SLOVAKIA too, as it did many other banks at that time. So, Robey State Bank and Depositors State Bank vanished off the face of the earth. Slovak Manufacturers in Chicago Soon after the Slovaks reached Chicago many of them began looking around and after acclimating themselves started various business enterprises. Many of them started or purchased taverns and at one time this was probably the most profitable business for the Slovaks. Many entered the grocery and meat market business but these ventures, like milk stores or dairies are fading out of the picture since merchandising chains and shopping centers grew up profusely. One outstanding exception is the wholesale dairy owned and managed by J. Ziak and his sons in South Chicago. Other Chicago Slovaks, particularly those from a town of Brezova, in Slovakia, who brought good experience to this country about tanning hides, these entered the tanning business, wood processing, and manufacturing of other hide products, such as drum heads, belts, brief cases etc. Others brought varied experiences and abilities such as wire workers. In Trencin county in Slovakia many were wire workers and many travelled all over the world plying their craft. They were called "drotari" and were able not only to manufacture wire products, but were also handy in repairing various objects in the home with the aid of wiring, such as broken pots, vases, ceramic objects etc. Their travel experiences were many and some of them were away from home many months, or even years. travelling from country to country. One of them, a wireworker by the name of Adam Dzudzi, told me he travelled extensively in Russia, knew the country well and spent much time in Tiflis, capital of the Georgian Republic. Others knew Baku well in Azerbajdjan USSR. Let us list at least a few of the manufacturing businesses that the Slovaks owned and conducted in Chicago at one time or another: Tanners and wool processors White Eagle Rawhide Mfg. Co., 1652 N. Throop St. Owners: George :ourkovic and John R. Janae. Organized �SLOVAKIA 59 in 1924. Manufacture of drum heads, banjos, tamborines, children's toys and drums etc. Employed 12 people. Liberty Rawhide and Tanning Co., 2020 N. Paulina Street. Manufacture of belts and belting. Representative : Steve Nosko. Kruty and Kruty. Organized 1939. Wool and sheep and goat hide processing. Employed seven people. John Kruty, representative. 1716 W. Webster Avenue. Vrablik & Co. Organized 1947. Carried on the same business as Kruty & Kruty, at the same address. Employed five people. Bachar & Mizialko. Organized 1935 by George Bachar and John Mizialko. Later the owners were: John Mizialko, Edward Mizialko and George Bachar. Manager of the business: John Mizialko, Sr. Their business was pulling of sheep pelts and the pickling of sheep skins. Paul Konecnik & Son. Stripping of wool. Martin slahor was in the wool and hide business since 1916. Samuel slahor-in the same business. National Wool Pulling and Scouring Co. Organized in 1921. President John Svatik (a brother-in-law of Dr. Stefan Osusky, the former ambasador from Czecho-Slovakia to France); Stefan Svatik, secretary, and Paul Konecnik, treasurer. Yearly output: 700,000 lbs. of wool shorn, washed and dried. Employed 10 people. 1117 W. Webster Avenue. F &B Mfg. Co. Owner: John Filko, Cable address : Filko-Chicago. Motto: "The crown jewels of ignition." The firm makes various automotive parts and various plastic caps, tops, and other objects. Filko Ignition-5840 North Northwest Hwy, is a Division of F & B. John Filko has been in this business for a long, long time. During the World War II, he was the recipient of many government orders and he received government subsidies for expansion purposes and for increasing his facilities for production of necessary work and manufacture. An interesting sidelight on John Filko and his F & B Co. Many of the products, particularly the plastic items, bear the name of the manufacturer, Filko, or Filko Co. Some years ago, the Philco Radio Company felt that this �60 SLOVAKIA was some sort of an encroachment on their name, and they sued to prevent John Filko using this trade-mark. Many and long, and expensive court battles followed. Filko claimed that this is his family name and he would protect it, and his right to use it, to the end of the world and to the limit of his treasury and all his resources. After extended litigation and appeals in courts, John Filko won out. Besides the lower courts, the litigation went through the Appelate Court and the Philco Co. ran the case up to the Supreme Court of the U.S. But John Filko won his case in all the courts, including the Supreme Court. Defending this case cost John Filko $42,000.00. John Filko has five plants, including two in Chicago at 4248 W. Chicago Ave. and Crawford and Chicago Avenue, one in Phoenix, Arizona, and even one in Bogota, Columbia. They manufacture electric parts for automobiles , electrical relays, parts for helicopters and jets for the U. S. Army and Navy. They do many millions of dollars of business every year. John Filko employs 500 people. John Filko's is a remarkable story. This fantastic success in business is certainly remarkable for a poor immigrant Slovak from Slovakia. This should encourage many of our native born to strive as hard as John Filko did, and while not every one can attain such success through hard work and application without some luck, many certainly can and would, if they go about it seriously and industriously. In World War I, Mr. Filko was a volunteer Czecho-Slovak Legionaire. The Legion helped establish Czecho-Slovakia. Wire workers Chillo Mfg. Co. 2106 So. Kedzie Avenue. Owner: Paul Chillo. Everede Tool Co. 2000 N. Parkside Avenue. Owner : J. Proksa. Canning, Pekara Inc. Representative: Gustav Pekara, Jr. 1809 W. Webster Avenue. Philadelphia Wire Lamp Frame Co. 1126 West 18th Street. Avondale Machinery Works Mfg. Co. 5546 N. Harlem Avenue. Milan Filip represented the company. �SLOVAKIA 61 Van Dyke Industries. 2259 W. 21st Street. Stephen Zidek. Supreme Wire & Metal Products Co. 317 East 29th Street. Premier Wire Lamp Shade Frame Co. 1716 S. Michigan Avenue. Western Wire Works Inc. Michael Martinek and Sons, 951 W. 18th Place. Manufactured various wire products, bird cages, wire cages for offices, elevators etc. Premier Metal Works, Inc. 1616 Clinton Street. Owner: Andrew Micjeta, who at one time was very active in Slovak fraternal work. Wood workers Arrow Parlor Furniture Frames. J. Havlik. 629 West Cermak Road. Marcek Furniture, Division of Central Parlor Frame Co. Inc. 1311 W. 47th Street. Olach Furniture Frames, Inc. 2527 W. Moffat Street. Owner: Anton Olach (an uncle of Dr. Frederick Dvonch, the violin virtuoso and orchestra leader on radio, TV and Broadway). Manufactured home furniture, church furnishings, institutional furniture etc. Had a subdivision: Mountainview Wood Prod. Co., Mountainview City, Arkansas. Has retired from this business several years ago. Other Businesses and Occupations The Slovaks in Chicago have been engaged in every kind of imaginable business, profession and occupation. While at one time, the saloon or tavern business was most popular, Slovak people have expanded into other lines. P. Kvorka has a large furniture store and so did Emil Arbet and J. Kostolansky. Soltis Radio and appliance store is a large establishment owned by John Soltis on 51st and Washtenaw now on 55th and South Pulaski Road. John zacek owns and operates a large trucking and hauling firm, the Fairfield Motors. Emil Arbet also had the Arbet Truck Lines. At one time, every side street had a grocery and meat market for the convenience of the local people. Now the large supermarkets, and shopping plazas have taken over this business, which even the automobile has made more �62 SLOVAKIA accessible to the housewife. Such local retail butchers and grocers should be mentioned as John Bistyak for a very large number of years on 48th and Darnen Ave., Joseph Peterka on Iowa St., on the northwest side. John Tybor and Ernest Keblusek p.as been on the south side. The late Mrs. Pitak was on the west side, so were the Sadeckis. The Turcans were at 24th Street, in Cicero. The Rafa.e's on the south side, so were the Bzduch's, and so was Mrs. Panko and the John Pirohar's. Also J . Dluhy, Sr., and Mrs. Oskvarek. We have also had chiropractors--e.g. Fred Kabana and his wife (now in Daytona Beach, Fla.) , the John and Johns (man and wife) and others. Vendel Tylka and his two sons still operate the Tylka Bros. Press, a commercial printery on West 63rd Street. John and Mrs. Keblusek, and their two sons, operate a very large and modern Ace Hardware store at 155th and South Cicero, in Oak Forest, Ill. Tony Pastyak and his wife Florence conduct a restaurant business on W. 63rd St., catering to parties, weddings and after-funeral luncheons. Also cocktail lounge. Many had retail shoe stores (like Nick Vratanina, J. Jurgovsky, Facuna, etc.). Galos is secretary and co-owner of the James Coal Co. on South Halsted Street. He has been in the coal business for many years. Many are, or have been in the real estate business, or in the insurance business e.g. Joseph Hubalik, ~oltis Realty, Karkoska, Dusan Augustiny and J. Fabry and others. And we had many in the travel bureau business e . g. Eden Radie, Michael Kaplan, Cerven Tvrdy and others. Large numbers of Slovak young ladies have become nurses and others devoted themselves to laboratory work. Very many are public school teachers. BIBLIOGRAPHY Souv enir of the F irst Catholic Slovak Day in Chicago, 1931. Dr. P eter P. Hletko, Edi tor. P. V. Rovnianek-Rovinov: Zcipisky za ziva pochov aneho. (Memoirs of one buried alive). 1924. Savings & Loan Statistics. Cook County Council. 1967. Statistics of Frat ernal Benefi t Soci eti es. 1967. Fraternal Monitor. Adam Podkrivacky: Slovaks in Chi cago 1872-1962. �SLOVAKIA 63 Souvenir Program of the 20th regular convention of the National Slovak Society - held in Chicago, 1950. Czechs and Slovaks (World's Fair Memorial), Chicago, Ill., 1933. Czech and Slovak leaders in Metropolitan Chicago. Edited by Daniel D. Droba, M. A., Ph. D. Published by the Slavonic Club of the University of Chicago. 1934. DR. PETER P. HLETKO was the Supreme Medical Examiner for the Slovak Catholic Sok-01 for some 36 years, from 1927 to 1963. The Youngstown convention of the or• ganization named him Honorary Supreme Medical Examiner for life. He was born in Chicago, Ill., in 1902, attended and was graduated from St. Michael's Slovak Parrish school, then ·attended St. Procopius Academy and College (19151921) in Lisle, Ill. The next two years he spent at De Paul University in Chicago and received his Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry. From 1923-1927 he attended Loyola University (now Stritch School of Medicine of Loyola University) in Chicago and in 1928 received his Doctor of Medicine degree. He then spent 1½ years interning at Cook County Hospital in Chicago and began his private practise of medicine on December 31, 1928. Some eight month later he was invited to join the faculty of the Loyola University School of Medicine and became instructor in clinical neurology for the junior students in their third year of medical school. He kept this post for a number of years, but later resigned because of his increasing medical practise and other civic and political commitments. He was twice president of the Slovak League of America and is now Honorary Supreme President. At one time he served as secretary of the Supreme Court of the Nat. Slovak Society and for the last number of years is the President of the Literary Committee of that organization. In 1938 he led a delegation of the Slovak League of America to Slovakia, CzechoSlovakia and Poland on the the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact, in an effort to convince or compel the Czecho Slovak government to recognize the stipulations of that Pact to yield to demands of the Slovak people for complete equality in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Starting with the April 13, 1927 issue, he was editor of the "Jaro", a monthly supplement of <the "Jednota" for a number of years. The "Jaro" was published for the benefit of the Junior Branch and Sokols of the First Catholic Slovak Union. For 35 years Dr. Hletko was c-0ntributing editor of the 'Osadne Hlasy' (Slovak Parish News) in Chicago, writing weekly editorials regularly and also writing such columns of comment and criticism as the 'Iskry' (Sparks) by 'Nitran', 'Paberky' (Gleamings) and others. For some 39 years he is a director and president of the 'Gage Park Savings and Loan Association' in Chicago, a $22,000,000.00 plus fi. nancial institullion. Dr. Hletko is now semi-retired but maintains his interest in this savings-loan association, in the Slovak Catholic Sokol (he is a member of the all-important Executive Committee), in the Slovak League of America and in all matters Slovak and civic. � 32 SLOVAKIA The Slovaks of Chicago DR. PETER P. HLETKO The first Slovaks in Chicago While the records are vague, according to some pub lic and official records it would seem that probably the first Slovak who came to Chicago was one G. Michalovic alias Mihal6cy (a Magyar spelling). He took active part in the Civil War. He joined the forces of Abraham Lincoln and supposedly organized an artillery battalion consisting of various Slavic nationalities. He was cited by President Lincoln, who wrote Michalovic a personal letter, thanking him for his services. Around 1872 another Slovak named Dorocak same to Chicago from County Spis in Slovakia. He was followed by Daniel Schustek, whose name was well known in the life of the early Chicago Slovaks. Then more Slovaks came and by 1892 there were some 300 in Chicago. That is not a very big number but already then they began to organize into a fraternal system. In that year-two years after the National Slovak Society was organized in Pennsylvania, the Slovaks in Chicago organized an assembly (Odbor 65) of the N. S.S., a non-denominational society. After the First Catholic Slovak Union ( the Jednota) was founded in Cleveland, the Chicago Catholic Slovaks organized St. Stephen's Society as Branch 224 of the FCSU. The third society organized was the "First Slovak Sokol," an independent and nondenominational gymnastic society. The group no longer exists. In 1893 these Slovak fraternal groups participated in the parade arranged by the committee of the Columbian Exposition held in Chicago. They paraded under the Slovak banner, and they had some difficulty in obtaining a Slovak flag. They had one made. The early Slovaks in Chicago By 1900 the Slovaks kept coming from the old country, from all parts of Slovakia. It is well-nigh impossible to find records about all of them but at least the following �SLOVAKIA 33 are definitely known to have been here between 1890 and 1900. The year of their arrival is in parentheses: · Andrej Adamcik (1894), Jan Balek (1894), J . Bavlsik, Jan Belcik (1893), Jan Bugajsky (1898), Jan Canik (1894) , Jan Druska, Jozef Gabaj 1886), Karol Grohovsky (1893), Andrej Gura (1899) ), Anton Gura (1899), Karol Gura (1889), stefan Gura (1889), Jan Haluska, Martin Hletko (father of Dr. Peter P. Hletko and Dr. S. J . Hletko 1899) , Jan Horvat (1899), Jan Ivorik, Imrich Jezisik (1877), Jozef Juranka (1894), Jan Keblusek (1890), Klinovsky (1888) , Florian Kojis (1898), Mikulas Krajci (1889), Peter Krajci (1889), Samuel Krc (1896), Pavel Kvorka (1890), Frantisek Kubis (1898), Pavel Kubis (1888), Frantisek Kuna (1899), Pavel Kurucar, Stulik (1892), Michal Laca (1892), Jan Majer (1893), Jozef Mally (1891), Karol Mally (1893 ), Jan Matejicko (1898), stefan Meliska (1898), Andrej Micuda (1899), Gustav Micuda (1899), Jozef Novota (1898), Jan Orendac (1899), Samuel Papanek (1890), Jan Paur 0893), Jan Pavelcik (1886), Pavel Pavelcik (1893), Jozef Pircoft (1889), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan slahor (1891), Imrich Podkrivacky, Jan Podmajersky (1896), Juraj Pucik (1884), Daniel Samuel (1898), Andrej Sedory (1888), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan Schustek, Jan slahor (1891), Jan Sokolik, Andrej Sokolik, Jan Svehla, Adam Trubacek (1890), Juraj Vatral, Jozef Zahumensky (1897), Adam Ziska, Frantisek Ziska and Jozef Ziska, Stefan Kovac (1897), Martin Dujmovic (1897). Others known to be here prior to 1900 were: M. Vitko, (father of the late Rev. Joseph Vitko, who died in Omaha. Nebraska). J. Madeja, John Lipovsky, J. Hajzus, J. L'e hocky, J. Jurik, John Micus, Kollarik, candar, Ducaj, Podhorsky, Pelikan and others. Because the Slovaks are a religious people, whether they are Catholic or Lutheran, they began attending their respective church services in the churches existing here already. But they were not satisfied with Latin or English services. They yearned for their own. Many of them attended St. Procopius Church, a Czech church at 18th and Allport St. Many of the Slovak Catholics settled on the West side in the vicinity of De Keven St., St. Wenceslaus parish ( site of Mrs. Oleary's barn where the cow kicked over a lantern and started the great Chicago fire of 1871. A humorous story has it that the cow was owned �34 SLOVAKIA by a Czech women, Mrs. Uhlir, but because the newspaper reporters could not spell or pronounce "Uhlir", it became Mrs. O'Leary, because that seemed close enough.) Another contigent gravitated south and west where they found the first Catholic Slovak church in Chicago, St. Michael's, at 48th and Winchester. Originally land was purchased for a church on Archer Ave., but this was given up. Church services began to be held every Sunday in a hall back of a tavern at 49th St. and Paulina St. Father Bronkala was the first pastor. A church was built at 48th and Winchester with two rooms in 1900. Sisters Walburga and Paulina, both of the Czech Benedictine convent in Lisle, Ill., and both being Slovaks, were the first two teachers in the school. The next pastor was Rev. S. Pavolcik, but when financial troubles arose, the Bohemian Benedictine Fathers in Lisle, Ill., were appointed in charge of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB., became the pastor and he did much to build the parish and put it on solid foundation . He left about 1911 and was followed by Rev. Thomas Vopatek, OSB., and eventually by Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., the so-called "first Slovak Benedictine in America", who later organized the Slovak Benedictine Fathers in Cleveland, Ohio. The Slovaks in Chicago have 8 Slovak Catholic parishes St. Michael's at 48th and Darnen Avenue_ A new combination church and school building was built in 1907. A few years later another school building was erected to accomodate a total of some 1,200 school children. SL Michael's parish at one time was the largest Slovak Catholic parish in America. Recently the original old church was taken down and a fine new social center was erected. Rev. Armand Gress, OSB., pastor, Rev_ L. Hudak, OSB. , and Rev. Maruskin, OSB., asistants. The parish has a large convent and a large rectory. After Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSR left for Cleveland, the late Rev. Charles Florek, OSB., was pastor for many years and his assistant for 22 years was the Rev. Ambrose Ondrak, OSB., who later became abbot of the Bohemian Benedictine Abbey in Lisle, Ill., and had to leave St. Michael's to assume his new duties as abbot. �SLOVAKIA 35 Assumption of the B. V. M. at 24th St. and California. Organized in 1903, at about the same time as St. Joseph's parish was being organized. The parish has a combination church and school building, a Sisters' convent, a rectory and an assembly hall under the church, besides several meeting halls. Msgr. Chvojka, pastor emeritus, Rev. J . Spitkovsky, acting pastor. St. Joseph's parish. Organized in 1904. Has a combination church and school building on 17th Pl., near Halsted St. Recently a new school building was built, with a large auditorium and bowling alleys in the basement. The area is becoming a changing neighborhood in recent years and the Slovak parishioners are leaving the locality and moving to newer neighborhoods. For that reason the parish is on the decline. The new school has been turned over to combined classes from a neighboring Lithuanian parish and the former rectory has been loaned to the Lithuanian sisters after the Slovak sisters from the Bohemian Order of St. Benedict in Lisle, Ill., gave up the school. The administrator of the parish, Rev. Slosarcik, lives at the nearby Lithuanian rectory. Msgr. John Rondzik, now retired, has been pastor for many years. The latest report is that parish will cease to exist. Holy Rosary parish at 108th and Perry Sts. Organized in 1907. The parish built a new church in recent years . A school, convent and rectory complete the properties of the parish. Rev. Andrew Valcicak is pastor, Rev. J . Dilla is assistant. The parish is located in the Pullman-Roseland area. St. John the Baptist. Organized in 1909 at 91st and So. Burley Ave., in the South Chicago district. The parish purchased an existing church in 1910. The property consists of this original church, with a hall in the basement and a rectory adjoining. The parish has no school. This parish has never prospered too much and is in a declining neighborhood but Rev. J. Petrik, the present pastor, has given the parish a big lift. Sacred Heart parish. Organized in 1910. At Huron and Oakley Blvd. A combination church and school building and a new rectory adjacent. For years, Rev. Victor Blahunka, who became the first Slovak Monsignor in America, was pastor. The present pastor is Rev. Francis Kosjak. �36 SLOVAKIA SS. Cyril and Methodius parish. At Walton St. and Kildare Ave. Organized January 3, 1914. Rev. Michael Bajor, pastor of the Sacred Heart parish, was the one who promoted the idea of organizing this parish. Rev. Victor Blahunka became the Slovak pastor on March 2, 1915. The parish used the hall of the Guardian Angels parish at Avers and Iowa Sts. as a temporary church. Other pastors who followed were Rev. Michael Bue, Rev. John Fedor and now Rev. A. Chisek. The church is a combination school and church building. St. Simon parish. This is the youngest Slovak parish. Organized October 1, 1926 at 52nd and So. California Ave., after many years of effort. Rev. E. Sendek was the first pastor. The parish has a combination school and church building, a rectory, a sisters' convent and recently an additional new school building. Rev. Joseph Job, a good Slovak nationalist, was pastor for many years, until his death there. He followed Rev. Sendek, who was transferred to St. Paul's parish in Chicago Heights, Ill. a suburb of Chicago. Father Job was popular and successful as a pastor of St. Simon's. He left a portion of his estate to the Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., the Slovak League and the St. Adalbert Society of Slovakia. The present pastor is Rev. D. Romancik and Rev. Richard skriba is assistant. Slovak Protestant Churches in Chicago Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church is the oldest Lutheran Slovak congregation. It was founded in 1893 and incorporated in 1897. The original church was in the vicinity of Noble St., and Chicago Ave. In time the old neighborhood began declining and the parishioners moved to Mayfair and Jefferson Park so that an auxiliary church was built in Mayfair in 1924. But in 1948 the congregation built a large, modern new church on the north side on Foster and Lacrosse Sts., with an outlay of some $400,000. SS. Peter and Paul Lutheran Church. Originally located on 19th St., near Halsted St. on the West Side. Organized in October 1901. With the neighborhood also undergoing changes for the worst, the congregation moved to Riverside into a new church about 10 years ago. Just recently the congregation celebrated 10 years of this moving to Riverside in appropriate church services assisted by some �SLOVAKIA 37 of the local Catholic clergy, in a real spirit of ecumenism. Rev. Kalny is pastor. Rev. John Body was pastor of the church when it was on the West Side. He is now retired in California. Zion Slovak Lutheran Church organized in 1909 at Huron St. and Bickerdike. The Bethlehem church merged with the Zion church in about 1926. Later they bought their present church at Iowa St. and Springfield Avenue. Slovak Evangelical Lutheran Cl?,urch of Dr. Martin Luther. Its first permanent church was at 50th and Honore Sts. from April 1918 to December 1947. In 1949 a new church was built at 54th and Francisco Ave. At one time Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., was pastor, who later became involved in "Czecho-Slovak" politics and then transferred to Holy Trinity. The present pastor, after Rev. Roh, is Rev. Figuly. The son of the original pastor, Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., who is Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan also, is a respected teacher of the history of religion at Yale University. He wrote the "Riddle of Catholicism" which was well received in Catholic circles, and he is a weekly contributor to the Catholic News Register. Slovak Baptist New Covenant Church. The beginings of the Slovak Baptists date back to 1908 when the first Slovak woman, Miss Catherine Nikodem, later Hudacek, became a Baptist by being baptized by immersion. She had been influenced by Vaclav Hlada, a Czech preacher from the Bohemian Baptist Emmanuel congregation. During some of his visits to the homes in the neighborhood he visited the Nikodems and left some books written by the Slovak authoress, Kristina Roy. Young Miss Catherine Nikodem began reading these books and she eventually received the Lord and accepted his truths. The early services were held in the Nikodem home and the newly accepted members belonged to the Czech congregation. In 1915 the Slovak Baptists, numbering 64, met to organize an independent organization of Slovak Baptists. Out of respect to the Czech mother church they accepted the name Emmanuel Slovak Baptist church. Public services were held regularly until 1925 in a synagogue at 1410 W. Augusta Blvd., and from 1925 to 1930 at 2015 W . Augusta Blvd. In 1930 they dedicated a new church at 5857-59 W. Giddings, corner of Marmora Ave. Up to the year 1929 �38 SLOVAKIA half of the congregation lived on the south side. In that year they became independent and assumed the name Czechoslovak Baptist Church, but later changed it to Trinity Church. Their church was at 5845 So. Rockwell St. The new name, Covenant, was accepted in 1947. The Slovak Baptist church is entirely independent from 1944. Up to that time it was helped and the pastor's salary financed by American Baptists. Some of the names that have appeared in the list of officers over the years include Michal Stancik, Jan Dinga, Pavel Kubik, Michal Placko, Michal Frano, Pavel Hanko and Jan Firak. The Greek-Catholics There are any number of Greek-Catholic churches in Chicago, but the Slovaks belong principally to two of them-St. Mary's , 49th and So. Seeley, is one. The members of this parish are all Slovaks of the Byzantine Eastern Rit~, headed by and directly connected with the Holy See, the Roman Catholic Church. The parish has a large church, a school, a rectory and a Sister's Convent. Rev. J. Kurty is pastor. SS. Peter and Paul Church at 53rd and So. Western is a split-off of St. Mary's parish, and the split-off was so complete that they broke ties with Rome, and joined the Greek-Russian Orthodox Church. Rev. Shimkoff is pastor and his son has been his assistent. Like many of the parishioners of St. Mary's, many in the SS. Peter and Paul Church mistakenly call themselves "Russians," "Sub-Carpatian Russians," "Greek Catholics," "Rusins," "Rusnaks" etc. Many belligerently deny that they are Slovaks. It's a case of faulty bringing up and lack of proper information or education along these lines . Yet, the members of both of these parishes are Slovaksfrom the Spis, saris and Zemplin counties in Slovakia. They are Slovaks who profess the Byzantine Rite, or the Orthodox Rite. Neither of these rites makes them "Russians" or anything else but Slovaks, no more than the Lutheran faith makes our Slovak Lutherans Germans or anything but Slovaks. These Lutherans are Slovaks whn profess the Lutheran faith, and they are Slovaks. The "Rusnaks" are Slovaks, who profess the Byzantine rite or Orthodox rite. There are other ethnic groups who profess �SLOVAKIA 39 these rites or faiths, like the Magyars, but their faith does not change them from Magyars to "Rusnaks," "Russians" or anything else but Magyars. The "Rusnaks" should call a spade and admit that ethnically they are Slovaks. Societies and Lodges Although there is a noticable decline in society and lodge activity in Chicago in the last 25 years, in the main it has remained stable. A few lodges, and even whole societies merged (Tatran Slovak Union, based in Chicago merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol, Slovak Evangelical Society, also based in Chicago, merged with The Slovak Lutheran Union now called United Lutheran) . Others, like the "Veniec Katolickych Slovakov (Wreath of Catholic Slovaks) just plainly liquidated and stopped existing. But in the main, the lodges have remained in existence. In 1930, at the height of our lodge activity, the following Societies were represented by their lodges as follows: First Catholic Slovak Union - 26 assemblies; Total 6,811 members. First Catholic Slovak Ladies' Union - 19 lodges; Total 10,549 members. Slovak Catholic Sokol - 5 male assemblies and 4 female Wreaths; Total 2,906 members. Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 4 local assemblies ; 24 7 members. Ladies Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 3 branches ; 704 members. National Slovak Society - 11 assemblies; 2,726 members. Tatran Slovak Union - 15 of its 27 assemblies were in Chicago; The Society merged with S. G. U.S. Catholic Order of Foresters - 9 Slovak Courts; Catholic Order of Ladies Foresters- 4 Slovak Courts; First Slovak Wreath of Free Eagle - 3 groups (based in Bridgeport, Conn.); Western Slovak Union - 2 assemblies; Independent Society of St. Martin - 1 assembly; Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol - 5 assemblies; 2,82b members. �40 SLOVAKIA Club " Furdek" Club "Furdek" was a social and educational Club designed to unite the intelligentia of the Chicago Catholic Slovaks. Started in 1930 by Dr. Peter P. Hletko, it lasted some 25 years, then went into abeyance. During its existence it exerted much good influence on the life of the Chicago Slovaks and Slovaks in America, as well. All the local Catholic Slovak priests were members, so were many of the lawyers, physicians and other professional people and the formal annual installation dinners were an outstanding feature of the social season. Many college students and professional people were thus given an opportunity to meet and become mutually acquainted. Savings and Loan Associations One of the more profitable businesses of industries in which some of our Chicago Slovaks are engaged is the savings and loan business. The Slovaks, next to the Czechs, were the earliest entrants into this business. No other nationality ·was in that business any earlier. However, none of our savings and loan institutions controlled and managed by Slovaks ever rose to such gigantic multimillion dollar institutions as have some of those controlled b y other ethnic groups. They came into this business much later but have passed up Slovak people and they have built financial giants. But the Slovak S & L's are doing very, very well. Their accounts are insured by the FSLIC to S15,000 and practically all of them pay 4}'1 % on regular passbook accounts and more on certificate deposits. How early our Slovaks were in the savings and loan business in Chicago may be seen from the history of the First Slovak S & L in Chicago - the " Dunaj" (Danube). It was organized on April 1, 1907 in St. Michael's parish on the south side of the city - some 7 years after the founding of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB. , a Czech, friendly to the Slovak people, was then pastor and it was he who saw the need for a savings and loan association for his parishioners. His theory was that if the association helped his parishioners to buy and acquire homes in the vicinity of the church, the parishioners would be apt to stay in the neighborhood longer, around �SLOVAKIA 41 the church, and they would not run off to other areas and to other parishes and churches. This would help keep the parish stable and intact, it would thus help the parish and it would also help the parishioners to home ownership. Father Kvitek called a few parishioners for consultation, they then called a meeting and founded the "Dunaj" S & L Assoc. The men present at the meeting and elected as members of the first board of directors were: Albert Vincek, President; John Dluhy, a local retail butcher shop owner, Treasurer; Vaclav Pesicka, a fine Czech gentleman and a banker, Secretary; Anton Charvat, Thomas Griglak ( then organist and choir director at St. Michael's ), Martin Skorupa (a builder ), Joseph Adam, a local tavern owner, and Joseph Tomala (real estate and insurance broker ) , as directors. Soon after its founding, the parishioners and others in the locality applied for membership in the "Dunaj " in big numbers. The association helped many to save their money and it helped many others to home ownership. "Dunaj" kept graving rapidly every year and in a short span of a few years it was the second largest saving and loan association in Chicago, and the largest Slovak association in all America, just as St. Michael's parish became the largest Slovak parish in America at that time. In 1931 the association opened its 99th series and its directors at that time were ( just to get their names on paper ) : Joseph Trubiroha, Paul Havlicek, John Dluhy, Charles Tupy, Andrew Valachovic, Matthew Vadovsky, Peter Hello, A. B. Suhany, John M. Nemec. For years the association held weekly meetings on Tuesday evening in the basement of the old church, until the time of an attempted hold-up, which, happily, was unsuccessful. But the management of the "Dunaj" decided to transfer it into Depositors State Bank, of which Vaclav Pesicka was then president. But "Dunaj " stopped prospering in the bank. It was merely vegetating. Finally, John M. Nemec, an employee of the bank managed to extricate the association from the bank and move it closer to the church, its original location. He housed it in his newly set up insurance and real estate office and he became "Dunaj 's" secretary. But even this did not help and did not save the association from demise. Pressure of the Great Depression brought about eventual liquidation and the "Dunaj," �42 SLOVAKIA the daddy of them all, became a happy and revered memory. "Gage Park S & L. Assn. " was organized in February 1921 by Joseph Tomala, who became secretary. Some of the names of officers and directors associated with "Gage Park" in the early years were: Joseph L. Reppa, Michael Cerny (a business man), John Slovinec (an architect), John Massura and Joseph Massura (mason-build ers), Fr. steffek, sanitation, John Bomba, Jr. (a timekeeper), Vincent 0. snep, Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Joseph Hubalik (insurance agency); John Bomba and others. The first office of the association was at 2650 West 51st Street. It moved to its present location in 1938. The association is now in its 48th year and has assets over 22 million dollars. It pays the highest permissible dividend rate. It maintains a nice office at 2740 W. 55th St. Its present officers and directors are: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, President; Wendell Tylka, Vice-Presiden t; Michael S. Rehak, Secretary-Tre asurer; John Keblusek, Joseph Hubalik, Joseph Karas and George Galos are the other directors. All the officers and directors are Slovaks. Office hours are 5 days per week, Tuesday and Friday evenings and till noon on Saturday. The " Darnen S & L. Assn." is another early entrant. It was organized in September and held its first meeting on October 4, 1916. John Gurka, a tavern-owner and later a soft drink manufacture r and distributor, was its first moving spirit, and the weekly meetings were held in the hall to the rear of Gurka's Tavern at 45th and S. Fairfield. It was originally organized under the name "Slovenska Wlast'" (Slovak Fatherland). When A. B. Tabola became secretary after a few years, he legally changed the name to the correct Slovak spelling, "Slovenska Vlast' ," since the Slovak language has no consonant like "w" in its alphabet. In 1922 the association moved its headquarters into St. Michael's parish hall where it continued for several years, until A. B. Tabola again legally changed the name to "Darnen" after the street on which his real estate office was located and he moved the association there, later to 51st St., just west of Darnen Ave. Assets are $13,099,366.00. Other names connected with this successful association: John M. Kubina (deceased, an undertaker for 50 years, long time President), V. Dobias, Stefan Pastyak, �SLOVAKIA 43 Thadeus Macejak, Joseph Kempiak, all now deceased. Its present officers are: Mary Tabola-Poronsky, President; Joseph Judickas, Vice-President; Dr. John Poronsky, Secretary-Treasurer; Frank Bohula, Michal Mladucky and Frank Kacmarcik, directors. The association is housed in a beautiful new office at 51st and Darnen Avenue. All officers and directors except one are Slovaks. " National Security" was also an early entry. Organized in 1907 as "Choe" S & L. Assn. For many years it was the "baby" of the late Steve s kriba, Sr., on the west side of Chicago. Later it was moved from S . California Avenue to 26th and Troy St., and eventually to its own beautiful building at 6859 W. Archer Ave. Its assets are over $121/~ million. Office hours are 5 days a week, closed on Wednesday. Its officers and directors are practically all Slovaks: William skriba, President; Andrew Babka, 1st Vice-President, Joseph Demko, Secretary-Treasurer, and Thomas Chuhak, Ernest Cibira, John Skultety and Edward Skriba, directors . Security Federal, organized in 1907. Address: 1209 Milwaukee Ave. Total assets: $30,042, 279. 83 . Officers are: Sam s lahor, President; John Janae, Vice-President; Ivan Kovac, Executive Vice-President; Elizabeth Andrisek, Assistant Secretary. Other directors are: Joseph Zilka, Joseph s andrik and William Machacek. " American Home" S & L. Assn. - 3924 W. North Ave. Organized in 1910. Assets $3,017,391.00. All of its officers and directors are Slovaks: John Bilka, President; Albert Jancovic, Executive Secretary; John Homola, Vice-President; Joseph Peterka, Treasurer. Other directors are : Edward Jancovic and Joseph Flaska. " Economy" S & L . Assn. is the latest entry. It was organized by Attorney Frank Matavovsky in 1949. It owns its very nice office building at 2650 W. 51st St., the original home site of Gage Park S & L. Assn. Assets: $11,921 ,865.00. Officers: Frank Matovsky, President; Marie Matovsky (Frank's wife ) is Secretary-Treasurer. Anthony Matavosky (a brother ) is Vice-President, George skodon, comptroller. Other directors : Michael Rusnak, Dr. Wendel Kapustiak ( an eye specialist ) . All the officers and two directors are Slovak. Two additional directors are : D. Varraveto and 0. J. VanMale. �44 SLOVAKIA " Andrej Hlinka" S & L. Assn., named after the national hero and political leader in Slovakia, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, P.A., existed for some 35 years at 2234 W. Chicago Ave. The association was managed by Vencel Roth ands. Velba. Eventually the association was taken over by Oran Mensik and its name changed to City Savings. After some additional 15 years, the supervisory authorities stepped in and began liquidating the institution. Oran Mensik had not applied for insurance of accounts by the FSLIC. " Hemlock" Federal S & L . Assn., while not a typically Slovak institution as far as the make-up of its board of directors, is managed and supervised by a Slovak, Joseph P. Gavron, its President. Its assets are: $40,601 ,000.00. Founded in 1904 by Czechs. Its office is at 5140 South Ashland Avenue. " Talman Federal," founded in 1922 by Ben F. Bohac and other Czechs on West 51st St., near Talman Avenue . This association is one of the giants in the industry. Its assets : £476,209,255.01. Its Assistant Secretary is Joseph Seliga, Slovak. His brother, Emil, was president of the association for a number of years, but later resigned and went to California. The president of "Talman" is Bernard A. Polek, the son-in-law of Ben F . Bohac. Present address: 55th and So. Kedzie Avenue. Other Slovaks in savings-loan work are: Attorney John Dluhy - in the legal department of "Home Federal S & L., a $362,000,000.00 institution; Mr. Dluhy was retired recently. J . Batis of Joliet, Ill., with Olympic Federal in Berwyn, Ill., and Miss Irene Kocur, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer of "American S & L." on West 47th Street. Dr. Joseph Mitric is a director in Midlothian S & L. Assn. In the past, two Slovak Savings-Loan associations existed on the West Side-' 'Bratstvo" and" Ferdis Juriga". Steve Balek was the secretary of "Bratstvo" but when the depression hit the country, "Bratstvo" went into voluntary liquidation and paid all its depositors in full and ceased to exist. "Ferdis Juriga" began having much the same diffi. culties at that time and it merged with another association, the "Oak", and passed out of Slovak control, despite the fact that a few of the Slovak directors were retained for a while. In that way "Ferdis Juriga" ceased to exist also. �SLOVAKIA 45 Joseph Pokora had been the moving spirit during its existence. "stefdnikova Dvorana" (stefdnik's Court) Already on December 13, 1899 the Chicago Slovaks held a meeting to organize a "Slovensky Dom" (Slovak Home), a social center, where they could meet, hold lodge meetings and other social affairs. By activity they raised money and soon bought a building on Canalport Street, near Halsted St. There they continued until 1924. This original venture was started by 4 assemblies of the National Slovak Society. Later they renamed the Home as "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" (National Slovak Court). In the meantime, on October 26, 1921, representatives of Assembly 39 Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol met with representatives of the "Slovenska Beseda" for the purpose of discussing the possibilities of erecting a "stefanik's Court", named after the big Slovak hero, Gen. Milan R . Stefanik, a French general, an astronomer and one of the organizers of Czecho-Slovakia. With again much activity, this group raised money by various endeavors and ultimately built the Court at 24th and S. Pulaski. On January 8, 1925, the original "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" merged with M. R. Stefanik Dvorana. The Stefanik Dvorana contains a large auditorium, meeting halls a dining hall, bar-room, etc. The building houses a 5,000 volume Slovak library, catalogued according to the A. L.A. classification system, which was donated to the Chicago Slovaks by the "Matica Slovenska" (Slovak Institute of Slovakia) and accepted in their behalf by the chairman of the welcoming Chicago committee, Dr. P. P. Hletko. The library, as well as the "Dvorana" itself were a bee-hive of activity for many years. But with balls and dances becoming more scarce in our Slovak community, no stage plays being put on, various lectures or celebrations and banquets also being less profitable whatwith radio, television and motor cars taking over, stefanik's Court is falling into disuse. Many of our lodges, as well as some individuals hold shares in this venture. Radio hours The late Vincent Kalnik was the originator of "Slovak Hours" in Chicago when he established one on WHFC in �46 SLOVAKIA the early 30's. Then others followed like Eden Radie, Macharek, ·Lutheran religious hours, the broadcast of the pro-labor group, the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol broadcast hour, etc. At present Rudolf Reis-Cerven conducts a full hour of Slovak music, songs, news and entertainment every Sunday morning 9-10 A. M. from station WXRT-FM - 93.1 kc. Chicago Slovaks have two Charitable organizations The Catholic group has the Katolicka Slovenska Dobrocinna Spolocnost' ( Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. ) which has been conducting the Catholic Slovak Days for over 33 years. The proceeds accrue to the Charitable Assn., originally organized to conduct charity among the poor of the community, but with the decline of poverty, money that accumulated has been turned over by the Charitable Assn. to the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill. The Association turned over some $65,000.00 for the purchase of the original building for the Convent. Additional contributions have also been made. The Association at one time owned a picnic grove with necessary building and accomodations, but the Argome National (Atomic) Laboratory took over the site. With the proceeds, the Association purchased "McDermott's Oaks Grove" on 119th and Archer Ave. The grove was improved and the buildings renovated and much activity ensued. But with changing times, picnics are no longer being held, the venture is less and less profitable and the Charitable Assn. is considering the selling of the grove. Rev. Richard skriba is president. The other group of Chicago Slovaks have their "Slovenska Americka Dobrocinna Spolocnost"' (The Slovak American Charitable Assn.), a non-denominational association. They too have been doing charity, but lately they are accumulating funds for construction of an Old Peoples' Home. They have purchased a site for the future home on North Ave., in Glen Ellyn, Ill., some 15 miles west of Chicago. There is still another group, the Slovak Catholic Old Peoples Home (Katolicko-Slovensky Starobinec) which is raising funds towards building or purchasing a home for our Senior citizens. This group has about $100,000.00 �SLOVAKIA 47 available for this purpose. Various moves are under consideration, even the possibility of the Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. and this Old Peoples Home group merging into one joint organization. Their pooled assets might give the proposed Old Peoples' Home a very good and promising start. Both groups are actually composed of the same and identical people and there is very little use to keep the two groups apart. Mrs. Julia Krajcovic, who originated the Slovak Catholic Charitable Assn., was its President for years, then organized the Starobinec group and was its President for years. After her recent death Dr. Peter P. Hletko was drafted as President. Permanent Slovak Theatre in Chicago Slovak enthusiasts for the theatre have fostered the "Americke Slovenske Narodne Divadlo" (The American National Theater) for very many years. It was organized in 1919. It has produced some 250 Slovak stage plays. Some of those active in this undertaking over the years were: Jesensky, Ondrejkovic, the Lesaks, the Matises, stevkova, Lamos, Matuskova, Letrich, Tibensky and many others. Most of their plays were produced at their "home" - the stage of the OSPS, hall at 18th and May Sts. With changing times and the loss of national consciousness in the youth, and the departure of the older folks, the need for a permanent Slovak theater died out. Slovak Days The so-called "National Slovak Days", conducted by a non-de.--,ominational group and back-boned by the Slovak American .'fational Charitable Assn., these "Days" are the older. But in 1931, the Slovak Catholics put on their First Catholic Slovak Day in Pilsen Park, 26th and Albany on October 11, 1931, which turned out to be a huge moral and financial success. The proceeds at that time, in times of the depression, were $5,100.00 in clear money. These "Days" have been held every year since then, and while some of them in subsequent years were even more successful than the first one, their attraction is also losing out. They have been a source of much money for the various causes of the Chicago Slovaks and the Slovaks of the USA. The "National Days" have been keeping up better �48 SLOVAK.IA in the last several years than the "Catholic Slovak Days" in Chicago. Slovak Catholic Cemetery In the early years, Slovak Catholics were being buried in Resurrection Cemetery, Justice, Ill. (a cemetery serving Czech, Polish and Slovak people ) , and in St. Adalbert's Cemetery, Niles, Ill., which also served the three nationalities. Those on the very far South Side used their local cemeteries there. On May 30, 1923, the Slovak Cemetery of Seven Dolors was dedicated in Hillside, Ill. It was adjacent to the newly forming diocesan Queen of Heaven cemetery but with the expansion of both cemeteries, Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery will soon be a part of Queen of Heaven. Msgr. V. Blahunka was the chief moving spirit in organizing the Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery. Across the road (Roosevelt Rd.) from our Slovak Cemetery is the huge diocesan Mt. Carmel Cemetery. Slovak A. A. For many years, the Slovaks maintained the "Mudron Athletic Club" (Mudron AC.) on the West Side. They participated in many sports, but also in social activities . Years later they re-organized and formed the "Slovak A. A." (Slovak Athletic Assn.) . The main activity of this club is soccer. They have produced very good, championship teams, and they participated in a soccer league which comprises teams of many ethnic groups- the Poles, the Germans, the Sweedes and others. The club maintains a clubhouse at 27th St. and So. Hamlin for social purposes. The public is invited to their club rooms. Slovak Newspapers in Chi cago Over the years many Slovak newspapers were founded and published in Chicago. Some had a very short existence, others lasted a long time. Prior to 1900 there was actually no need for a Slovak newspaper, and one could hardly have succeeded since the number of Slovaks here at that time was insufficient to support a newspaper. The earliest attempt to publish one was in 1902 by one Chudatsik, a controversial character because he had strong leanings towards the Magyars, whom the Slovaks �SLOVAKIA 49 despised because it was the Hungarian government under which the Slovaks have suffered a thousand years, being denied all rights and privileges of a nation, which forced many Slovaks to emigrate to this country in quest of a little liberty, a piece of bread and pursuit of happiness. Chudatsik with his pro-Magyar proclivities was not favored very much by the Slovaks and for that reason his newspaper, the "Katolicke N oviny" ( Catholic Slovak News), and the half dozen other papers which he founded under various names in subsequent years, never found wide acceptance. He began publishing his "Katolicke Slovenske Noviny" on the South Side in the vicinity of 46th and So. Marshfield Ave. The paper was a weekly. Later he founded dailies, publishing some two or even three simultaneously, with the news contents identical in all of them, only the advertizing being different from one paper to the other, thus being a source of revenue. At times some of these newspapers had no circulation and no readers. All his newspapers ceased publication in about 1926. The last known address was 2117 W. Grand Avenue. "Nove Casy" (New Times) was established at 1702 So. Halsted St. in 1918, after the establishment of CzechoSlovakia, with which the Catholic Slovak People's party (Hlinka's autonomist party), and most of the Catholic Slovaks became disenchanted. The editor was Stephen Huska. Ceased publication in 1942 because the Catholic Slovaks in Chicago refused to support the paper and to subscribe for it. "Narodny Slovensky Dennik" (National Slovak Daily), established in 1913 on Milwaukee Ave., was a pretty serious attempt to establish a good daily in Chicago. Some of its editors were S . Huska, Michael Laucik, then Gustav Marsal Petrovsky, John Feriencik and others. It lasted only four years and ceased in 191 7. "Katolicky Slovak" (Catholic Slovak) was a weekly, established in 1921 by V. Tylka and Louis Kycko at 17th and So. Union Ave. It lasted a few years and was eventually converted into a daily, the " Chicagsky Dennik" ( Chicago Daily) and moved to St. Michael's parish, at 48th and So. Winchester Ave. It lasted only one year, 1921-22, almost to the day, and failed because the new owner, �50 SLOVAKIA Rudolph Pollak, a real estate operator and insurance broker, got himself into a tight financial squeeze in his own private business and the revenue from the daily was not sufficient as yet to bail him out of his own troubles. Dr. Peter P. Hletko, then a college student, was the editor, later M. Bozek, Florian Tylka and Rudolph Pollak himself served as assistant editors. The daily was Catholic in its ideologies. After the "Chicagsky Dennik" ceased publication the Chicago Catholic Slovaks felt a big void. They had become accustomed to the services of the "Katolicky Slovak" and the "Chicagsky Dennik" and now felt they must again have a newspaper. The Tylka Brothers (Florian and Wendel), operators of a tiny printing shop at 830 W. 18th started publishing the weekly "Osadne Hlasy" (Slovak Parish News) amid much enthusiasm among the Chicago Slovaks, and with the moral support of Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., pastor at St. Michael's (he is the one who suggested the name "Osadne Hlasy", Parish News). But shortly after the start, Rev. Gregory left for Cleveland, Ohio, to begin his work of organizing the Slovak Benedictine monastery there as its first prior. "Osadne Hlasy" continued and prospered for many years, 36 to be exact, from 1928 to April 1963. Dr. Peter P. Hletko became contributing editor in 1928 and lasted to the end. Florian Tylka was the editor, and when he died, Vendel Tylka assumed ownership and editorship. This was undoubtedly the most successful venture in the newspaper publishing business that the Chicago Slovaks ever had. The paper, through the contacts of Dr. Hletko became an influential force in the life of the Slovaks all over America, not only in Chicago. It should never have ceased publication. Another void followed the demise of "Osadne Hlasy" in the life of the Chicago Slovaks. The Slovak Catholic Charitable Association sensing the lack of contact among the Chicago Slovak Catholics, decided to help in a small way, and it established and promised to subsidize a small monthly news-pamphl et, the "Nase Hlasy" (Our Voice). It is being published in the Tylka Bros. printery at 2548 W. 63rd St. Much different in its politics from the "Osadne Hlasy," the new paper is totally non-controve rsial and feeble in its editorial program leadership of its readers. �SLOVAKIA 51 Other newspapers and publications which have appeared in Chicago over the many years: "Pravda" (The Truth), a labor weekly, established in 1933. Publishers: Pravda Publishing Co., 1510 W. 18th St. "Rovnost' Ludu" (Peoples' Equality), labor, pro-Socialist, later pro-Communist, established 1926, by the same people and at the same address as "Pravda". "Slovensko-Americky Dennik" (Slovak American Daily ) established 1904 in the Chudatsik newspaper chain on Grand Ave. "Slovensko--Americke Noviny" (Slovak American News), another in that chain. "Slovenske Slovo" (The Slovak Word), weekly, established in 1914. Ceased in 1916. Gustav Marsal Petrovsky editor. Publisher Slovak Printing Co., 19th and So. Halsted Street. "Tatran" (Tatranian), fraternal monthly, was the official organ of the Tatran Slovak Union (a Chicago-based fraternal society), until the organization merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol of New Jersey. John Matlocha was editor since its beginning in 1916 and it was printed in the Mally Press Printing shop, 1702 S. Halsted, where the "Nove easy" had been published for many years. "Viestnik" (a Slovak monthly) established in 1913 for the parishioners of St. Michael's. Publishers: Hurban Bros. Press at 47th St., near Darnen Ave. Editor: Ladislav Hurban. Lasted until 1918 when L. Hurban ceased being organist at St. Michael's. "Ludovy Dennik" (Peoples' Daily), pro-Communist, published by the same people and at the same address as "Rovnost' Ludu," "Pravda," etc. "Nas Svet" (Our World) was published on North Ashland Avenue, as a non-denominational weekly for a number of years. Its owner, editor and publisher was John Dend'ur, now in New York City. "Slovenska Zena" (The Slovak Woman) was a nice, illustrated monthly catering to the needs of Slovak women, but it lasted only a short time. The editor was Mrs. John Dend'ur, and the publisher her husband John. �52 SLOVAKIA Slovak newspapermen Besides the Slovak newspapermen mentioned in connection with the above Slovak newspapers over the years, we now have Slovaks engaged in American newspaper work. One is Ronald Kotulak, science editor of the Chicago Daily Tribune, who frequently writes medical and health articles for the Chicago Tribune. At the annual awards luncheon of the Chicago Heart Association held in June 1968 at the Palmer House, Mr. Kotulak received the meritorious service award. He was cited for his outstanding role in making· the public aware of the progress against heart disease and heart association programs and accomplishments. The guest speakers were Jimmy Durante and Jim Conway, radio and television personality. Mr. Kotulak is well known in Chicago and North-West Indiana for his outstanding articles on the latest advancements in scientific research. His late mother, Mary Kotulak was a long time officer of the 403 Branch of the Catholic Slovak Ladies Association branch in Chicago. John Husar is a sports writer for the Chicago Daily Tribune, covering football games and practically all other sports. He is the son of John 'Firpo' Husar of Chicago, well known for his sports activities at St. Procopius College, Lisle, Ill. and Purdue University. John Jr. also conducts a weekly column in the Tribune called the "Locker Room" on golf topics. Lawyers and Judges The Slovaks of Chicago have produced and developed a fine group of lawyers. Most of them are native born. The first to achieve a position on the judicial bench was the late Michael Tremko as a Judge of the Municipal Court. A present day Judge is Judge John Pavlik, a St. Michael's school graduate, University of Chicago law school graduate, elected in Calumet City, Ill., but sitting in the Chicago courts practically every day. We have had two assistant State's Attorneys, Sam Papanek and Rudolph Janega, who is still serving. Judge Louis Hyde (Hajdusek), son of the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek, is Probate Judge. Among the attorneys, past and present, we find such names as these: Michael S. Rehak, John Hlavacka, Joseph Hlavacka, J. Hlavacka, Jr., Paul Dolenak, Frank Matavov- �SLOVAKIA 53 sky, Edward Kerpec, John Skultety, R. Ptacin, E. Haranta, W. Lesak, John Golosinec, Sam Susina, Steve Svatik, John Svatik, Vlado Hojsa, Ann Kubicek, St. Schostok, John Dluhy, Igor Kovac, Thos Chuhack, Anton Mikula, Edward Fusek, Joseph Steller (former vice-president of the National Slovak Society), now in Milwaukee, Wis., S . Michuda (was also an engineer and Chicago City Bridge engineer ) now out of Chicago, and the late attorneys: Adam Poliak, J. Slifka, Anna Svatik and John Balko. Physicians and Surgeons The Slovaks of Chicago are well represented in the medical field with their proportionate share of good, adequate, dedicated and able physicians, who minister well to the health needs not only of Chicago Slovaks but also Chicagoans of all ethnic groups. The first Slovak comers to this city had to depend on various other group physicians for their medical needs and care. Eventually they developed their own as time went on. One of the first Slovak physicians here was Dr. f>uro Guca on the West Side, an immigrant from the southern part of Slovakia. Soon others-some foreign born, most native born, followed. Thus, the late Dr. Joseph Gazda at 52nd and S. Darnen Ave., now his son, Dr. Mace Gazda. Also, the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek in Town of Lake on W. 47th St., Dr. Raymond on W. 18th St. (his wife is also an M.D.). Dr. Peter P. Hletko (former clinical instructor in clinical neurology at Loyola U. Strich School of Medicine, former Cook Co . Hospital interne); Dr. Paul Hletko, psychiatrist, former assistant Managing Officer of the State Hospital in Manteno, Ill., now chief Medical Officer of the State Welfare Dept.; Dr. Louis Wajay (his wife is also an M.D.), Dr. John Turcan, Dr. Fr. Soltis, Dr. Wendell Kapustiak (specializing in ophthalmology), Dr. Louis Dvonch and Dr. Wm. Dvonch ( these two are brothers of Fred Dvonch, the orchestra leader on Broadway), Dr. John Vyboch (an orthopedic surgeon now in Los Angeles, Cal.,), Dr. Joseph Mitrick, Dr. Mary Patras (former instructor in Loyola U. Medical School-now she lives and practices in Miami, Fla); Dr. Michael Vanecko (his son is also a physician-the young Vanecko is son-in-law of Mayor Daley); Dr. William Rurik and others. �54 SLOVAKIA The following physicians have died: Dr. Raymond Jezisik, Blue Island, Ill.; Dr. Emil Zidek, Dr. Martin t>asko (his wife also an MD.), Dr. John Belensky, Dr. L. J. Hajdusek and Dr. Martin Kostelny. Dentists Right along with the physicians-surgeons Slovaks in Chicago have a fine crop of capable dentists. We should mention the following: Dr. Steve J . Hletko (former English editor of the Slovak Catholic Sokol "Falcon," now sports director of National Slovak Society, Secretary of the Slovak Bowling Congress and recent president of the Illinois Bowling Congress, a former Lt. Col. of the U. S . Army at Ft. Hood, Texas ), Dr. Richard Remijas, Dr. George Matula, Dr. G. Tilley, three Bunta brothers (Albert, Paul and Joseph ), Dr. Michael Rak, Dr. Michael Orth, Dr. Michael Vitek, Dr. Joseph F. Solus and his wife Dr. Eleanor Solus, Dr . Joseph Biel, Dr. Joseph Tisoncik, Dr. John Poronsky (Secretary of "Darnen" S & L. Assn.), and Dr. Daniel Tylka, now practising in Toledo, Ill. Pharmacists The drug profession is not quite as well represented as the physicians, dentists and lawyers, but at least the following are known: the late four Lesko brothers, Joseph Duleba and his son, Messrs (two ) zibrida (Bernard died since this article was written ), Mr. Grigus, B. Mensik and John Miklian on West 63rd St. The Arts In the arts the Slovaks here have produced such stars as Mary Halama from the neighborhood of Chicago Ave., and Frederick Sts., an operatic concert singer whose career was rather short. She moved to New York, married and apparently gave up her career. Lillian Michuda from Roseland was a splendid singer and entered the movies. One of her first movies was with Jack Benny, under the movie name of "Lillian Cornell." Other movies followed but she too married and forsook the cinema and settled down. The one real luminary is Frederick Dvonch, a graduate of the Juilliard School of Music in New York. He is an orchestra leader and composer. He conducted the �SLOVAKIA 55 orchestra for Allegheny-Ludlum Steel in a series of radio musical programs. He also conducted for "Show Boat," "Song of Norway," "Carousel" and other Broadway musicals, both on and off Broadway. Freddie Dvonch is a real talent and an artist, descended from a musical family-his father, a tailor, was a band musician, his uncle, Anton Olach, was a band musician, and Freddie's two brothers , the physicians, were also good violinists at early ages. Freddie has a doctorate in music. Other good singers are Irene Kocur and Mary ( skriba ) Koys, who at one time had short season appearances with the chorus in Chicago opera. Orchestra leaders Besides many small local bands and orchestras and combos, some amateur, some semi-professional, Joe Pat(erek) has a popular polka band, much like the wellknown Frankie Yankovich. They play polkas, waltzes, schottisches etc. He plays Slovak, Czech, Polish and international numbers. He puts on quite an act. One of his parents was Slovak, the other Polish. - Frankie Slaboda is a good violinist, a good entertainer and a good orchestra leader. - Dr. Isidore Mlecko, a chiropodist from Chicago Heights, originally came from Roseland, was much like Frankie Slaboda. But unfortunately he died a short time ago. R el i gi ous orders The "Our Lady of Sorrows Convent" is the Convent of the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago. They branched off the Czech Benedictine Convent in Lisle, Ill. Mother Theresita, OSB., was the first prioress. The present Rev. Mother is Mother Geraldine, OSB. Besides the old convent building, they have a new Convent, built and dedicated only two years ago . Rt. Rev. Abbot Kojis, OSB., from St. Andrew's Abbey in Cleveland, is chaplain. Chicago Slovaks contribute heavily. The Slovak Franciscan Fathers in Valparaiso, Indiana, although a short distance from Chicago, are close to the hearts of many Chicago Slovak Catholics and they support the Franciscan Fathers very generously. The Chicago Slovak Catholics hold annual pilgrimages to the Seven �56 SLOVAKIA Dolors Shrine on the grounds of the monastery. A new Church has been built there recently. Old peoples' and nursing homes The Slovak Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius from Danville, Pa., conduct the St. Cyril Villa, in Highland Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, Ill. Some Chicago Slovaks avail themselves of this service. Others support the Villa financially. The Daughters of St. Francis, a Slovak Sisters Franciscan order, conduct the Nursing Home of St. Joseph in Lacon, Illinois. Many Chicago Slovaks have contributed generously to these Sisters since they came from Slovakia as immigrants and also contributed to the building of the Nursing Home. The home accomodates 50 patients. A new addition is being built to accomodate another 50 patients. Also a new million dollar mother-house. These Sisters also run a hospital in Mountainview, Mo. Undertakers Of these, the late John M. Kubina was probably the first Slovak undertaker here. He celebrated his 50th anniversary as a funeral director four years ago, shortly before his death. He was active in many extra-curricular fields, including fishing and bowling (he was President of the Slovak Bowling Congress and savings and loan work, President and Chairman of the board at "Darnen S & L.). Many other Slovak undertakers have died here: Sam Kostelny, Steve Kostelny, John Zidek (his son is carrying on), Martin Mensik (son is continuing the business), Charles Machacek, Thomas Barosko, John Palenica and John Lattyak. Well known names were also Paterek and John Posuch. Some of those still active today are: John Satala, Edward Tybor, William Machacek, B. Mensik, John t>Oltis, Miss Judy Tybor, John Palenica, Jr., and Fred Kubasak, now in California. Edward Dluhy in now in Florida. Theater Owners There have not been many of these from the Slovak ranks. In 1913 the late John Remijas and the late Charles Kobilak teamed up and conducted the theater business in the "Gaelic Theater" on W. 47th St., near Western �SLOVAKIA 57 Ave. Mr. Kobilak died and Mr. Remijas carried on, in fact expanded when he built the "Acadia Theater" at 55th and Fairfield Ave. in 1929 and kept both theaters going for many years, even during the depression. He was the father of Dr. Richard Remijas, a dentist, and father-in-law of Dr. Peter P . Hletko (wife Anna). With advancing years and failing health, he eventually sold both theaters but did not live too long after that. He died in 1947. Both theaters are now converted to other businesses. Brokers In the investment field we have at least two account representatives with brokerage houses: Milan Blazek with Francis Du Pont Co., 122 So. LaSalle St., and Godfrey Labda, with Howe, Barnes & Co., 208 S . LaSalle Street. Banks and bankers Some of Chicago Slovaks even tried banking as a business, but did not have much success. Perhaps the earliest was John Haluska on the West Side shortly after the turn of the century. He never attained great success, but he enjoyed a good folloving among his people. Later Papanek-Kovac State Bank operated for a few years at 886 Milwaukee Ave., but the Great Depression took its toll here. It was said that if the supervisory state authorities had not been so quick on the draw and had they been just a little more lenient, the P. K . Bank would have worked out its temporary squeeze. John S. Jurik was perhaps the most successful Slovak banker in Chicago, while it lasted. For years he had been a real estate and insurance broker on West 47th St. near Darnen Avenue ( then called Robey St. ) . Eventually he organized the Robey State Bank, on West 47th St., just west of Robey St. The bank enjoyed pretty good success for a long time . The writer of this article worked in this bank for several summers (during student vacations ) as a bookkeeper and teller. Just before the depression, Robey State Bank merged with Depositors State Bank at 47th and Ashland Ave. and Mr. Jurik became one of the vice-presidents of the merged bank. Mr. Vaclav Pesicka, former secretary of "Dunaj" S & L. Assn., was the president of Depositors. But the depression eventually cut down Depositors Bank �58 SLOVAKIA too, as it did many other banks at that time. So, Robey State Bank and Depositors State Bank vanished off the face of the earth. Slovak Manufacturers in Chicago Soon after the Slovaks reached Chicago many of them began looking around and after acclimating themselves started various business enterprises. Many of them started or purchased taverns and at one time this was probably the most profitable business for the Slovaks. Many entered the grocery and meat market business but these ventures, like milk stores or dairies are fading out of the picture since merchandising chains and shopping centers grew up profusely. One outstanding exception is the wholesale dairy owned and managed by J. Ziak and his sons in South Chicago. Other Chicago Slovaks, particularly those from a town of Brezova, in Slovakia, who brought good experience to this country about tanning hides, these entered the tanning business, wood processing, and manufacturing of other hide products, such as drum heads, belts, brief cases etc. Others brought varied experiences and abilities such as wire workers. In Trencin county in Slovakia many were wire workers and many travelled all over the world plying their craft. They were called "drotari" and were able not only to manufacture wire products, but were also handy in repairing various objects in the home with the aid of wiring, such as broken pots, vases, ceramic objects etc. Their travel experiences were many and some of them were away from home many months, or even years. travelling from country to country. One of them, a wireworker by the name of Adam Dzudzi, told me he travelled extensively in Russia, knew the country well and spent much time in Tiflis, capital of the Georgian Republic. Others knew Baku well in Azerbajdjan USSR. Let us list at least a few of the manufacturing businesses that the Slovaks owned and conducted in Chicago at one time or another: Tanners and wool processors White Eagle Rawhide Mfg. Co., 1652 N. Throop St. Owners: George :ourkovic and John R. Janae. Organized �SLOVAKIA 59 in 1924. Manufacture of drum heads, banjos, tamborines, children's toys and drums etc. Employed 12 people. Liberty Rawhide and Tanning Co., 2020 N. Paulina Street. Manufacture of belts and belting. Representative : Steve Nosko. Kruty and Kruty. Organized 1939. Wool and sheep and goat hide processing. Employed seven people. John Kruty, representative. 1716 W. Webster Avenue. Vrablik & Co. Organized 1947. Carried on the same business as Kruty & Kruty, at the same address. Employed five people. Bachar & Mizialko. Organized 1935 by George Bachar and John Mizialko. Later the owners were: John Mizialko, Edward Mizialko and George Bachar. Manager of the business: John Mizialko, Sr. Their business was pulling of sheep pelts and the pickling of sheep skins. Paul Konecnik & Son. Stripping of wool. Martin slahor was in the wool and hide business since 1916. Samuel slahor-in the same business. National Wool Pulling and Scouring Co. Organized in 1921. President John Svatik (a brother-in-law of Dr. Stefan Osusky, the former ambasador from Czecho-Slovakia to France); Stefan Svatik, secretary, and Paul Konecnik, treasurer. Yearly output: 700,000 lbs. of wool shorn, washed and dried. Employed 10 people. 1117 W. Webster Avenue. F &B Mfg. Co. Owner: John Filko, Cable address : Filko-Chicago. Motto: "The crown jewels of ignition." The firm makes various automotive parts and various plastic caps, tops, and other objects. Filko Ignition-5840 North Northwest Hwy, is a Division of F & B. John Filko has been in this business for a long, long time. During the World War II, he was the recipient of many government orders and he received government subsidies for expansion purposes and for increasing his facilities for production of necessary work and manufacture. An interesting sidelight on John Filko and his F & B Co. Many of the products, particularly the plastic items, bear the name of the manufacturer, Filko, or Filko Co. Some years ago, the Philco Radio Company felt that this �60 SLOVAKIA was some sort of an encroachment on their name, and they sued to prevent John Filko using this trade-mark. Many and long, and expensive court battles followed. Filko claimed that this is his family name and he would protect it, and his right to use it, to the end of the world and to the limit of his treasury and all his resources. After extended litigation and appeals in courts, John Filko won out. Besides the lower courts, the litigation went through the Appelate Court and the Philco Co. ran the case up to the Supreme Court of the U.S. But John Filko won his case in all the courts, including the Supreme Court. Defending this case cost John Filko $42,000.00. John Filko has five plants, including two in Chicago at 4248 W. Chicago Ave. and Crawford and Chicago Avenue, one in Phoenix, Arizona, and even one in Bogota, Columbia. They manufacture electric parts for automobiles , electrical relays, parts for helicopters and jets for the U. S. Army and Navy. They do many millions of dollars of business every year. John Filko employs 500 people. John Filko's is a remarkable story. This fantastic success in business is certainly remarkable for a poor immigrant Slovak from Slovakia. This should encourage many of our native born to strive as hard as John Filko did, and while not every one can attain such success through hard work and application without some luck, many certainly can and would, if they go about it seriously and industriously. In World War I, Mr. Filko was a volunteer Czecho-Slovak Legionaire. The Legion helped establish Czecho-Slovakia. Wire workers Chillo Mfg. Co. 2106 So. Kedzie Avenue. Owner: Paul Chillo. Everede Tool Co. 2000 N. Parkside Avenue. Owner : J. Proksa. Canning, Pekara Inc. Representative: Gustav Pekara, Jr. 1809 W. Webster Avenue. Philadelphia Wire Lamp Frame Co. 1126 West 18th Street. Avondale Machinery Works Mfg. Co. 5546 N. Harlem Avenue. Milan Filip represented the company. �SLOVAKIA 61 Van Dyke Industries. 2259 W. 21st Street. Stephen Zidek. Supreme Wire & Metal Products Co. 317 East 29th Street. Premier Wire Lamp Shade Frame Co. 1716 S. Michigan Avenue. Western Wire Works Inc. Michael Martinek and Sons, 951 W. 18th Place. Manufactured various wire products, bird cages, wire cages for offices, elevators etc. Premier Metal Works, Inc. 1616 Clinton Street. Owner: Andrew Micjeta, who at one time was very active in Slovak fraternal work. Wood workers Arrow Parlor Furniture Frames. J. Havlik. 629 West Cermak Road. Marcek Furniture, Division of Central Parlor Frame Co. Inc. 1311 W. 47th Street. Olach Furniture Frames, Inc. 2527 W. Moffat Street. Owner: Anton Olach (an uncle of Dr. Frederick Dvonch, the violin virtuoso and orchestra leader on radio, TV and Broadway). Manufactured home furniture, church furnishings, institutional furniture etc. Had a subdivision: Mountainview Wood Prod. Co., Mountainview City, Arkansas. Has retired from this business several years ago. Other Businesses and Occupations The Slovaks in Chicago have been engaged in every kind of imaginable business, profession and occupation. While at one time, the saloon or tavern business was most popular, Slovak people have expanded into other lines. P. Kvorka has a large furniture store and so did Emil Arbet and J. Kostolansky. Soltis Radio and appliance store is a large establishment owned by John Soltis on 51st and Washtenaw now on 55th and South Pulaski Road. John zacek owns and operates a large trucking and hauling firm, the Fairfield Motors. Emil Arbet also had the Arbet Truck Lines. At one time, every side street had a grocery and meat market for the convenience of the local people. Now the large supermarkets, and shopping plazas have taken over this business, which even the automobile has made more �62 SLOVAKIA accessible to the housewife. Such local retail butchers and grocers should be mentioned as John Bistyak for a very large number of years on 48th and Darnen Ave., Joseph Peterka on Iowa St., on the northwest side. John Tybor and Ernest Keblusek p.as been on the south side. The late Mrs. Pitak was on the west side, so were the Sadeckis. The Turcans were at 24th Street, in Cicero. The Rafa.e's on the south side, so were the Bzduch's, and so was Mrs. Panko and the John Pirohar's. Also J . Dluhy, Sr., and Mrs. Oskvarek. We have also had chiropractors--e.g. Fred Kabana and his wife (now in Daytona Beach, Fla.) , the John and Johns (man and wife) and others. Vendel Tylka and his two sons still operate the Tylka Bros. Press, a commercial printery on West 63rd Street. John and Mrs. Keblusek, and their two sons, operate a very large and modern Ace Hardware store at 155th and South Cicero, in Oak Forest, Ill. Tony Pastyak and his wife Florence conduct a restaurant business on W. 63rd St., catering to parties, weddings and after-funeral luncheons. Also cocktail lounge. Many had retail shoe stores (like Nick Vratanina, J. Jurgovsky, Facuna, etc.). Galos is secretary and co-owner of the James Coal Co. on South Halsted Street. He has been in the coal business for many years. Many are, or have been in the real estate business, or in the insurance business e.g. Joseph Hubalik, ~oltis Realty, Karkoska, Dusan Augustiny and J. Fabry and others. And we had many in the travel bureau business e . g. Eden Radie, Michael Kaplan, Cerven Tvrdy and others. Large numbers of Slovak young ladies have become nurses and others devoted themselves to laboratory work. Very many are public school teachers. BIBLIOGRAPHY Souv enir of the F irst Catholic Slovak Day in Chicago, 1931. Dr. P eter P. Hletko, Edi tor. P. V. Rovnianek-Rovinov: Zcipisky za ziva pochov aneho. (Memoirs of one buried alive). 1924. Savings & Loan Statistics. Cook County Council. 1967. Statistics of Frat ernal Benefi t Soci eti es. 1967. Fraternal Monitor. Adam Podkrivacky: Slovaks in Chi cago 1872-1962. �SLOVAKIA 63 Souvenir Program of the 20th regular convention of the National Slovak Society - held in Chicago, 1950. Czechs and Slovaks (World's Fair Memorial), Chicago, Ill., 1933. Czech and Slovak leaders in Metropolitan Chicago. Edited by Daniel D. Droba, M. A., Ph. D. Published by the Slavonic Club of the University of Chicago. 1934. DR. PETER P. HLETKO was the Supreme Medical Examiner for the Slovak Catholic Sok-01 for some 36 years, from 1927 to 1963. The Youngstown convention of the or• ganization named him Honorary Supreme Medical Examiner for life. He was born in Chicago, Ill., in 1902, attended and was graduated from St. Michael's Slovak Parrish school, then ·attended St. Procopius Academy and College (19151921) in Lisle, Ill. The next two years he spent at De Paul University in Chicago and received his Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry. From 1923-1927 he attended Loyola University (now Stritch School of Medicine of Loyola University) in Chicago and in 1928 received his Doctor of Medicine degree. He then spent 1½ years interning at Cook County Hospital in Chicago and began his private practise of medicine on December 31, 1928. Some eight month later he was invited to join the faculty of the Loyola University School of Medicine and became instructor in clinical neurology for the junior students in their third year of medical school. He kept this post for a number of years, but later resigned because of his increasing medical practise and other civic and political commitments. He was twice president of the Slovak League of America and is now Honorary Supreme President. At one time he served as secretary of the Supreme Court of the Nat. Slovak Society and for the last number of years is the President of the Literary Committee of that organization. In 1938 he led a delegation of the Slovak League of America to Slovakia, CzechoSlovakia and Poland on the the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact, in an effort to convince or compel the Czecho Slovak government to recognize the stipulations of that Pact to yield to demands of the Slovak people for complete equality in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Starting with the April 13, 1927 issue, he was editor of the "Jaro", a monthly supplement of <the "Jednota" for a number of years. The "Jaro" was published for the benefit of the Junior Branch and Sokols of the First Catholic Slovak Union. For 35 years Dr. Hletko was c-0ntributing editor of the 'Osadne Hlasy' (Slovak Parish News) in Chicago, writing weekly editorials regularly and also writing such columns of comment and criticism as the 'Iskry' (Sparks) by 'Nitran', 'Paberky' (Gleamings) and others. For some 39 years he is a director and president of the 'Gage Park Savings and Loan Association' in Chicago, a $22,000,000.00 plus fi. nancial institullion. Dr. Hletko is now semi-retired but maintains his interest in this savings-loan association, in the Slovak Catholic Sokol (he is a member of the all-important Executive Committee), in the Slovak League of America and in all matters Slovak and civic. � 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 1969, Vol. 19 Description An account of the resource Vol. 19 (No. 42), 1969. 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 1969 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 32 SLOVAKIA The Slovaks of Chicago DR. PETER P. HLETKO The first Slovaks in Chicago While the records are vague, according to some pub lic and official records it would seem that probably the first Slovak who came to Chicago was one G. Michalovic alias Mihal6cy (a Magyar spelling). He took active part in the Civil War. He joined the forces of Abraham Lincoln and supposedly organized an artillery battalion consisting of various Slavic nationalities. He was cited by President Lincoln, who wrote Michalovic a personal letter, thanking him for his services. Around 1872 another Slovak named Dorocak same to Chicago from County Spis in Slovakia. He was followed by Daniel Schustek, whose name was well known in the life of the early Chicago Slovaks. Then more Slovaks came and by 1892 there were some 300 in Chicago. That is not a very big number but already then they began to organize into a fraternal system. In that year-two years after the National Slovak Society was organized in Pennsylvania, the Slovaks in Chicago organized an assembly (Odbor 65) of the N. S.S., a non-denominational society. After the First Catholic Slovak Union ( the Jednota) was founded in Cleveland, the Chicago Catholic Slovaks organized St. Stephen's Society as Branch 224 of the FCSU. The third society organized was the "First Slovak Sokol," an independent and nondenominational gymnastic society. The group no longer exists. In 1893 these Slovak fraternal groups participated in the parade arranged by the committee of the Columbian Exposition held in Chicago. They paraded under the Slovak banner, and they had some difficulty in obtaining a Slovak flag. They had one made. The early Slovaks in Chicago By 1900 the Slovaks kept coming from the old country, from all parts of Slovakia. It is well-nigh impossible to find records about all of them but at least the following SLOVAKIA 33 are definitely known to have been here between 1890 and 1900. The year of their arrival is in parentheses: · Andrej Adamcik (1894), Jan Balek (1894), J . Bavlsik, Jan Belcik (1893), Jan Bugajsky (1898), Jan Canik (1894) , Jan Druska, Jozef Gabaj 1886), Karol Grohovsky (1893), Andrej Gura (1899) ), Anton Gura (1899), Karol Gura (1889), stefan Gura (1889), Jan Haluska, Martin Hletko (father of Dr. Peter P. Hletko and Dr. S. J . Hletko 1899) , Jan Horvat (1899), Jan Ivorik, Imrich Jezisik (1877), Jozef Juranka (1894), Jan Keblusek (1890), Klinovsky (1888) , Florian Kojis (1898), Mikulas Krajci (1889), Peter Krajci (1889), Samuel Krc (1896), Pavel Kvorka (1890), Frantisek Kubis (1898), Pavel Kubis (1888), Frantisek Kuna (1899), Pavel Kurucar, Stulik (1892), Michal Laca (1892), Jan Majer (1893), Jozef Mally (1891), Karol Mally (1893 ), Jan Matejicko (1898), stefan Meliska (1898), Andrej Micuda (1899), Gustav Micuda (1899), Jozef Novota (1898), Jan Orendac (1899), Samuel Papanek (1890), Jan Paur 0893), Jan Pavelcik (1886), Pavel Pavelcik (1893), Jozef Pircoft (1889), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan slahor (1891), Imrich Podkrivacky, Jan Podmajersky (1896), Juraj Pucik (1884), Daniel Samuel (1898), Andrej Sedory (1888), Andrej Schustek (1889), Jan Schustek, Jan slahor (1891), Jan Sokolik, Andrej Sokolik, Jan Svehla, Adam Trubacek (1890), Juraj Vatral, Jozef Zahumensky (1897), Adam Ziska, Frantisek Ziska and Jozef Ziska, Stefan Kovac (1897), Martin Dujmovic (1897). Others known to be here prior to 1900 were: M. Vitko, (father of the late Rev. Joseph Vitko, who died in Omaha. Nebraska). J. Madeja, John Lipovsky, J. Hajzus, J. L'e hocky, J. Jurik, John Micus, Kollarik, candar, Ducaj, Podhorsky, Pelikan and others. Because the Slovaks are a religious people, whether they are Catholic or Lutheran, they began attending their respective church services in the churches existing here already. But they were not satisfied with Latin or English services. They yearned for their own. Many of them attended St. Procopius Church, a Czech church at 18th and Allport St. Many of the Slovak Catholics settled on the West side in the vicinity of De Keven St., St. Wenceslaus parish ( site of Mrs. Oleary's barn where the cow kicked over a lantern and started the great Chicago fire of 1871. A humorous story has it that the cow was owned 34 SLOVAKIA by a Czech women, Mrs. Uhlir, but because the newspaper reporters could not spell or pronounce "Uhlir", it became Mrs. O'Leary, because that seemed close enough.) Another contigent gravitated south and west where they found the first Catholic Slovak church in Chicago, St. Michael's, at 48th and Winchester. Originally land was purchased for a church on Archer Ave., but this was given up. Church services began to be held every Sunday in a hall back of a tavern at 49th St. and Paulina St. Father Bronkala was the first pastor. A church was built at 48th and Winchester with two rooms in 1900. Sisters Walburga and Paulina, both of the Czech Benedictine convent in Lisle, Ill., and both being Slovaks, were the first two teachers in the school. The next pastor was Rev. S. Pavolcik, but when financial troubles arose, the Bohemian Benedictine Fathers in Lisle, Ill., were appointed in charge of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB., became the pastor and he did much to build the parish and put it on solid foundation . He left about 1911 and was followed by Rev. Thomas Vopatek, OSB., and eventually by Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., the so-called "first Slovak Benedictine in America", who later organized the Slovak Benedictine Fathers in Cleveland, Ohio. The Slovaks in Chicago have 8 Slovak Catholic parishes St. Michael's at 48th and Darnen Avenue_ A new combination church and school building was built in 1907. A few years later another school building was erected to accomodate a total of some 1,200 school children. SL Michael's parish at one time was the largest Slovak Catholic parish in America. Recently the original old church was taken down and a fine new social center was erected. Rev. Armand Gress, OSB., pastor, Rev_ L. Hudak, OSB. , and Rev. Maruskin, OSB., asistants. The parish has a large convent and a large rectory. After Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSR left for Cleveland, the late Rev. Charles Florek, OSB., was pastor for many years and his assistant for 22 years was the Rev. Ambrose Ondrak, OSB., who later became abbot of the Bohemian Benedictine Abbey in Lisle, Ill., and had to leave St. Michael's to assume his new duties as abbot. SLOVAKIA 35 Assumption of the B. V. M. at 24th St. and California. Organized in 1903, at about the same time as St. Joseph's parish was being organized. The parish has a combination church and school building, a Sisters' convent, a rectory and an assembly hall under the church, besides several meeting halls. Msgr. Chvojka, pastor emeritus, Rev. J . Spitkovsky, acting pastor. St. Joseph's parish. Organized in 1904. Has a combination church and school building on 17th Pl., near Halsted St. Recently a new school building was built, with a large auditorium and bowling alleys in the basement. The area is becoming a changing neighborhood in recent years and the Slovak parishioners are leaving the locality and moving to newer neighborhoods. For that reason the parish is on the decline. The new school has been turned over to combined classes from a neighboring Lithuanian parish and the former rectory has been loaned to the Lithuanian sisters after the Slovak sisters from the Bohemian Order of St. Benedict in Lisle, Ill., gave up the school. The administrator of the parish, Rev. Slosarcik, lives at the nearby Lithuanian rectory. Msgr. John Rondzik, now retired, has been pastor for many years. The latest report is that parish will cease to exist. Holy Rosary parish at 108th and Perry Sts. Organized in 1907. The parish built a new church in recent years . A school, convent and rectory complete the properties of the parish. Rev. Andrew Valcicak is pastor, Rev. J . Dilla is assistant. The parish is located in the Pullman-Roseland area. St. John the Baptist. Organized in 1909 at 91st and So. Burley Ave., in the South Chicago district. The parish purchased an existing church in 1910. The property consists of this original church, with a hall in the basement and a rectory adjoining. The parish has no school. This parish has never prospered too much and is in a declining neighborhood but Rev. J. Petrik, the present pastor, has given the parish a big lift. Sacred Heart parish. Organized in 1910. At Huron and Oakley Blvd. A combination church and school building and a new rectory adjacent. For years, Rev. Victor Blahunka, who became the first Slovak Monsignor in America, was pastor. The present pastor is Rev. Francis Kosjak. 36 SLOVAKIA SS. Cyril and Methodius parish. At Walton St. and Kildare Ave. Organized January 3, 1914. Rev. Michael Bajor, pastor of the Sacred Heart parish, was the one who promoted the idea of organizing this parish. Rev. Victor Blahunka became the Slovak pastor on March 2, 1915. The parish used the hall of the Guardian Angels parish at Avers and Iowa Sts. as a temporary church. Other pastors who followed were Rev. Michael Bue, Rev. John Fedor and now Rev. A. Chisek. The church is a combination school and church building. St. Simon parish. This is the youngest Slovak parish. Organized October 1, 1926 at 52nd and So. California Ave., after many years of effort. Rev. E. Sendek was the first pastor. The parish has a combination school and church building, a rectory, a sisters' convent and recently an additional new school building. Rev. Joseph Job, a good Slovak nationalist, was pastor for many years, until his death there. He followed Rev. Sendek, who was transferred to St. Paul's parish in Chicago Heights, Ill. a suburb of Chicago. Father Job was popular and successful as a pastor of St. Simon's. He left a portion of his estate to the Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., the Slovak League and the St. Adalbert Society of Slovakia. The present pastor is Rev. D. Romancik and Rev. Richard skriba is assistant. Slovak Protestant Churches in Chicago Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church is the oldest Lutheran Slovak congregation. It was founded in 1893 and incorporated in 1897. The original church was in the vicinity of Noble St., and Chicago Ave. In time the old neighborhood began declining and the parishioners moved to Mayfair and Jefferson Park so that an auxiliary church was built in Mayfair in 1924. But in 1948 the congregation built a large, modern new church on the north side on Foster and Lacrosse Sts., with an outlay of some $400,000. SS. Peter and Paul Lutheran Church. Originally located on 19th St., near Halsted St. on the West Side. Organized in October 1901. With the neighborhood also undergoing changes for the worst, the congregation moved to Riverside into a new church about 10 years ago. Just recently the congregation celebrated 10 years of this moving to Riverside in appropriate church services assisted by some SLOVAKIA 37 of the local Catholic clergy, in a real spirit of ecumenism. Rev. Kalny is pastor. Rev. John Body was pastor of the church when it was on the West Side. He is now retired in California. Zion Slovak Lutheran Church organized in 1909 at Huron St. and Bickerdike. The Bethlehem church merged with the Zion church in about 1926. Later they bought their present church at Iowa St. and Springfield Avenue. Slovak Evangelical Lutheran Cl?,urch of Dr. Martin Luther. Its first permanent church was at 50th and Honore Sts. from April 1918 to December 1947. In 1949 a new church was built at 54th and Francisco Ave. At one time Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., was pastor, who later became involved in "Czecho-Slovak" politics and then transferred to Holy Trinity. The present pastor, after Rev. Roh, is Rev. Figuly. The son of the original pastor, Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan, Sr., who is Rev. Jaroslav Pelikan also, is a respected teacher of the history of religion at Yale University. He wrote the "Riddle of Catholicism" which was well received in Catholic circles, and he is a weekly contributor to the Catholic News Register. Slovak Baptist New Covenant Church. The beginings of the Slovak Baptists date back to 1908 when the first Slovak woman, Miss Catherine Nikodem, later Hudacek, became a Baptist by being baptized by immersion. She had been influenced by Vaclav Hlada, a Czech preacher from the Bohemian Baptist Emmanuel congregation. During some of his visits to the homes in the neighborhood he visited the Nikodems and left some books written by the Slovak authoress, Kristina Roy. Young Miss Catherine Nikodem began reading these books and she eventually received the Lord and accepted his truths. The early services were held in the Nikodem home and the newly accepted members belonged to the Czech congregation. In 1915 the Slovak Baptists, numbering 64, met to organize an independent organization of Slovak Baptists. Out of respect to the Czech mother church they accepted the name Emmanuel Slovak Baptist church. Public services were held regularly until 1925 in a synagogue at 1410 W. Augusta Blvd., and from 1925 to 1930 at 2015 W . Augusta Blvd. In 1930 they dedicated a new church at 5857-59 W. Giddings, corner of Marmora Ave. Up to the year 1929 38 SLOVAKIA half of the congregation lived on the south side. In that year they became independent and assumed the name Czechoslovak Baptist Church, but later changed it to Trinity Church. Their church was at 5845 So. Rockwell St. The new name, Covenant, was accepted in 1947. The Slovak Baptist church is entirely independent from 1944. Up to that time it was helped and the pastor's salary financed by American Baptists. Some of the names that have appeared in the list of officers over the years include Michal Stancik, Jan Dinga, Pavel Kubik, Michal Placko, Michal Frano, Pavel Hanko and Jan Firak. The Greek-Catholics There are any number of Greek-Catholic churches in Chicago, but the Slovaks belong principally to two of them-St. Mary's , 49th and So. Seeley, is one. The members of this parish are all Slovaks of the Byzantine Eastern Rit~, headed by and directly connected with the Holy See, the Roman Catholic Church. The parish has a large church, a school, a rectory and a Sister's Convent. Rev. J. Kurty is pastor. SS. Peter and Paul Church at 53rd and So. Western is a split-off of St. Mary's parish, and the split-off was so complete that they broke ties with Rome, and joined the Greek-Russian Orthodox Church. Rev. Shimkoff is pastor and his son has been his assistent. Like many of the parishioners of St. Mary's, many in the SS. Peter and Paul Church mistakenly call themselves "Russians," "Sub-Carpatian Russians," "Greek Catholics," "Rusins," "Rusnaks" etc. Many belligerently deny that they are Slovaks. It's a case of faulty bringing up and lack of proper information or education along these lines . Yet, the members of both of these parishes are Slovaksfrom the Spis, saris and Zemplin counties in Slovakia. They are Slovaks who profess the Byzantine Rite, or the Orthodox Rite. Neither of these rites makes them "Russians" or anything else but Slovaks, no more than the Lutheran faith makes our Slovak Lutherans Germans or anything but Slovaks. These Lutherans are Slovaks whn profess the Lutheran faith, and they are Slovaks. The "Rusnaks" are Slovaks, who profess the Byzantine rite or Orthodox rite. There are other ethnic groups who profess SLOVAKIA 39 these rites or faiths, like the Magyars, but their faith does not change them from Magyars to "Rusnaks," "Russians" or anything else but Magyars. The "Rusnaks" should call a spade and admit that ethnically they are Slovaks. Societies and Lodges Although there is a noticable decline in society and lodge activity in Chicago in the last 25 years, in the main it has remained stable. A few lodges, and even whole societies merged (Tatran Slovak Union, based in Chicago merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol, Slovak Evangelical Society, also based in Chicago, merged with The Slovak Lutheran Union now called United Lutheran) . Others, like the "Veniec Katolickych Slovakov (Wreath of Catholic Slovaks) just plainly liquidated and stopped existing. But in the main, the lodges have remained in existence. In 1930, at the height of our lodge activity, the following Societies were represented by their lodges as follows: First Catholic Slovak Union - 26 assemblies; Total 6,811 members. First Catholic Slovak Ladies' Union - 19 lodges; Total 10,549 members. Slovak Catholic Sokol - 5 male assemblies and 4 female Wreaths; Total 2,906 members. Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 4 local assemblies ; 24 7 members. Ladies Penna. Slovak Catholic Union - 3 branches ; 704 members. National Slovak Society - 11 assemblies; 2,726 members. Tatran Slovak Union - 15 of its 27 assemblies were in Chicago; The Society merged with S. G. U.S. Catholic Order of Foresters - 9 Slovak Courts; Catholic Order of Ladies Foresters- 4 Slovak Courts; First Slovak Wreath of Free Eagle - 3 groups (based in Bridgeport, Conn.); Western Slovak Union - 2 assemblies; Independent Society of St. Martin - 1 assembly; Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol - 5 assemblies; 2,82b members. 40 SLOVAKIA Club " Furdek" Club "Furdek" was a social and educational Club designed to unite the intelligentia of the Chicago Catholic Slovaks. Started in 1930 by Dr. Peter P. Hletko, it lasted some 25 years, then went into abeyance. During its existence it exerted much good influence on the life of the Chicago Slovaks and Slovaks in America, as well. All the local Catholic Slovak priests were members, so were many of the lawyers, physicians and other professional people and the formal annual installation dinners were an outstanding feature of the social season. Many college students and professional people were thus given an opportunity to meet and become mutually acquainted. Savings and Loan Associations One of the more profitable businesses of industries in which some of our Chicago Slovaks are engaged is the savings and loan business. The Slovaks, next to the Czechs, were the earliest entrants into this business. No other nationality ·was in that business any earlier. However, none of our savings and loan institutions controlled and managed by Slovaks ever rose to such gigantic multimillion dollar institutions as have some of those controlled b y other ethnic groups. They came into this business much later but have passed up Slovak people and they have built financial giants. But the Slovak S & L's are doing very, very well. Their accounts are insured by the FSLIC to S15,000 and practically all of them pay 4}'1 % on regular passbook accounts and more on certificate deposits. How early our Slovaks were in the savings and loan business in Chicago may be seen from the history of the First Slovak S & L in Chicago - the " Dunaj" (Danube). It was organized on April 1, 1907 in St. Michael's parish on the south side of the city - some 7 years after the founding of the parish. Rev. Bartolomej Kvitek, OSB. , a Czech, friendly to the Slovak people, was then pastor and it was he who saw the need for a savings and loan association for his parishioners. His theory was that if the association helped his parishioners to buy and acquire homes in the vicinity of the church, the parishioners would be apt to stay in the neighborhood longer, around SLOVAKIA 41 the church, and they would not run off to other areas and to other parishes and churches. This would help keep the parish stable and intact, it would thus help the parish and it would also help the parishioners to home ownership. Father Kvitek called a few parishioners for consultation, they then called a meeting and founded the "Dunaj" S & L Assoc. The men present at the meeting and elected as members of the first board of directors were: Albert Vincek, President; John Dluhy, a local retail butcher shop owner, Treasurer; Vaclav Pesicka, a fine Czech gentleman and a banker, Secretary; Anton Charvat, Thomas Griglak ( then organist and choir director at St. Michael's ), Martin Skorupa (a builder ), Joseph Adam, a local tavern owner, and Joseph Tomala (real estate and insurance broker ) , as directors. Soon after its founding, the parishioners and others in the locality applied for membership in the "Dunaj " in big numbers. The association helped many to save their money and it helped many others to home ownership. "Dunaj" kept graving rapidly every year and in a short span of a few years it was the second largest saving and loan association in Chicago, and the largest Slovak association in all America, just as St. Michael's parish became the largest Slovak parish in America at that time. In 1931 the association opened its 99th series and its directors at that time were ( just to get their names on paper ) : Joseph Trubiroha, Paul Havlicek, John Dluhy, Charles Tupy, Andrew Valachovic, Matthew Vadovsky, Peter Hello, A. B. Suhany, John M. Nemec. For years the association held weekly meetings on Tuesday evening in the basement of the old church, until the time of an attempted hold-up, which, happily, was unsuccessful. But the management of the "Dunaj" decided to transfer it into Depositors State Bank, of which Vaclav Pesicka was then president. But "Dunaj " stopped prospering in the bank. It was merely vegetating. Finally, John M. Nemec, an employee of the bank managed to extricate the association from the bank and move it closer to the church, its original location. He housed it in his newly set up insurance and real estate office and he became "Dunaj 's" secretary. But even this did not help and did not save the association from demise. Pressure of the Great Depression brought about eventual liquidation and the "Dunaj," 42 SLOVAKIA the daddy of them all, became a happy and revered memory. "Gage Park S & L. Assn. " was organized in February 1921 by Joseph Tomala, who became secretary. Some of the names of officers and directors associated with "Gage Park" in the early years were: Joseph L. Reppa, Michael Cerny (a business man), John Slovinec (an architect), John Massura and Joseph Massura (mason-build ers), Fr. steffek, sanitation, John Bomba, Jr. (a timekeeper), Vincent 0. snep, Dr. Peter P. Hletko, Joseph Hubalik (insurance agency); John Bomba and others. The first office of the association was at 2650 West 51st Street. It moved to its present location in 1938. The association is now in its 48th year and has assets over 22 million dollars. It pays the highest permissible dividend rate. It maintains a nice office at 2740 W. 55th St. Its present officers and directors are: Dr. Peter P. Hletko, President; Wendell Tylka, Vice-Presiden t; Michael S. Rehak, Secretary-Tre asurer; John Keblusek, Joseph Hubalik, Joseph Karas and George Galos are the other directors. All the officers and directors are Slovaks. Office hours are 5 days per week, Tuesday and Friday evenings and till noon on Saturday. The " Darnen S & L. Assn." is another early entrant. It was organized in September and held its first meeting on October 4, 1916. John Gurka, a tavern-owner and later a soft drink manufacture r and distributor, was its first moving spirit, and the weekly meetings were held in the hall to the rear of Gurka's Tavern at 45th and S. Fairfield. It was originally organized under the name "Slovenska Wlast'" (Slovak Fatherland). When A. B. Tabola became secretary after a few years, he legally changed the name to the correct Slovak spelling, "Slovenska Vlast' ," since the Slovak language has no consonant like "w" in its alphabet. In 1922 the association moved its headquarters into St. Michael's parish hall where it continued for several years, until A. B. Tabola again legally changed the name to "Darnen" after the street on which his real estate office was located and he moved the association there, later to 51st St., just west of Darnen Ave. Assets are $13,099,366.00. Other names connected with this successful association: John M. Kubina (deceased, an undertaker for 50 years, long time President), V. Dobias, Stefan Pastyak, SLOVAKIA 43 Thadeus Macejak, Joseph Kempiak, all now deceased. Its present officers are: Mary Tabola-Poronsky, President; Joseph Judickas, Vice-President; Dr. John Poronsky, Secretary-Treasurer; Frank Bohula, Michal Mladucky and Frank Kacmarcik, directors. The association is housed in a beautiful new office at 51st and Darnen Avenue. All officers and directors except one are Slovaks. " National Security" was also an early entry. Organized in 1907 as "Choe" S & L. Assn. For many years it was the "baby" of the late Steve s kriba, Sr., on the west side of Chicago. Later it was moved from S . California Avenue to 26th and Troy St., and eventually to its own beautiful building at 6859 W. Archer Ave. Its assets are over $121/~ million. Office hours are 5 days a week, closed on Wednesday. Its officers and directors are practically all Slovaks: William skriba, President; Andrew Babka, 1st Vice-President, Joseph Demko, Secretary-Treasurer, and Thomas Chuhak, Ernest Cibira, John Skultety and Edward Skriba, directors . Security Federal, organized in 1907. Address: 1209 Milwaukee Ave. Total assets: $30,042, 279. 83 . Officers are: Sam s lahor, President; John Janae, Vice-President; Ivan Kovac, Executive Vice-President; Elizabeth Andrisek, Assistant Secretary. Other directors are: Joseph Zilka, Joseph s andrik and William Machacek. " American Home" S & L. Assn. - 3924 W. North Ave. Organized in 1910. Assets $3,017,391.00. All of its officers and directors are Slovaks: John Bilka, President; Albert Jancovic, Executive Secretary; John Homola, Vice-President; Joseph Peterka, Treasurer. Other directors are : Edward Jancovic and Joseph Flaska. " Economy" S & L . Assn. is the latest entry. It was organized by Attorney Frank Matavovsky in 1949. It owns its very nice office building at 2650 W. 51st St., the original home site of Gage Park S & L. Assn. Assets: $11,921 ,865.00. Officers: Frank Matovsky, President; Marie Matovsky (Frank's wife ) is Secretary-Treasurer. Anthony Matavosky (a brother ) is Vice-President, George skodon, comptroller. Other directors : Michael Rusnak, Dr. Wendel Kapustiak ( an eye specialist ) . All the officers and two directors are Slovak. Two additional directors are : D. Varraveto and 0. J. VanMale. 44 SLOVAKIA " Andrej Hlinka" S & L. Assn., named after the national hero and political leader in Slovakia, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, P.A., existed for some 35 years at 2234 W. Chicago Ave. The association was managed by Vencel Roth ands. Velba. Eventually the association was taken over by Oran Mensik and its name changed to City Savings. After some additional 15 years, the supervisory authorities stepped in and began liquidating the institution. Oran Mensik had not applied for insurance of accounts by the FSLIC. " Hemlock" Federal S & L . Assn., while not a typically Slovak institution as far as the make-up of its board of directors, is managed and supervised by a Slovak, Joseph P. Gavron, its President. Its assets are: $40,601 ,000.00. Founded in 1904 by Czechs. Its office is at 5140 South Ashland Avenue. " Talman Federal," founded in 1922 by Ben F. Bohac and other Czechs on West 51st St., near Talman Avenue . This association is one of the giants in the industry. Its assets : £476,209,255.01. Its Assistant Secretary is Joseph Seliga, Slovak. His brother, Emil, was president of the association for a number of years, but later resigned and went to California. The president of "Talman" is Bernard A. Polek, the son-in-law of Ben F . Bohac. Present address: 55th and So. Kedzie Avenue. Other Slovaks in savings-loan work are: Attorney John Dluhy - in the legal department of "Home Federal S & L., a $362,000,000.00 institution; Mr. Dluhy was retired recently. J . Batis of Joliet, Ill., with Olympic Federal in Berwyn, Ill., and Miss Irene Kocur, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer of "American S & L." on West 47th Street. Dr. Joseph Mitric is a director in Midlothian S & L. Assn. In the past, two Slovak Savings-Loan associations existed on the West Side-' 'Bratstvo" and" Ferdis Juriga". Steve Balek was the secretary of "Bratstvo" but when the depression hit the country, "Bratstvo" went into voluntary liquidation and paid all its depositors in full and ceased to exist. "Ferdis Juriga" began having much the same diffi. culties at that time and it merged with another association, the "Oak", and passed out of Slovak control, despite the fact that a few of the Slovak directors were retained for a while. In that way "Ferdis Juriga" ceased to exist also. SLOVAKIA 45 Joseph Pokora had been the moving spirit during its existence. "stefdnikova Dvorana" (stefdnik's Court) Already on December 13, 1899 the Chicago Slovaks held a meeting to organize a "Slovensky Dom" (Slovak Home), a social center, where they could meet, hold lodge meetings and other social affairs. By activity they raised money and soon bought a building on Canalport Street, near Halsted St. There they continued until 1924. This original venture was started by 4 assemblies of the National Slovak Society. Later they renamed the Home as "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" (National Slovak Court). In the meantime, on October 26, 1921, representatives of Assembly 39 Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol met with representatives of the "Slovenska Beseda" for the purpose of discussing the possibilities of erecting a "stefanik's Court", named after the big Slovak hero, Gen. Milan R . Stefanik, a French general, an astronomer and one of the organizers of Czecho-Slovakia. With again much activity, this group raised money by various endeavors and ultimately built the Court at 24th and S. Pulaski. On January 8, 1925, the original "Narodna Slovenska Dvorana" merged with M. R. Stefanik Dvorana. The Stefanik Dvorana contains a large auditorium, meeting halls a dining hall, bar-room, etc. The building houses a 5,000 volume Slovak library, catalogued according to the A. L.A. classification system, which was donated to the Chicago Slovaks by the "Matica Slovenska" (Slovak Institute of Slovakia) and accepted in their behalf by the chairman of the welcoming Chicago committee, Dr. P. P. Hletko. The library, as well as the "Dvorana" itself were a bee-hive of activity for many years. But with balls and dances becoming more scarce in our Slovak community, no stage plays being put on, various lectures or celebrations and banquets also being less profitable whatwith radio, television and motor cars taking over, stefanik's Court is falling into disuse. Many of our lodges, as well as some individuals hold shares in this venture. Radio hours The late Vincent Kalnik was the originator of "Slovak Hours" in Chicago when he established one on WHFC in 46 SLOVAKIA the early 30's. Then others followed like Eden Radie, Macharek, ·Lutheran religious hours, the broadcast of the pro-labor group, the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol broadcast hour, etc. At present Rudolf Reis-Cerven conducts a full hour of Slovak music, songs, news and entertainment every Sunday morning 9-10 A. M. from station WXRT-FM - 93.1 kc. Chicago Slovaks have two Charitable organizations The Catholic group has the Katolicka Slovenska Dobrocinna Spolocnost' ( Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. ) which has been conducting the Catholic Slovak Days for over 33 years. The proceeds accrue to the Charitable Assn., originally organized to conduct charity among the poor of the community, but with the decline of poverty, money that accumulated has been turned over by the Charitable Assn. to the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill. The Association turned over some $65,000.00 for the purchase of the original building for the Convent. Additional contributions have also been made. The Association at one time owned a picnic grove with necessary building and accomodations, but the Argome National (Atomic) Laboratory took over the site. With the proceeds, the Association purchased "McDermott's Oaks Grove" on 119th and Archer Ave. The grove was improved and the buildings renovated and much activity ensued. But with changing times, picnics are no longer being held, the venture is less and less profitable and the Charitable Assn. is considering the selling of the grove. Rev. Richard skriba is president. The other group of Chicago Slovaks have their "Slovenska Americka Dobrocinna Spolocnost"' (The Slovak American Charitable Assn.), a non-denominational association. They too have been doing charity, but lately they are accumulating funds for construction of an Old Peoples' Home. They have purchased a site for the future home on North Ave., in Glen Ellyn, Ill., some 15 miles west of Chicago. There is still another group, the Slovak Catholic Old Peoples Home (Katolicko-Slovensky Starobinec) which is raising funds towards building or purchasing a home for our Senior citizens. This group has about $100,000.00 SLOVAKIA 47 available for this purpose. Various moves are under consideration, even the possibility of the Catholic Slovak Charitable Assn. and this Old Peoples Home group merging into one joint organization. Their pooled assets might give the proposed Old Peoples' Home a very good and promising start. Both groups are actually composed of the same and identical people and there is very little use to keep the two groups apart. Mrs. Julia Krajcovic, who originated the Slovak Catholic Charitable Assn., was its President for years, then organized the Starobinec group and was its President for years. After her recent death Dr. Peter P. Hletko was drafted as President. Permanent Slovak Theatre in Chicago Slovak enthusiasts for the theatre have fostered the "Americke Slovenske Narodne Divadlo" (The American National Theater) for very many years. It was organized in 1919. It has produced some 250 Slovak stage plays. Some of those active in this undertaking over the years were: Jesensky, Ondrejkovic, the Lesaks, the Matises, stevkova, Lamos, Matuskova, Letrich, Tibensky and many others. Most of their plays were produced at their "home" - the stage of the OSPS, hall at 18th and May Sts. With changing times and the loss of national consciousness in the youth, and the departure of the older folks, the need for a permanent Slovak theater died out. Slovak Days The so-called "National Slovak Days", conducted by a non-de.--,ominational group and back-boned by the Slovak American .'fational Charitable Assn., these "Days" are the older. But in 1931, the Slovak Catholics put on their First Catholic Slovak Day in Pilsen Park, 26th and Albany on October 11, 1931, which turned out to be a huge moral and financial success. The proceeds at that time, in times of the depression, were $5,100.00 in clear money. These "Days" have been held every year since then, and while some of them in subsequent years were even more successful than the first one, their attraction is also losing out. They have been a source of much money for the various causes of the Chicago Slovaks and the Slovaks of the USA. The "National Days" have been keeping up better 48 SLOVAK.IA in the last several years than the "Catholic Slovak Days" in Chicago. Slovak Catholic Cemetery In the early years, Slovak Catholics were being buried in Resurrection Cemetery, Justice, Ill. (a cemetery serving Czech, Polish and Slovak people ) , and in St. Adalbert's Cemetery, Niles, Ill., which also served the three nationalities. Those on the very far South Side used their local cemeteries there. On May 30, 1923, the Slovak Cemetery of Seven Dolors was dedicated in Hillside, Ill. It was adjacent to the newly forming diocesan Queen of Heaven cemetery but with the expansion of both cemeteries, Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery will soon be a part of Queen of Heaven. Msgr. V. Blahunka was the chief moving spirit in organizing the Our Lady of Sorrows Slovak Cemetery. Across the road (Roosevelt Rd.) from our Slovak Cemetery is the huge diocesan Mt. Carmel Cemetery. Slovak A. A. For many years, the Slovaks maintained the "Mudron Athletic Club" (Mudron AC.) on the West Side. They participated in many sports, but also in social activities . Years later they re-organized and formed the "Slovak A. A." (Slovak Athletic Assn.) . The main activity of this club is soccer. They have produced very good, championship teams, and they participated in a soccer league which comprises teams of many ethnic groups- the Poles, the Germans, the Sweedes and others. The club maintains a clubhouse at 27th St. and So. Hamlin for social purposes. The public is invited to their club rooms. Slovak Newspapers in Chi cago Over the years many Slovak newspapers were founded and published in Chicago. Some had a very short existence, others lasted a long time. Prior to 1900 there was actually no need for a Slovak newspaper, and one could hardly have succeeded since the number of Slovaks here at that time was insufficient to support a newspaper. The earliest attempt to publish one was in 1902 by one Chudatsik, a controversial character because he had strong leanings towards the Magyars, whom the Slovaks SLOVAKIA 49 despised because it was the Hungarian government under which the Slovaks have suffered a thousand years, being denied all rights and privileges of a nation, which forced many Slovaks to emigrate to this country in quest of a little liberty, a piece of bread and pursuit of happiness. Chudatsik with his pro-Magyar proclivities was not favored very much by the Slovaks and for that reason his newspaper, the "Katolicke N oviny" ( Catholic Slovak News), and the half dozen other papers which he founded under various names in subsequent years, never found wide acceptance. He began publishing his "Katolicke Slovenske Noviny" on the South Side in the vicinity of 46th and So. Marshfield Ave. The paper was a weekly. Later he founded dailies, publishing some two or even three simultaneously, with the news contents identical in all of them, only the advertizing being different from one paper to the other, thus being a source of revenue. At times some of these newspapers had no circulation and no readers. All his newspapers ceased publication in about 1926. The last known address was 2117 W. Grand Avenue. "Nove Casy" (New Times) was established at 1702 So. Halsted St. in 1918, after the establishment of CzechoSlovakia, with which the Catholic Slovak People's party (Hlinka's autonomist party), and most of the Catholic Slovaks became disenchanted. The editor was Stephen Huska. Ceased publication in 1942 because the Catholic Slovaks in Chicago refused to support the paper and to subscribe for it. "Narodny Slovensky Dennik" (National Slovak Daily), established in 1913 on Milwaukee Ave., was a pretty serious attempt to establish a good daily in Chicago. Some of its editors were S . Huska, Michael Laucik, then Gustav Marsal Petrovsky, John Feriencik and others. It lasted only four years and ceased in 191 7. "Katolicky Slovak" (Catholic Slovak) was a weekly, established in 1921 by V. Tylka and Louis Kycko at 17th and So. Union Ave. It lasted a few years and was eventually converted into a daily, the " Chicagsky Dennik" ( Chicago Daily) and moved to St. Michael's parish, at 48th and So. Winchester Ave. It lasted only one year, 1921-22, almost to the day, and failed because the new owner, 50 SLOVAKIA Rudolph Pollak, a real estate operator and insurance broker, got himself into a tight financial squeeze in his own private business and the revenue from the daily was not sufficient as yet to bail him out of his own troubles. Dr. Peter P. Hletko, then a college student, was the editor, later M. Bozek, Florian Tylka and Rudolph Pollak himself served as assistant editors. The daily was Catholic in its ideologies. After the "Chicagsky Dennik" ceased publication the Chicago Catholic Slovaks felt a big void. They had become accustomed to the services of the "Katolicky Slovak" and the "Chicagsky Dennik" and now felt they must again have a newspaper. The Tylka Brothers (Florian and Wendel), operators of a tiny printing shop at 830 W. 18th started publishing the weekly "Osadne Hlasy" (Slovak Parish News) amid much enthusiasm among the Chicago Slovaks, and with the moral support of Rev. Gregory Vaniscak, OSB., pastor at St. Michael's (he is the one who suggested the name "Osadne Hlasy", Parish News). But shortly after the start, Rev. Gregory left for Cleveland, Ohio, to begin his work of organizing the Slovak Benedictine monastery there as its first prior. "Osadne Hlasy" continued and prospered for many years, 36 to be exact, from 1928 to April 1963. Dr. Peter P. Hletko became contributing editor in 1928 and lasted to the end. Florian Tylka was the editor, and when he died, Vendel Tylka assumed ownership and editorship. This was undoubtedly the most successful venture in the newspaper publishing business that the Chicago Slovaks ever had. The paper, through the contacts of Dr. Hletko became an influential force in the life of the Slovaks all over America, not only in Chicago. It should never have ceased publication. Another void followed the demise of "Osadne Hlasy" in the life of the Chicago Slovaks. The Slovak Catholic Charitable Association sensing the lack of contact among the Chicago Slovak Catholics, decided to help in a small way, and it established and promised to subsidize a small monthly news-pamphl et, the "Nase Hlasy" (Our Voice). It is being published in the Tylka Bros. printery at 2548 W. 63rd St. Much different in its politics from the "Osadne Hlasy," the new paper is totally non-controve rsial and feeble in its editorial program leadership of its readers. SLOVAKIA 51 Other newspapers and publications which have appeared in Chicago over the many years: "Pravda" (The Truth), a labor weekly, established in 1933. Publishers: Pravda Publishing Co., 1510 W. 18th St. "Rovnost' Ludu" (Peoples' Equality), labor, pro-Socialist, later pro-Communist, established 1926, by the same people and at the same address as "Pravda". "Slovensko-Americky Dennik" (Slovak American Daily ) established 1904 in the Chudatsik newspaper chain on Grand Ave. "Slovensko--Americke Noviny" (Slovak American News), another in that chain. "Slovenske Slovo" (The Slovak Word), weekly, established in 1914. Ceased in 1916. Gustav Marsal Petrovsky editor. Publisher Slovak Printing Co., 19th and So. Halsted Street. "Tatran" (Tatranian), fraternal monthly, was the official organ of the Tatran Slovak Union (a Chicago-based fraternal society), until the organization merged with the Slovak Gymnastic Union Sokol of New Jersey. John Matlocha was editor since its beginning in 1916 and it was printed in the Mally Press Printing shop, 1702 S. Halsted, where the "Nove easy" had been published for many years. "Viestnik" (a Slovak monthly) established in 1913 for the parishioners of St. Michael's. Publishers: Hurban Bros. Press at 47th St., near Darnen Ave. Editor: Ladislav Hurban. Lasted until 1918 when L. Hurban ceased being organist at St. Michael's. "Ludovy Dennik" (Peoples' Daily), pro-Communist, published by the same people and at the same address as "Rovnost' Ludu," "Pravda," etc. "Nas Svet" (Our World) was published on North Ashland Avenue, as a non-denominational weekly for a number of years. Its owner, editor and publisher was John Dend'ur, now in New York City. "Slovenska Zena" (The Slovak Woman) was a nice, illustrated monthly catering to the needs of Slovak women, but it lasted only a short time. The editor was Mrs. John Dend'ur, and the publisher her husband John. 52 SLOVAKIA Slovak newspapermen Besides the Slovak newspapermen mentioned in connection with the above Slovak newspapers over the years, we now have Slovaks engaged in American newspaper work. One is Ronald Kotulak, science editor of the Chicago Daily Tribune, who frequently writes medical and health articles for the Chicago Tribune. At the annual awards luncheon of the Chicago Heart Association held in June 1968 at the Palmer House, Mr. Kotulak received the meritorious service award. He was cited for his outstanding role in making· the public aware of the progress against heart disease and heart association programs and accomplishments. The guest speakers were Jimmy Durante and Jim Conway, radio and television personality. Mr. Kotulak is well known in Chicago and North-West Indiana for his outstanding articles on the latest advancements in scientific research. His late mother, Mary Kotulak was a long time officer of the 403 Branch of the Catholic Slovak Ladies Association branch in Chicago. John Husar is a sports writer for the Chicago Daily Tribune, covering football games and practically all other sports. He is the son of John 'Firpo' Husar of Chicago, well known for his sports activities at St. Procopius College, Lisle, Ill. and Purdue University. John Jr. also conducts a weekly column in the Tribune called the "Locker Room" on golf topics. Lawyers and Judges The Slovaks of Chicago have produced and developed a fine group of lawyers. Most of them are native born. The first to achieve a position on the judicial bench was the late Michael Tremko as a Judge of the Municipal Court. A present day Judge is Judge John Pavlik, a St. Michael's school graduate, University of Chicago law school graduate, elected in Calumet City, Ill., but sitting in the Chicago courts practically every day. We have had two assistant State's Attorneys, Sam Papanek and Rudolph Janega, who is still serving. Judge Louis Hyde (Hajdusek), son of the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek, is Probate Judge. Among the attorneys, past and present, we find such names as these: Michael S. Rehak, John Hlavacka, Joseph Hlavacka, J. Hlavacka, Jr., Paul Dolenak, Frank Matavov- SLOVAKIA 53 sky, Edward Kerpec, John Skultety, R. Ptacin, E. Haranta, W. Lesak, John Golosinec, Sam Susina, Steve Svatik, John Svatik, Vlado Hojsa, Ann Kubicek, St. Schostok, John Dluhy, Igor Kovac, Thos Chuhack, Anton Mikula, Edward Fusek, Joseph Steller (former vice-president of the National Slovak Society), now in Milwaukee, Wis., S . Michuda (was also an engineer and Chicago City Bridge engineer ) now out of Chicago, and the late attorneys: Adam Poliak, J. Slifka, Anna Svatik and John Balko. Physicians and Surgeons The Slovaks of Chicago are well represented in the medical field with their proportionate share of good, adequate, dedicated and able physicians, who minister well to the health needs not only of Chicago Slovaks but also Chicagoans of all ethnic groups. The first Slovak comers to this city had to depend on various other group physicians for their medical needs and care. Eventually they developed their own as time went on. One of the first Slovak physicians here was Dr. f>uro Guca on the West Side, an immigrant from the southern part of Slovakia. Soon others-some foreign born, most native born, followed. Thus, the late Dr. Joseph Gazda at 52nd and S. Darnen Ave., now his son, Dr. Mace Gazda. Also, the late Dr. L. J. Hajdusek in Town of Lake on W. 47th St., Dr. Raymond on W. 18th St. (his wife is also an M.D.). Dr. Peter P. Hletko (former clinical instructor in clinical neurology at Loyola U. Strich School of Medicine, former Cook Co . Hospital interne); Dr. Paul Hletko, psychiatrist, former assistant Managing Officer of the State Hospital in Manteno, Ill., now chief Medical Officer of the State Welfare Dept.; Dr. Louis Wajay (his wife is also an M.D.), Dr. John Turcan, Dr. Fr. Soltis, Dr. Wendell Kapustiak (specializing in ophthalmology), Dr. Louis Dvonch and Dr. Wm. Dvonch ( these two are brothers of Fred Dvonch, the orchestra leader on Broadway), Dr. John Vyboch (an orthopedic surgeon now in Los Angeles, Cal.,), Dr. Joseph Mitrick, Dr. Mary Patras (former instructor in Loyola U. Medical School-now she lives and practices in Miami, Fla); Dr. Michael Vanecko (his son is also a physician-the young Vanecko is son-in-law of Mayor Daley); Dr. William Rurik and others. 54 SLOVAKIA The following physicians have died: Dr. Raymond Jezisik, Blue Island, Ill.; Dr. Emil Zidek, Dr. Martin t>asko (his wife also an MD.), Dr. John Belensky, Dr. L. J. Hajdusek and Dr. Martin Kostelny. Dentists Right along with the physicians-surgeons Slovaks in Chicago have a fine crop of capable dentists. We should mention the following: Dr. Steve J . Hletko (former English editor of the Slovak Catholic Sokol "Falcon," now sports director of National Slovak Society, Secretary of the Slovak Bowling Congress and recent president of the Illinois Bowling Congress, a former Lt. Col. of the U. S . Army at Ft. Hood, Texas ), Dr. Richard Remijas, Dr. George Matula, Dr. G. Tilley, three Bunta brothers (Albert, Paul and Joseph ), Dr. Michael Rak, Dr. Michael Orth, Dr. Michael Vitek, Dr. Joseph F. Solus and his wife Dr. Eleanor Solus, Dr . Joseph Biel, Dr. Joseph Tisoncik, Dr. John Poronsky (Secretary of "Darnen" S & L. Assn.), and Dr. Daniel Tylka, now practising in Toledo, Ill. Pharmacists The drug profession is not quite as well represented as the physicians, dentists and lawyers, but at least the following are known: the late four Lesko brothers, Joseph Duleba and his son, Messrs (two ) zibrida (Bernard died since this article was written ), Mr. Grigus, B. Mensik and John Miklian on West 63rd St. The Arts In the arts the Slovaks here have produced such stars as Mary Halama from the neighborhood of Chicago Ave., and Frederick Sts., an operatic concert singer whose career was rather short. She moved to New York, married and apparently gave up her career. Lillian Michuda from Roseland was a splendid singer and entered the movies. One of her first movies was with Jack Benny, under the movie name of "Lillian Cornell." Other movies followed but she too married and forsook the cinema and settled down. The one real luminary is Frederick Dvonch, a graduate of the Juilliard School of Music in New York. He is an orchestra leader and composer. He conducted the SLOVAKIA 55 orchestra for Allegheny-Ludlum Steel in a series of radio musical programs. He also conducted for "Show Boat," "Song of Norway," "Carousel" and other Broadway musicals, both on and off Broadway. Freddie Dvonch is a real talent and an artist, descended from a musical family-his father, a tailor, was a band musician, his uncle, Anton Olach, was a band musician, and Freddie's two brothers , the physicians, were also good violinists at early ages. Freddie has a doctorate in music. Other good singers are Irene Kocur and Mary ( skriba ) Koys, who at one time had short season appearances with the chorus in Chicago opera. Orchestra leaders Besides many small local bands and orchestras and combos, some amateur, some semi-professional, Joe Pat(erek) has a popular polka band, much like the wellknown Frankie Yankovich. They play polkas, waltzes, schottisches etc. He plays Slovak, Czech, Polish and international numbers. He puts on quite an act. One of his parents was Slovak, the other Polish. - Frankie Slaboda is a good violinist, a good entertainer and a good orchestra leader. - Dr. Isidore Mlecko, a chiropodist from Chicago Heights, originally came from Roseland, was much like Frankie Slaboda. But unfortunately he died a short time ago. R el i gi ous orders The "Our Lady of Sorrows Convent" is the Convent of the Slovak Benedictine Sisters in Tinley Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago. They branched off the Czech Benedictine Convent in Lisle, Ill. Mother Theresita, OSB., was the first prioress. The present Rev. Mother is Mother Geraldine, OSB. Besides the old convent building, they have a new Convent, built and dedicated only two years ago . Rt. Rev. Abbot Kojis, OSB., from St. Andrew's Abbey in Cleveland, is chaplain. Chicago Slovaks contribute heavily. The Slovak Franciscan Fathers in Valparaiso, Indiana, although a short distance from Chicago, are close to the hearts of many Chicago Slovak Catholics and they support the Franciscan Fathers very generously. The Chicago Slovak Catholics hold annual pilgrimages to the Seven 56 SLOVAKIA Dolors Shrine on the grounds of the monastery. A new Church has been built there recently. Old peoples' and nursing homes The Slovak Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius from Danville, Pa., conduct the St. Cyril Villa, in Highland Park, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, Ill. Some Chicago Slovaks avail themselves of this service. Others support the Villa financially. The Daughters of St. Francis, a Slovak Sisters Franciscan order, conduct the Nursing Home of St. Joseph in Lacon, Illinois. Many Chicago Slovaks have contributed generously to these Sisters since they came from Slovakia as immigrants and also contributed to the building of the Nursing Home. The home accomodates 50 patients. A new addition is being built to accomodate another 50 patients. Also a new million dollar mother-house. These Sisters also run a hospital in Mountainview, Mo. Undertakers Of these, the late John M. Kubina was probably the first Slovak undertaker here. He celebrated his 50th anniversary as a funeral director four years ago, shortly before his death. He was active in many extra-curricular fields, including fishing and bowling (he was President of the Slovak Bowling Congress and savings and loan work, President and Chairman of the board at "Darnen S & L.). Many other Slovak undertakers have died here: Sam Kostelny, Steve Kostelny, John Zidek (his son is carrying on), Martin Mensik (son is continuing the business), Charles Machacek, Thomas Barosko, John Palenica and John Lattyak. Well known names were also Paterek and John Posuch. Some of those still active today are: John Satala, Edward Tybor, William Machacek, B. Mensik, John t>Oltis, Miss Judy Tybor, John Palenica, Jr., and Fred Kubasak, now in California. Edward Dluhy in now in Florida. Theater Owners There have not been many of these from the Slovak ranks. In 1913 the late John Remijas and the late Charles Kobilak teamed up and conducted the theater business in the "Gaelic Theater" on W. 47th St., near Western SLOVAKIA 57 Ave. Mr. Kobilak died and Mr. Remijas carried on, in fact expanded when he built the "Acadia Theater" at 55th and Fairfield Ave. in 1929 and kept both theaters going for many years, even during the depression. He was the father of Dr. Richard Remijas, a dentist, and father-in-law of Dr. Peter P . Hletko (wife Anna). With advancing years and failing health, he eventually sold both theaters but did not live too long after that. He died in 1947. Both theaters are now converted to other businesses. Brokers In the investment field we have at least two account representatives with brokerage houses: Milan Blazek with Francis Du Pont Co., 122 So. LaSalle St., and Godfrey Labda, with Howe, Barnes & Co., 208 S . LaSalle Street. Banks and bankers Some of Chicago Slovaks even tried banking as a business, but did not have much success. Perhaps the earliest was John Haluska on the West Side shortly after the turn of the century. He never attained great success, but he enjoyed a good folloving among his people. Later Papanek-Kovac State Bank operated for a few years at 886 Milwaukee Ave., but the Great Depression took its toll here. It was said that if the supervisory state authorities had not been so quick on the draw and had they been just a little more lenient, the P. K . Bank would have worked out its temporary squeeze. John S. Jurik was perhaps the most successful Slovak banker in Chicago, while it lasted. For years he had been a real estate and insurance broker on West 47th St. near Darnen Avenue ( then called Robey St. ) . Eventually he organized the Robey State Bank, on West 47th St., just west of Robey St. The bank enjoyed pretty good success for a long time . The writer of this article worked in this bank for several summers (during student vacations ) as a bookkeeper and teller. Just before the depression, Robey State Bank merged with Depositors State Bank at 47th and Ashland Ave. and Mr. Jurik became one of the vice-presidents of the merged bank. Mr. Vaclav Pesicka, former secretary of "Dunaj" S & L. Assn., was the president of Depositors. But the depression eventually cut down Depositors Bank 58 SLOVAKIA too, as it did many other banks at that time. So, Robey State Bank and Depositors State Bank vanished off the face of the earth. Slovak Manufacturers in Chicago Soon after the Slovaks reached Chicago many of them began looking around and after acclimating themselves started various business enterprises. Many of them started or purchased taverns and at one time this was probably the most profitable business for the Slovaks. Many entered the grocery and meat market business but these ventures, like milk stores or dairies are fading out of the picture since merchandising chains and shopping centers grew up profusely. One outstanding exception is the wholesale dairy owned and managed by J. Ziak and his sons in South Chicago. Other Chicago Slovaks, particularly those from a town of Brezova, in Slovakia, who brought good experience to this country about tanning hides, these entered the tanning business, wood processing, and manufacturing of other hide products, such as drum heads, belts, brief cases etc. Others brought varied experiences and abilities such as wire workers. In Trencin county in Slovakia many were wire workers and many travelled all over the world plying their craft. They were called "drotari" and were able not only to manufacture wire products, but were also handy in repairing various objects in the home with the aid of wiring, such as broken pots, vases, ceramic objects etc. Their travel experiences were many and some of them were away from home many months, or even years. travelling from country to country. One of them, a wireworker by the name of Adam Dzudzi, told me he travelled extensively in Russia, knew the country well and spent much time in Tiflis, capital of the Georgian Republic. Others knew Baku well in Azerbajdjan USSR. Let us list at least a few of the manufacturing businesses that the Slovaks owned and conducted in Chicago at one time or another: Tanners and wool processors White Eagle Rawhide Mfg. Co., 1652 N. Throop St. Owners: George :ourkovic and John R. Janae. Organized SLOVAKIA 59 in 1924. Manufacture of drum heads, banjos, tamborines, children's toys and drums etc. Employed 12 people. Liberty Rawhide and Tanning Co., 2020 N. Paulina Street. Manufacture of belts and belting. Representative : Steve Nosko. Kruty and Kruty. Organized 1939. Wool and sheep and goat hide processing. Employed seven people. John Kruty, representative. 1716 W. Webster Avenue. Vrablik & Co. Organized 1947. Carried on the same business as Kruty & Kruty, at the same address. Employed five people. Bachar & Mizialko. Organized 1935 by George Bachar and John Mizialko. Later the owners were: John Mizialko, Edward Mizialko and George Bachar. Manager of the business: John Mizialko, Sr. Their business was pulling of sheep pelts and the pickling of sheep skins. Paul Konecnik & Son. Stripping of wool. Martin slahor was in the wool and hide business since 1916. Samuel slahor-in the same business. National Wool Pulling and Scouring Co. Organized in 1921. President John Svatik (a brother-in-law of Dr. Stefan Osusky, the former ambasador from Czecho-Slovakia to France); Stefan Svatik, secretary, and Paul Konecnik, treasurer. Yearly output: 700,000 lbs. of wool shorn, washed and dried. Employed 10 people. 1117 W. Webster Avenue. F &B Mfg. Co. Owner: John Filko, Cable address : Filko-Chicago. Motto: "The crown jewels of ignition." The firm makes various automotive parts and various plastic caps, tops, and other objects. Filko Ignition-5840 North Northwest Hwy, is a Division of F & B. John Filko has been in this business for a long, long time. During the World War II, he was the recipient of many government orders and he received government subsidies for expansion purposes and for increasing his facilities for production of necessary work and manufacture. An interesting sidelight on John Filko and his F & B Co. Many of the products, particularly the plastic items, bear the name of the manufacturer, Filko, or Filko Co. Some years ago, the Philco Radio Company felt that this 60 SLOVAKIA was some sort of an encroachment on their name, and they sued to prevent John Filko using this trade-mark. Many and long, and expensive court battles followed. Filko claimed that this is his family name and he would protect it, and his right to use it, to the end of the world and to the limit of his treasury and all his resources. After extended litigation and appeals in courts, John Filko won out. Besides the lower courts, the litigation went through the Appelate Court and the Philco Co. ran the case up to the Supreme Court of the U.S. But John Filko won his case in all the courts, including the Supreme Court. Defending this case cost John Filko $42,000.00. John Filko has five plants, including two in Chicago at 4248 W. Chicago Ave. and Crawford and Chicago Avenue, one in Phoenix, Arizona, and even one in Bogota, Columbia. They manufacture electric parts for automobiles , electrical relays, parts for helicopters and jets for the U. S. Army and Navy. They do many millions of dollars of business every year. John Filko employs 500 people. John Filko's is a remarkable story. This fantastic success in business is certainly remarkable for a poor immigrant Slovak from Slovakia. This should encourage many of our native born to strive as hard as John Filko did, and while not every one can attain such success through hard work and application without some luck, many certainly can and would, if they go about it seriously and industriously. In World War I, Mr. Filko was a volunteer Czecho-Slovak Legionaire. The Legion helped establish Czecho-Slovakia. Wire workers Chillo Mfg. Co. 2106 So. Kedzie Avenue. Owner: Paul Chillo. Everede Tool Co. 2000 N. Parkside Avenue. Owner : J. Proksa. Canning, Pekara Inc. Representative: Gustav Pekara, Jr. 1809 W. Webster Avenue. Philadelphia Wire Lamp Frame Co. 1126 West 18th Street. Avondale Machinery Works Mfg. Co. 5546 N. Harlem Avenue. Milan Filip represented the company. SLOVAKIA 61 Van Dyke Industries. 2259 W. 21st Street. Stephen Zidek. Supreme Wire & Metal Products Co. 317 East 29th Street. Premier Wire Lamp Shade Frame Co. 1716 S. Michigan Avenue. Western Wire Works Inc. Michael Martinek and Sons, 951 W. 18th Place. Manufactured various wire products, bird cages, wire cages for offices, elevators etc. Premier Metal Works, Inc. 1616 Clinton Street. Owner: Andrew Micjeta, who at one time was very active in Slovak fraternal work. Wood workers Arrow Parlor Furniture Frames. J. Havlik. 629 West Cermak Road. Marcek Furniture, Division of Central Parlor Frame Co. Inc. 1311 W. 47th Street. Olach Furniture Frames, Inc. 2527 W. Moffat Street. Owner: Anton Olach (an uncle of Dr. Frederick Dvonch, the violin virtuoso and orchestra leader on radio, TV and Broadway). Manufactured home furniture, church furnishings, institutional furniture etc. Had a subdivision: Mountainview Wood Prod. Co., Mountainview City, Arkansas. Has retired from this business several years ago. Other Businesses and Occupations The Slovaks in Chicago have been engaged in every kind of imaginable business, profession and occupation. While at one time, the saloon or tavern business was most popular, Slovak people have expanded into other lines. P. Kvorka has a large furniture store and so did Emil Arbet and J. Kostolansky. Soltis Radio and appliance store is a large establishment owned by John Soltis on 51st and Washtenaw now on 55th and South Pulaski Road. John zacek owns and operates a large trucking and hauling firm, the Fairfield Motors. Emil Arbet also had the Arbet Truck Lines. At one time, every side street had a grocery and meat market for the convenience of the local people. Now the large supermarkets, and shopping plazas have taken over this business, which even the automobile has made more 62 SLOVAKIA accessible to the housewife. Such local retail butchers and grocers should be mentioned as John Bistyak for a very large number of years on 48th and Darnen Ave., Joseph Peterka on Iowa St., on the northwest side. John Tybor and Ernest Keblusek p.as been on the south side. The late Mrs. Pitak was on the west side, so were the Sadeckis. The Turcans were at 24th Street, in Cicero. The Rafa.e's on the south side, so were the Bzduch's, and so was Mrs. Panko and the John Pirohar's. Also J . Dluhy, Sr., and Mrs. Oskvarek. We have also had chiropractors--e.g. Fred Kabana and his wife (now in Daytona Beach, Fla.) , the John and Johns (man and wife) and others. Vendel Tylka and his two sons still operate the Tylka Bros. Press, a commercial printery on West 63rd Street. John and Mrs. Keblusek, and their two sons, operate a very large and modern Ace Hardware store at 155th and South Cicero, in Oak Forest, Ill. Tony Pastyak and his wife Florence conduct a restaurant business on W. 63rd St., catering to parties, weddings and after-funeral luncheons. Also cocktail lounge. Many had retail shoe stores (like Nick Vratanina, J. Jurgovsky, Facuna, etc.). Galos is secretary and co-owner of the James Coal Co. on South Halsted Street. He has been in the coal business for many years. Many are, or have been in the real estate business, or in the insurance business e.g. Joseph Hubalik, ~oltis Realty, Karkoska, Dusan Augustiny and J. Fabry and others. And we had many in the travel bureau business e . g. Eden Radie, Michael Kaplan, Cerven Tvrdy and others. Large numbers of Slovak young ladies have become nurses and others devoted themselves to laboratory work. Very many are public school teachers. BIBLIOGRAPHY Souv enir of the F irst Catholic Slovak Day in Chicago, 1931. Dr. P eter P. Hletko, Edi tor. P. V. Rovnianek-Rovinov: Zcipisky za ziva pochov aneho. (Memoirs of one buried alive). 1924. Savings & Loan Statistics. Cook County Council. 1967. Statistics of Frat ernal Benefi t Soci eti es. 1967. Fraternal Monitor. Adam Podkrivacky: Slovaks in Chi cago 1872-1962. SLOVAKIA 63 Souvenir Program of the 20th regular convention of the National Slovak Society - held in Chicago, 1950. Czechs and Slovaks (World's Fair Memorial), Chicago, Ill., 1933. Czech and Slovak leaders in Metropolitan Chicago. Edited by Daniel D. Droba, M. A., Ph. D. Published by the Slavonic Club of the University of Chicago. 1934. DR. PETER P. HLETKO was the Supreme Medical Examiner for the Slovak Catholic Sok-01 for some 36 years, from 1927 to 1963. The Youngstown convention of the or• ganization named him Honorary Supreme Medical Examiner for life. He was born in Chicago, Ill., in 1902, attended and was graduated from St. Michael's Slovak Parrish school, then ·attended St. Procopius Academy and College (19151921) in Lisle, Ill. The next two years he spent at De Paul University in Chicago and received his Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry. From 1923-1927 he attended Loyola University (now Stritch School of Medicine of Loyola University) in Chicago and in 1928 received his Doctor of Medicine degree. He then spent 1½ years interning at Cook County Hospital in Chicago and began his private practise of medicine on December 31, 1928. Some eight month later he was invited to join the faculty of the Loyola University School of Medicine and became instructor in clinical neurology for the junior students in their third year of medical school. He kept this post for a number of years, but later resigned because of his increasing medical practise and other civic and political commitments. He was twice president of the Slovak League of America and is now Honorary Supreme President. At one time he served as secretary of the Supreme Court of the Nat. Slovak Society and for the last number of years is the President of the Literary Committee of that organization. In 1938 he led a delegation of the Slovak League of America to Slovakia, CzechoSlovakia and Poland on the the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Pittsburgh Pact, in an effort to convince or compel the Czecho Slovak government to recognize the stipulations of that Pact to yield to demands of the Slovak people for complete equality in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Starting with the April 13, 1927 issue, he was editor of the "Jaro", a monthly supplement of <the "Jednota" for a number of years. The "Jaro" was published for the benefit of the Junior Branch and Sokols of the First Catholic Slovak Union. For 35 years Dr. Hletko was c-0ntributing editor of the 'Osadne Hlasy' (Slovak Parish News) in Chicago, writing weekly editorials regularly and also writing such columns of comment and criticism as the 'Iskry' (Sparks) by 'Nitran', 'Paberky' (Gleamings) and others. For some 39 years he is a director and president of the 'Gage Park Savings and Loan Association' in Chicago, a $22,000,000.00 plus fi. nancial institullion. Dr. Hletko is now semi-retired but maintains his interest in this savings-loan association, in the Slovak Catholic Sokol (he is a member of the all-important Executive Committee), in the Slovak League of America and in all matters Slovak and civic.  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 of Chicago Description An account of the resource Dr. Peter P. Hletko Slovakia, Vol. 19 (No. 42), 1969 pp. 32-63 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hletko, Peter P., 1902-1973 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1969 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/29447f6d211a355161309fa98bc1dea0.pdf 3a23cb29402bede360b3cea790b2ea44 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA If he does not find sufficient records, he will survey the self-reoog,nition nationailly, especfa:lly the personalities of the Rev. Stephen Furdek, the foll!Ilder of t.lhe First Catholic SJ.walk Union, and P eter Rovniiaine'k, the foU!Ilde r of the Nationa1 Slova'k Society. Dr. Greene, who has learned to read and ooderstand SlovaJk, is familiar with the ouilitura1 and historicaJl material a'Wlllfa1ble art: tihe J ankola Lj,brary iin Damville, Pa., the S[ova'k linst1turte Li,b rary in Olevel-amd, Ohio, and the faciltties iin Pittsburgh, Pa. rund Chicago, Illinois. In his own reference library he has joot about aJll the books publ!ished about the American SlovaJks, both ii11 the English and S.Jovak language. In his cooversation he talks 147 with ease aibout FuTdek, JankoLa, Murgas, Rovnianek, Sabol, Cutlen, Ko j is, Hrobak, Hletko, itfue Slov,a;k League of Arrnedca, the S[ovalk CaitJholic Federation of America, Lhe Jednota, amd a;ll the other Slovaik orgamizations. He .feels he hi t a bonanza when he came across the 75 Year History of the 1?'irst Oatholk Slovaik Union (75 rdkov Prvej KatoliC!kej Sloveniskej Jednoty), by Dr. Joseph Pauco. •'Not only is it a complete a.ind most comprehensive 1h i s t o r y of the J ednota ,amd rt!he Slovatks in Arrnerlca, buit its many references, footnotes, and bibliography wiilil sart:isfy any serious reader and research historiam," said Dr. Greene. Joseph C. Krajsa A DELICATE SUBJECT On March 17, 1965, was St. Pia t T •i c k's Day, a day Wlhidh iJS lh~1d .fill high esteem in ,tJhe heart of every Irishman wthether of remote ancestry from -the United States or from a,cross :the s ea. ]n New Yoiik this day is celebra,ted wi:f:Jh an annual parade down F'wth Avenue. By chiam.ce my -husbam.d is em- ployed in a 'luxury apa:ritment house overlooking Ce n tr a 1 parik: ; thus lh e viewed the paraide for the first time a1thougih !he immigrated to the United States six years ago. His Irish co-wo:rike r raved about the spectac:Ie. Meanwhile, they were jomed by a third pa11ty who oommented on the strong Irish nation- �148 SLOVAKIA aJisti,c fee '1i 111 g. Noting my being Ni:tra situated in Slohusband's aocenit asked where vaJkia. he was from. What is the reruson for my "S1lova'kia", wa:s his reply. interest? I was born twentyUpon this his i ill q u i r e r four yeaiis a,go in New York drew a bl8J!llk expression and City of Mora:viam-SlovaJk iparelllts; rHved in tJhe heart :lf shrugged lb.is shoU!lders. the Slovak and Czech neigh..Czecho-SlovaJkfa; it's a bo•rhood; and graduated from p a r t of Czee1ho-Sll.O'V\akia. the O.rech School. I sensed There aTe two nation,a11ities. that .there was an Ullleasy I'm Slovruk", was his earnest feeRng between some of the reply. Czechs amd SlovaJks. Af,t hough not beilllg a:gg,ressive nor any "Oh." mteHeoturul, I mooe timid inWitJh tlhi<s tJhe company dis- quires for wlhiclh peoip1e either persed. shurnrned away from the poin,t Thart: s a m e evening my or ranigTilly hU'S'.hed me. I soon hUJSban'd recounted the day's discovered that whatever the events remrutikinig how very reaison, it was a delicate and few people are awaire that a coml)lioated subject. 'I'hen I met my fU!ture husbamd who S'1ov,aikia exists. as a subscriber to "Slovak After loolkilng up in a ·b ook v Amerilke" 'began to read of Saints ibheir brief notes secrtion•s irn volving the poliition Saint Part:rick, one of the crul issues 8Jlld ipast history of paJtron sa:illlibs of Ireland, we tJhe cou'1!try. ln the beginning t u r n e d to see whart: was it was difficult for me to written aJbouJt Sairut Cyri,l a,nd ruoknowledg:e the i.1!1.1.f ormatfon Saint MetihodiU!S. According whioh seemed inrflammatory to the text these two saints and cOilltrary to what I preare responsi,ble for tlhe Slav sUJined to be the whole truth. rul,phalbet and s,u/bsequently the Slaiv l,amguage a:s well as Slowly I began to correilaspreading Christianity. It te ·tJhis infovmation with what a·lso mentiOlllS very briefly was wdtten ~rn various artictihe territory .they covered - les, hooks, encyclopedias as soUtt:hern Russia, Bohemia, wel!l as by ,various authors, and Paland. 'Dhere is no men- and foU'Ild thaJt certain fact s tion of Great Mora:via whi~h seemed etther omitted, g,lid~ existed at this time du!':ng ed over, or misinterpreted. the ninth cent ury, its center For e:x:ample, one source ad• �SLOVAKIA milts ilil a few pages 'bha,t Slov.aikia became an independent sitate on March 14, 1939, ,b ut there is no mention of Jozef Tiso, the Roman OatJholic priest a·s :president. lt only states thait Slovaikia fatithfuily did it!he 1b iddings of Germany UIIltil .April 5, 1945 ; when it decided to return to the originaJl bi~sit,a te of Czecho.:Slova!kia, but on equal b a s i s with the Czedhs I pemonai11y ,o annot see it becaiUJSe Slov,aJkia during its independence enjoyed g,reater prosperity than wihen it was in the centra:lized Republic. No state once tasting the fruits of independence :is going to e~ohange it for denationa!lization and communism ll1Il1ess forced to do so. A it ih i rd souree .portrays President Tiso ia;s ,a cautious fascist; a fourth as 'b eing a N arzi ipuppet who danced when Hitler pu[1leid the stTiings. and ainotJher treats the pr;blem as something which unfortunaitely existed. 149 Sudete!rland? In faict Slovak autonomy did not rise over nig<hit so i,t could hide in H itler's· shadow; S<lova!ks wanted aiuitonomy ,b efore World War II. 1t j u s t happened they made a successful break during a itoomoil; a brea!k which was fort!hcoming regardless !if there would have been a Hitler. As for it doing Hitler's biddings, Ptresidenrt Tiso was d e e P 1 Y rooted in Roman Catholic dogma, became presideint without opposition £r?~ the V,aitic~, cou4d not wihlmgly obey H utler who was an ~t heist and ohief advocate agamst ~oman Oa,tJholicism OIIl the pomt itihairt Jesus was a Jew. If President Tiso is bd ng bI18Jil!ded a f ,a scist or a Nazi 1 pUJPPet wihairt would one label Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, along wiith tJhe French who made a..n agreement with Hitler in Mu\Jlich in reg,a.rd to Sudclenland; O!I' Benes's 20 ye a r aJilisance treaity wi,t h Moscow when he c o u l d have well The ,p oint is these state- guessed StaJlm's intentions! menits are 1cold and narrowIt is easy to labe'l rpeople, miinded. How could a small the de trimentail fact being it ' newly..formed Slovalk st.ate ' iJS sei'zed Uipon by an NI-inaif.ter a tjhousam.d y e a r ;; of formed audience which dines fore~gn ru[e, stand against on coiined phrases disregardthe higMy organized and miing the initial source. litarized Germany who alMary A. Hlock y ready todk Austr~a and the � SLOVAKIA If he does not find sufficient records, he will survey the self-reoog,nition nationailly, especfa:lly the personalities of the Rev. Stephen Furdek, the foll!Ilder of t.lhe First Catholic SJ.walk Union, and P eter Rovniiaine'k, the foU!Ilde r of the Nationa1 Slova'k Society. Dr. Greene, who has learned to read and ooderstand SlovaJk, is familiar with the ouilitura1 and historicaJl material a'Wlllfa1ble art: tihe J ankola Lj,brary iin Damville, Pa., the S[ova'k linst1turte Li,b rary in Olevel-amd, Ohio, and the faciltties iin Pittsburgh, Pa. rund Chicago, Illinois. In his own reference library he has joot about aJll the books publ!ished about the American SlovaJks, both ii11 the English and S.Jovak language. In his cooversation he talks 147 with ease aibout FuTdek, JankoLa, Murgas, Rovnianek, Sabol, Cutlen, Ko j is, Hrobak, Hletko, itfue Slov,a;k League of Arrnedca, the S[ovalk CaitJholic Federation of America, Lhe Jednota, amd a;ll the other Slovaik orgamizations. He .feels he hi t a bonanza when he came across the 75 Year History of the 1?'irst Oatholk Slovaik Union (75 rdkov Prvej KatoliC!kej Sloveniskej Jednoty), by Dr. Joseph Pauco. •'Not only is it a complete a.ind most comprehensive 1h i s t o r y of the J ednota ,amd rt!he Slovatks in Arrnerlca, buit its many references, footnotes, and bibliography wiilil sart:isfy any serious reader and research historiam," said Dr. Greene. Joseph C. Krajsa A DELICATE SUBJECT On March 17, 1965, was St. Pia t T •i c k's Day, a day Wlhidh iJS lh~1d .fill high esteem in ,tJhe heart of every Irishman wthether of remote ancestry from -the United States or from a,cross :the s ea. ]n New Yoiik this day is celebra,ted wi:f:Jh an annual parade down F'wth Avenue. By chiam.ce my -husbam.d is em- ployed in a 'luxury apa:ritment house overlooking Ce n tr a 1 parik: ; thus lh e viewed the paraide for the first time a1thougih !he immigrated to the United States six years ago. His Irish co-wo:rike r raved about the spectac:Ie. Meanwhile, they were jomed by a third pa11ty who oommented on the strong Irish nation- �148 SLOVAKIA aJisti,c fee '1i 111 g. Noting my being Ni:tra situated in Slohusband's aocenit asked where vaJkia. he was from. What is the reruson for my "S1lova'kia", wa:s his reply. interest? I was born twentyUpon this his i ill q u i r e r four yeaiis a,go in New York drew a bl8J!llk expression and City of Mora:viam-SlovaJk iparelllts; rHved in tJhe heart :lf shrugged lb.is shoU!lders. the Slovak and Czech neigh..Czecho-SlovaJkfa; it's a bo•rhood; and graduated from p a r t of Czee1ho-Sll.O'V\akia. the O.rech School. I sensed There aTe two nation,a11ities. that .there was an Ullleasy I'm Slovruk", was his earnest feeRng between some of the reply. Czechs amd SlovaJks. Af,t hough not beilllg a:gg,ressive nor any "Oh." mteHeoturul, I mooe timid inWitJh tlhi<s tJhe company dis- quires for wlhiclh peoip1e either persed. shurnrned away from the poin,t Thart: s a m e evening my or ranigTilly hU'S'.hed me. I soon hUJSban'd recounted the day's discovered that whatever the events remrutikinig how very reaison, it was a delicate and few people are awaire that a coml)lioated subject. 'I'hen I met my fU!ture husbamd who S'1ov,aikia exists. as a subscriber to "Slovak After loolkilng up in a ·b ook v Amerilke" 'began to read of Saints ibheir brief notes secrtion•s irn volving the poliition Saint Part:rick, one of the crul issues 8Jlld ipast history of paJtron sa:illlibs of Ireland, we tJhe cou'1!try. ln the beginning t u r n e d to see whart: was it was difficult for me to written aJbouJt Sairut Cyri,l a,nd ruoknowledg:e the i.1!1.1.f ormatfon Saint MetihodiU!S. According whioh seemed inrflammatory to the text these two saints and cOilltrary to what I preare responsi,ble for tlhe Slav sUJined to be the whole truth. rul,phalbet and s,u/bsequently the Slaiv l,amguage a:s well as Slowly I began to correilaspreading Christianity. It te ·tJhis infovmation with what a·lso mentiOlllS very briefly was wdtten ~rn various artictihe territory .they covered - les, hooks, encyclopedias as soUtt:hern Russia, Bohemia, wel!l as by ,various authors, and Paland. 'Dhere is no men- and foU'Ild thaJt certain fact s tion of Great Mora:via whi~h seemed etther omitted, g,lid~ existed at this time du!':ng ed over, or misinterpreted. the ninth cent ury, its center For e:x:ample, one source ad• �SLOVAKIA milts ilil a few pages 'bha,t Slov.aikia became an independent sitate on March 14, 1939, ,b ut there is no mention of Jozef Tiso, the Roman OatJholic priest a·s :president. lt only states thait Slovaikia fatithfuily did it!he 1b iddings of Germany UIIltil .April 5, 1945 ; when it decided to return to the originaJl bi~sit,a te of Czecho.:Slova!kia, but on equal b a s i s with the Czedhs I pemonai11y ,o annot see it becaiUJSe Slov,aJkia during its independence enjoyed g,reater prosperity than wihen it was in the centra:lized Republic. No state once tasting the fruits of independence :is going to e~ohange it for denationa!lization and communism ll1Il1ess forced to do so. A it ih i rd souree .portrays President Tiso ia;s ,a cautious fascist; a fourth as 'b eing a N arzi ipuppet who danced when Hitler pu[1leid the stTiings. and ainotJher treats the pr;blem as something which unfortunaitely existed. 149 Sudete!rland? In faict Slovak autonomy did not rise over nig<hit so i,t could hide in H itler's· shadow; S<lova!ks wanted aiuitonomy ,b efore World War II. 1t j u s t happened they made a successful break during a itoomoil; a brea!k which was fort!hcoming regardless !if there would have been a Hitler. As for it doing Hitler's biddings, Ptresidenrt Tiso was d e e P 1 Y rooted in Roman Catholic dogma, became presideint without opposition £r?~ the V,aitic~, cou4d not wihlmgly obey H utler who was an ~t heist and ohief advocate agamst ~oman Oa,tJholicism OIIl the pomt itihairt Jesus was a Jew. If President Tiso is bd ng bI18Jil!ded a f ,a scist or a Nazi 1 pUJPPet wihairt would one label Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, along wiith tJhe French who made a..n agreement with Hitler in Mu\Jlich in reg,a.rd to Sudclenland; O!I' Benes's 20 ye a r aJilisance treaity wi,t h Moscow when he c o u l d have well The ,p oint is these state- guessed StaJlm's intentions! menits are 1cold and narrowIt is easy to labe'l rpeople, miinded. How could a small the de trimentail fact being it ' newly..formed Slovalk st.ate ' iJS sei'zed Uipon by an NI-inaif.ter a tjhousam.d y e a r ;; of formed audience which dines fore~gn ru[e, stand against on coiined phrases disregardthe higMy organized and miing the initial source. litarized Germany who alMary A. Hlock y ready todk Austr~a and the � 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 1965, Vol. 15 Description An account of the resource Vol. 15 (No. 38), 1965. 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 1965 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 If he does not find sufficient records, he will survey the self-reoog,nition nationailly, especfa:lly the personalities of the Rev. Stephen Furdek, the foll!Ilder of t.lhe First Catholic SJ.walk Union, and P eter Rovniiaine'k, the foU!Ilde r of the Nationa1 Slova'k Society. Dr. Greene, who has learned to read and ooderstand SlovaJk, is familiar with the ouilitura1 and historicaJl material a'Wlllfa1ble art: tihe J ankola Lj,brary iin Damville, Pa., the S[ova'k linst1turte Li,b rary in Olevel-amd, Ohio, and the faciltties iin Pittsburgh, Pa. rund Chicago, Illinois. In his own reference library he has joot about aJll the books publ!ished about the American SlovaJks, both ii11 the English and S.Jovak language. In his cooversation he talks 147 with ease aibout FuTdek, JankoLa, Murgas, Rovnianek, Sabol, Cutlen, Ko j is, Hrobak, Hletko, itfue Slov,a;k League of Arrnedca, the S[ovalk CaitJholic Federation of America, Lhe Jednota, amd a;ll the other Slovaik orgamizations. He .feels he hi t a bonanza when he came across the 75 Year History of the 1?'irst Oatholk Slovaik Union (75 rdkov Prvej KatoliC!kej Sloveniskej Jednoty), by Dr. Joseph Pauco. •'Not only is it a complete a.ind most comprehensive 1h i s t o r y of the J ednota ,amd rt!he Slovatks in Arrnerlca, buit its many references, footnotes, and bibliography wiilil sart:isfy any serious reader and research historiam," said Dr. Greene. Joseph C. Krajsa A DELICATE SUBJECT On March 17, 1965, was St. Pia t T •i c k's Day, a day Wlhidh iJS lh~1d .fill high esteem in ,tJhe heart of every Irishman wthether of remote ancestry from -the United States or from a,cross :the s ea. ]n New Yoiik this day is celebra,ted wi:f:Jh an annual parade down F'wth Avenue. By chiam.ce my -husbam.d is em- ployed in a 'luxury apa:ritment house overlooking Ce n tr a 1 parik: ; thus lh e viewed the paraide for the first time a1thougih !he immigrated to the United States six years ago. His Irish co-wo:rike r raved about the spectac:Ie. Meanwhile, they were jomed by a third pa11ty who oommented on the strong Irish nation- 148 SLOVAKIA aJisti,c fee '1i 111 g. Noting my being Ni:tra situated in Slohusband's aocenit asked where vaJkia. he was from. What is the reruson for my "S1lova'kia", wa:s his reply. interest? I was born twentyUpon this his i ill q u i r e r four yeaiis a,go in New York drew a bl8J!llk expression and City of Mora:viam-SlovaJk iparelllts; rHved in tJhe heart :lf shrugged lb.is shoU!lders. the Slovak and Czech neigh..Czecho-SlovaJkfa; it's a bo•rhood; and graduated from p a r t of Czee1ho-Sll.O'V\akia. the O.rech School. I sensed There aTe two nation,a11ities. that .there was an Ullleasy I'm Slovruk", was his earnest feeRng between some of the reply. Czechs amd SlovaJks. Af,t hough not beilllg a:gg,ressive nor any "Oh." mteHeoturul, I mooe timid inWitJh tlhi<s tJhe company dis- quires for wlhiclh peoip1e either persed. shurnrned away from the poin,t Thart: s a m e evening my or ranigTilly hU'S'.hed me. I soon hUJSban'd recounted the day's discovered that whatever the events remrutikinig how very reaison, it was a delicate and few people are awaire that a coml)lioated subject. 'I'hen I met my fU!ture husbamd who S'1ov,aikia exists. as a subscriber to "Slovak After loolkilng up in a ·b ook v Amerilke" 'began to read of Saints ibheir brief notes secrtion•s irn volving the poliition Saint Part:rick, one of the crul issues 8Jlld ipast history of paJtron sa:illlibs of Ireland, we tJhe cou'1!try. ln the beginning t u r n e d to see whart: was it was difficult for me to written aJbouJt Sairut Cyri,l a,nd ruoknowledg:e the i.1!1.1.f ormatfon Saint MetihodiU!S. According whioh seemed inrflammatory to the text these two saints and cOilltrary to what I preare responsi,ble for tlhe Slav sUJined to be the whole truth. rul,phalbet and s,u/bsequently the Slaiv l,amguage a:s well as Slowly I began to correilaspreading Christianity. It te ·tJhis infovmation with what a·lso mentiOlllS very briefly was wdtten ~rn various artictihe territory .they covered - les, hooks, encyclopedias as soUtt:hern Russia, Bohemia, wel!l as by ,various authors, and Paland. 'Dhere is no men- and foU'Ild thaJt certain fact s tion of Great Mora:via whi~h seemed etther omitted, g,lid~ existed at this time du!':ng ed over, or misinterpreted. the ninth cent ury, its center For e:x:ample, one source ad• SLOVAKIA milts ilil a few pages 'bha,t Slov.aikia became an independent sitate on March 14, 1939, ,b ut there is no mention of Jozef Tiso, the Roman OatJholic priest a·s :president. lt only states thait Slovaikia fatithfuily did it!he 1b iddings of Germany UIIltil .April 5, 1945 ; when it decided to return to the originaJl bi~sit,a te of Czecho.:Slova!kia, but on equal b a s i s with the Czedhs I pemonai11y ,o annot see it becaiUJSe Slov,aJkia during its independence enjoyed g,reater prosperity than wihen it was in the centra:lized Republic. No state once tasting the fruits of independence :is going to e~ohange it for denationa!lization and communism ll1Il1ess forced to do so. A it ih i rd souree .portrays President Tiso ia;s ,a cautious fascist; a fourth as 'b eing a N arzi ipuppet who danced when Hitler pu[1leid the stTiings. and ainotJher treats the pr;blem as something which unfortunaitely existed. 149 Sudete!rland? In faict Slovak autonomy did not rise over nig<hit so i,t could hide in H itler's· shadow; S<lova!ks wanted aiuitonomy ,b efore World War II. 1t j u s t happened they made a successful break during a itoomoil; a brea!k which was fort!hcoming regardless !if there would have been a Hitler. As for it doing Hitler's biddings, Ptresidenrt Tiso was d e e P 1 Y rooted in Roman Catholic dogma, became presideint without opposition £r?~ the V,aitic~, cou4d not wihlmgly obey H utler who was an ~t heist and ohief advocate agamst ~oman Oa,tJholicism OIIl the pomt itihairt Jesus was a Jew. If President Tiso is bd ng bI18Jil!ded a f ,a scist or a Nazi 1 pUJPPet wihairt would one label Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister, along wiith tJhe French who made a..n agreement with Hitler in Mu\Jlich in reg,a.rd to Sudclenland; O!I' Benes's 20 ye a r aJilisance treaity wi,t h Moscow when he c o u l d have well The ,p oint is these state- guessed StaJlm's intentions! menits are 1cold and narrowIt is easy to labe'l rpeople, miinded. How could a small the de trimentail fact being it ' newly..formed Slovalk st.ate ' iJS sei'zed Uipon by an NI-inaif.ter a tjhousam.d y e a r ;; of formed audience which dines fore~gn ru[e, stand against on coiined phrases disregardthe higMy organized and miing the initial source. litarized Germany who alMary A. Hlock y ready todk Austr~a and the  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 A Delicate Subject Description An account of the resource Mary A. Hlocky Slovakia, Vol. 15 (No. 38), 1965 pp. 147-149 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hlocky, Mary A. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1965 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/67a71766807f746825c0f4f6587618a4.pdf f0d1736d284a8276bfdba5d1f1dacd6a PDF Text Text 156 SLOVAKIA Famous Slovak Inventors Long before the arrival of the Slovaks in central Europer the Celts who inhabited the area, mined iron-ore, silver, gold and lead and utilized these minerals in making various instruments, ornaments and utensils. As newcomers, the Slovaks continued to use these minerals centuries before the coming of the Turkish-Mongol tribes. Technically, both the mining and metal industries remained rather primitive until modern times. New methods and techniques which were developed outside the· country were not introduced until quite recently. Modernization of the mining industry in Slovakia, though of recent data, was preceded in the 17th and 18th centuries by several notable processes. In 1627, for example, it was K. Wendler, a Tyrolean explosive expert, who detonated the first black-powder charge in the Banska stiavnica mines in Slovakia; incidentally, the first of its kind in mining history. Then, J. A. Born (1742-1791), a Saxon from Transylvania, in the latter half of the 18th century introduced the quicksilver (mercury) amalgamation process of refining gold, silver and lead. At the end of the 17th century most of the Slovak mines were flooded because continual warfare caused them to be neglected. Primitive methods of pumping out the water proved inefficient and expensive. They required an outlay of money for wood, men-power and horses. The cost was prohibitive. Water-wheels proved unsatisfactory and mining engineers decided to try the new atmospheric-fire invention of Newcombe. Potter, an Englishman, came to install the new machinery in the Nova Ban.a mine. It was put into operation in 1724. But when it proved to be a failure it was dismantled. In 1733 a series of modified methods were introduced but all proved inadequate. Finally, J. K. Hell (1713-1789), a native Slovak engineer and machinist, installed his own machinery at the entrance of the mine in Banska stiavnica in 1749. It proved successful, and soon afterwards he installed his invention in a �SLOVAKIA 157 number of deep mine shafts. Later Hell developed a better atmospheric type of mine-pump. Mining methods for gold, silver and lead remained primitive and time consuming. It was Born's amalgamation process, developed and adapted from the Spanish types employed in the mines of South America, which reduced the time of processing silver from six weeks to approximately twelve hours. Moreover, wood was reduced to a minimum and lead was saved in the process. A silver metallurgical plant was built in Sklene Teplice, Slovakia, in 1785, and a lead mill or foundry was constructed in Ulmanka, near Stare Hory, in 1788. Sometime in the 14th century the manufacture of glass was introduced into Slovakia, most likely from the Czech plants in Bohemia. At first, ordinary glass was made, and only later quality glassware was produced for use in the metal and chemical plants in the country. We present a brief summary of the life-work of the following Slovak pioneers in technology. Some of these early scientific technicians are known, some but little known, but their work has all been at least partially evaluated. STEFAN A. JEDLfK Among the earliest inventors in Slovakia was Stefan Ananian Jedlik (1800-1896), who came from the village of Zemne, near Kollarovo, Slovakia. A talented youth he chose the priesthood as a life's vocation. In 1831 he was assigned as a teacher to the Gymnasium ( Junior College ) in Bratislava. Soon his work in Physics won the attention of the administration at the University of Budapest, where he was destined to teach for the next four decades. That is why the Magyars claim him as a Hungarian scientist although he stoutly maintained he was a Slovak. As an electro-technician Jedlik won wide acclaim when electricity was still in its infancy. As early as 1829 in his research in electro-magnetism, he hit upon the theory that an electro-magnet must oscillate simultaneously around another electro-magnet once the current is turned on. His experiments proved the theory true and his primitive motor was the forerunner of the induction motor. �158 SLOVAKIA Although Arag, a French physicist, is credited with the discovery of the theory of electro-magnetism , Jedlik's first motor was certainly closer to the idea of the induction motor than Arag's ideas in theoretical form. Unfortunately, the Slovak scientific genius did not publicize his discovery because he dismissed the motor as economically impractical because it depended on power from an expensive source he himself developed, and which a railroad firm adopted not merely for its own use for its telegraph system but actually put it on the market for general use later. In the late 1850's Jedlik discovered the principle of the self-generating dynamo in which a spark at the magnetic pole is sufficient to give it the initial impetus and gradually the electric current generated will attain maximum power. Werner Siemens, a German pioneer in this field, is given credit for the discovery of the dynamo-electric principle which he patented in 1866 despite the fact that Jedlik and others had actually made the discovery before Siemens registered his patent rights. So far it has been ascertained that Jedlik patented approximately eighty (80 ) patents, mostly in the electromagnetic field. Atoms, Jedlik declared, could be split by a high electric current. Matter, he said, consisted of a radio-active primate, later confirmed by the discovery of radium. AUREL STODOLA World renown was won by another Slovak, namely, Aurel Stodola (1859-1942) in the field of electro-technology indirectly, for he developed the idea of the extensive industrial use of electricity by inventing the steam and gas turbines. He always made it quite clear that he was a Slovak who was born in Liptovsky Sv. Mikulas, Slovakia. His first studies in Levoca were supplemented at the technological institute in Budapest. Here he won a scholarship to study at the technological school in Zilrich, Switzerland. After two years of work on the railways of Hungary, Stodola went for further study at the technical college in Charlotteburg in Germany, and then in Paris. He returned to his native homeland where he remained only a short time �SLOVAKIA 159 because his services were required by the Rustanka firm in Prague. In the 1880's Parsons and Laval's steam turbines caught the interest of Stodola who now began concentrating upon perfecting their theoretical ideas and putting them into practical use. His success won him a professorship at the Technological Institute in Ztirich, Switzerland in 1892. Here he remained until 1929. During this period he trained hundreds of experts of two generations in the field of steam and gas turbines. Stodola's life-work in the design and manufacture of turbine engines, which he continued to perfect constantly, remains unique in the scientific world. He won the Watt medal and the Nobel prize in science. JOZEF MURGAS Jozef Murgas (1864-1929), world famous pioneer in wireless telegraphy, was born in Tajov, near Banska Bystrica, Slovakia. He was born of a peasant family and early in life was destined to study for the priesthood. His talents were many, however, particularly in art. Soon after ordination he was sent by his bishop to study at the Academy of Art in Munich. For some reason shortly before completing his course of study at the Academy, he was recalled to Slovakia for pastoral work. Because of his ardent patriotism he incurred the hostility of the pro-Magyar ecclesiastical authorities. Upon hearing of the need for priests for Slovak immigrant communities, he immediately applied for this apostolate. Accordingly, he was sent to the anthracite city of Wilkes-Barre in northeastern Pennsylvania. Father Murgas' apostolate as pastor of a thriving Slovak parish was marked by devoted service to his Slovak people. In his spare time he did some painting, but his experiments in wireless teiegraphy began to take up most of his leisure moments. In his scientific laboratory, which he built himself at one end of the parsonage, the priest-scientist experimented in attempts to send messages by air. At first he used the Morse code but later replaced it with a tone system, which he patented in 1904. By 1911 he obtained about a dozen additional patents. Private speculators and syndicates sensed that his experiments were on the right track to revolutionize the communications' system, and they bombarded Father Mur- �160 SLOVAKIA gas with offers. Finally, the inventor accepted the bid from a Philadelphia syndicate, the Aether or Ether Telegraph Company, which furnished him with a new laboratory in return for his patent rights. But he had to erect the necessary towers for transmitting and receiving the messages. This Father Murgas did by constructing twin towers, each 60 meters in height, one near his home in Wilkes-Barre and the other about ten miles distant near Scranton, Pa. It is a matter of historical record that in 1905 Father Murgas succeeded in sending a message from his hometower to Scranton. Before he could pursue his experimentation further, however, a violent storm damaged the wooden towers and destroyed the antenas. His company refused to advance the money necessary for repairs and soon after the syndicate was dissolved. Apparently, Father Murgas was unable to raise enough money to make the repairs himself. Moreover, he became embroiled in a patent suit with Marconi (who was subsequently to be credited with the invention of modern radio) and Fessenden. Although Father Murgas won the law-suit, the government controls imposed on all means of communicati on at the outbreak of World War I prevented him from following up his initial success. Thus ended the scientific career of the great Slovak pioneer in wireless telegraphy. From this time until his death in 1929 he devoted all his time exclusively to pastoral service and patriotic work among his Slovak people. JOZEF M. PETZVAL Jozef Maximilian Petzval (Pecval)-180 7-1895-was a Slovak despite claims by Magyars and Austrians to the contrary. He was born in Spisska Bela in Slovakia. After completing his schooling in Podolinec, Levoca and the Lyceum in Kosice (in Slovakia) he attended the polytechnical institute at the University of Budapest. He paid his own way from his salary as a city engineer. After receiving his doctorate in mathematics he obtained a professorship at the University of Vienna in 1836. Petzval secured living quarters in an abandoned monastery on Kahlenberg hill above the city. Here he established his own mechanical laboratory where he began producing �SLOVAKIA 161 special optical lens of such quality so that soon they were in demand in all parts of the world. When the daguerrotype photo apparatus appeared on the scene in the 1830's Petzval opened his own studio where he made invaluable contributions to modern photography. By 1840 he developed a photo lens that increased the degree of light ten-fold, thereby considerably decreasing the time of exposure. Voigtlander, an optician in Vienna, became the recipient of a real windfall when Petzval surrendered his formulas in the science of optics to him in return for a contract. Voigtlander refused to live up to the agreement. Accordingly, Petzval became so bitterly involved in litigation that this caused him to become a recluse . .. a final outcome of his misanthropic tendencies. Petzval developed the basics for the production of lens for people afflicted with astigmatism, and his process was adopted in the 1880's by the great Zeiss corporation in Jena. From Petzval's laboratories came the first high-power telescopes and fieldglasses, super electric spotlights and other improvements in the field of optics, as well as new developments in the mathematical sciences. It was only during World War II that Petzval's name was discovered inscribed (in German) on a memorial tablet in his birthplace in Spisska Bela, Slovakia. STEFAN BANIC stefan Banic, the inventor of the parachute, emigrated from his native Slovakia in search of a job in the U.S. He worked at odd jobs and tinkered with an invention that resulted in the making of the first real, workable parachute for which he obtained patent rights from the U.S. Patent Office in 1914. Banic sold the patent rights to a company for a mere pittance and the company made millions on government orders from the U.S. Army Air force during the first World War. (A. A. Hoch, Vyndlezy, ktore zmenili svet (Inventions which changed the world). Published by Mlade Leta, Bratislava, 1959). � 156 SLOVAKIA Famous Slovak Inventors Long before the arrival of the Slovaks in central Europer the Celts who inhabited the area, mined iron-ore, silver, gold and lead and utilized these minerals in making various instruments, ornaments and utensils. As newcomers, the Slovaks continued to use these minerals centuries before the coming of the Turkish-Mongol tribes. Technically, both the mining and metal industries remained rather primitive until modern times. New methods and techniques which were developed outside the· country were not introduced until quite recently. Modernization of the mining industry in Slovakia, though of recent data, was preceded in the 17th and 18th centuries by several notable processes. In 1627, for example, it was K. Wendler, a Tyrolean explosive expert, who detonated the first black-powder charge in the Banska stiavnica mines in Slovakia; incidentally, the first of its kind in mining history. Then, J. A. Born (1742-1791), a Saxon from Transylvania, in the latter half of the 18th century introduced the quicksilver (mercury) amalgamation process of refining gold, silver and lead. At the end of the 17th century most of the Slovak mines were flooded because continual warfare caused them to be neglected. Primitive methods of pumping out the water proved inefficient and expensive. They required an outlay of money for wood, men-power and horses. The cost was prohibitive. Water-wheels proved unsatisfactory and mining engineers decided to try the new atmospheric-fire invention of Newcombe. Potter, an Englishman, came to install the new machinery in the Nova Ban.a mine. It was put into operation in 1724. But when it proved to be a failure it was dismantled. In 1733 a series of modified methods were introduced but all proved inadequate. Finally, J. K. Hell (1713-1789), a native Slovak engineer and machinist, installed his own machinery at the entrance of the mine in Banska stiavnica in 1749. It proved successful, and soon afterwards he installed his invention in a �SLOVAKIA 157 number of deep mine shafts. Later Hell developed a better atmospheric type of mine-pump. Mining methods for gold, silver and lead remained primitive and time consuming. It was Born's amalgamation process, developed and adapted from the Spanish types employed in the mines of South America, which reduced the time of processing silver from six weeks to approximately twelve hours. Moreover, wood was reduced to a minimum and lead was saved in the process. A silver metallurgical plant was built in Sklene Teplice, Slovakia, in 1785, and a lead mill or foundry was constructed in Ulmanka, near Stare Hory, in 1788. Sometime in the 14th century the manufacture of glass was introduced into Slovakia, most likely from the Czech plants in Bohemia. At first, ordinary glass was made, and only later quality glassware was produced for use in the metal and chemical plants in the country. We present a brief summary of the life-work of the following Slovak pioneers in technology. Some of these early scientific technicians are known, some but little known, but their work has all been at least partially evaluated. STEFAN A. JEDLfK Among the earliest inventors in Slovakia was Stefan Ananian Jedlik (1800-1896), who came from the village of Zemne, near Kollarovo, Slovakia. A talented youth he chose the priesthood as a life's vocation. In 1831 he was assigned as a teacher to the Gymnasium ( Junior College ) in Bratislava. Soon his work in Physics won the attention of the administration at the University of Budapest, where he was destined to teach for the next four decades. That is why the Magyars claim him as a Hungarian scientist although he stoutly maintained he was a Slovak. As an electro-technician Jedlik won wide acclaim when electricity was still in its infancy. As early as 1829 in his research in electro-magnetism, he hit upon the theory that an electro-magnet must oscillate simultaneously around another electro-magnet once the current is turned on. His experiments proved the theory true and his primitive motor was the forerunner of the induction motor. �158 SLOVAKIA Although Arag, a French physicist, is credited with the discovery of the theory of electro-magnetism , Jedlik's first motor was certainly closer to the idea of the induction motor than Arag's ideas in theoretical form. Unfortunately, the Slovak scientific genius did not publicize his discovery because he dismissed the motor as economically impractical because it depended on power from an expensive source he himself developed, and which a railroad firm adopted not merely for its own use for its telegraph system but actually put it on the market for general use later. In the late 1850's Jedlik discovered the principle of the self-generating dynamo in which a spark at the magnetic pole is sufficient to give it the initial impetus and gradually the electric current generated will attain maximum power. Werner Siemens, a German pioneer in this field, is given credit for the discovery of the dynamo-electric principle which he patented in 1866 despite the fact that Jedlik and others had actually made the discovery before Siemens registered his patent rights. So far it has been ascertained that Jedlik patented approximately eighty (80 ) patents, mostly in the electromagnetic field. Atoms, Jedlik declared, could be split by a high electric current. Matter, he said, consisted of a radio-active primate, later confirmed by the discovery of radium. AUREL STODOLA World renown was won by another Slovak, namely, Aurel Stodola (1859-1942) in the field of electro-technology indirectly, for he developed the idea of the extensive industrial use of electricity by inventing the steam and gas turbines. He always made it quite clear that he was a Slovak who was born in Liptovsky Sv. Mikulas, Slovakia. His first studies in Levoca were supplemented at the technological institute in Budapest. Here he won a scholarship to study at the technological school in Zilrich, Switzerland. After two years of work on the railways of Hungary, Stodola went for further study at the technical college in Charlotteburg in Germany, and then in Paris. He returned to his native homeland where he remained only a short time �SLOVAKIA 159 because his services were required by the Rustanka firm in Prague. In the 1880's Parsons and Laval's steam turbines caught the interest of Stodola who now began concentrating upon perfecting their theoretical ideas and putting them into practical use. His success won him a professorship at the Technological Institute in Ztirich, Switzerland in 1892. Here he remained until 1929. During this period he trained hundreds of experts of two generations in the field of steam and gas turbines. Stodola's life-work in the design and manufacture of turbine engines, which he continued to perfect constantly, remains unique in the scientific world. He won the Watt medal and the Nobel prize in science. JOZEF MURGAS Jozef Murgas (1864-1929), world famous pioneer in wireless telegraphy, was born in Tajov, near Banska Bystrica, Slovakia. He was born of a peasant family and early in life was destined to study for the priesthood. His talents were many, however, particularly in art. Soon after ordination he was sent by his bishop to study at the Academy of Art in Munich. For some reason shortly before completing his course of study at the Academy, he was recalled to Slovakia for pastoral work. Because of his ardent patriotism he incurred the hostility of the pro-Magyar ecclesiastical authorities. Upon hearing of the need for priests for Slovak immigrant communities, he immediately applied for this apostolate. Accordingly, he was sent to the anthracite city of Wilkes-Barre in northeastern Pennsylvania. Father Murgas' apostolate as pastor of a thriving Slovak parish was marked by devoted service to his Slovak people. In his spare time he did some painting, but his experiments in wireless teiegraphy began to take up most of his leisure moments. In his scientific laboratory, which he built himself at one end of the parsonage, the priest-scientist experimented in attempts to send messages by air. At first he used the Morse code but later replaced it with a tone system, which he patented in 1904. By 1911 he obtained about a dozen additional patents. Private speculators and syndicates sensed that his experiments were on the right track to revolutionize the communications' system, and they bombarded Father Mur- �160 SLOVAKIA gas with offers. Finally, the inventor accepted the bid from a Philadelphia syndicate, the Aether or Ether Telegraph Company, which furnished him with a new laboratory in return for his patent rights. But he had to erect the necessary towers for transmitting and receiving the messages. This Father Murgas did by constructing twin towers, each 60 meters in height, one near his home in Wilkes-Barre and the other about ten miles distant near Scranton, Pa. It is a matter of historical record that in 1905 Father Murgas succeeded in sending a message from his hometower to Scranton. Before he could pursue his experimentation further, however, a violent storm damaged the wooden towers and destroyed the antenas. His company refused to advance the money necessary for repairs and soon after the syndicate was dissolved. Apparently, Father Murgas was unable to raise enough money to make the repairs himself. Moreover, he became embroiled in a patent suit with Marconi (who was subsequently to be credited with the invention of modern radio) and Fessenden. Although Father Murgas won the law-suit, the government controls imposed on all means of communicati on at the outbreak of World War I prevented him from following up his initial success. Thus ended the scientific career of the great Slovak pioneer in wireless telegraphy. From this time until his death in 1929 he devoted all his time exclusively to pastoral service and patriotic work among his Slovak people. JOZEF M. PETZVAL Jozef Maximilian Petzval (Pecval)-180 7-1895-was a Slovak despite claims by Magyars and Austrians to the contrary. He was born in Spisska Bela in Slovakia. After completing his schooling in Podolinec, Levoca and the Lyceum in Kosice (in Slovakia) he attended the polytechnical institute at the University of Budapest. He paid his own way from his salary as a city engineer. After receiving his doctorate in mathematics he obtained a professorship at the University of Vienna in 1836. Petzval secured living quarters in an abandoned monastery on Kahlenberg hill above the city. Here he established his own mechanical laboratory where he began producing �SLOVAKIA 161 special optical lens of such quality so that soon they were in demand in all parts of the world. When the daguerrotype photo apparatus appeared on the scene in the 1830's Petzval opened his own studio where he made invaluable contributions to modern photography. By 1840 he developed a photo lens that increased the degree of light ten-fold, thereby considerably decreasing the time of exposure. Voigtlander, an optician in Vienna, became the recipient of a real windfall when Petzval surrendered his formulas in the science of optics to him in return for a contract. Voigtlander refused to live up to the agreement. Accordingly, Petzval became so bitterly involved in litigation that this caused him to become a recluse . .. a final outcome of his misanthropic tendencies. Petzval developed the basics for the production of lens for people afflicted with astigmatism, and his process was adopted in the 1880's by the great Zeiss corporation in Jena. From Petzval's laboratories came the first high-power telescopes and fieldglasses, super electric spotlights and other improvements in the field of optics, as well as new developments in the mathematical sciences. It was only during World War II that Petzval's name was discovered inscribed (in German) on a memorial tablet in his birthplace in Spisska Bela, Slovakia. STEFAN BANIC stefan Banic, the inventor of the parachute, emigrated from his native Slovakia in search of a job in the U.S. He worked at odd jobs and tinkered with an invention that resulted in the making of the first real, workable parachute for which he obtained patent rights from the U.S. Patent Office in 1914. Banic sold the patent rights to a company for a mere pittance and the company made millions on government orders from the U.S. Army Air force during the first World War. (A. A. Hoch, Vyndlezy, ktore zmenili svet (Inventions which changed the world). Published by Mlade Leta, Bratislava, 1959). � 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 1974, Vol. 24 Description An account of the resource Vol. 24 (No. 47), 1974. 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 1974 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 156 SLOVAKIA Famous Slovak Inventors Long before the arrival of the Slovaks in central Europer the Celts who inhabited the area, mined iron-ore, silver, gold and lead and utilized these minerals in making various instruments, ornaments and utensils. As newcomers, the Slovaks continued to use these minerals centuries before the coming of the Turkish-Mongol tribes. Technically, both the mining and metal industries remained rather primitive until modern times. New methods and techniques which were developed outside the· country were not introduced until quite recently. Modernization of the mining industry in Slovakia, though of recent data, was preceded in the 17th and 18th centuries by several notable processes. In 1627, for example, it was K. Wendler, a Tyrolean explosive expert, who detonated the first black-powder charge in the Banska stiavnica mines in Slovakia; incidentally, the first of its kind in mining history. Then, J. A. Born (1742-1791), a Saxon from Transylvania, in the latter half of the 18th century introduced the quicksilver (mercury) amalgamation process of refining gold, silver and lead. At the end of the 17th century most of the Slovak mines were flooded because continual warfare caused them to be neglected. Primitive methods of pumping out the water proved inefficient and expensive. They required an outlay of money for wood, men-power and horses. The cost was prohibitive. Water-wheels proved unsatisfactory and mining engineers decided to try the new atmospheric-fire invention of Newcombe. Potter, an Englishman, came to install the new machinery in the Nova Ban.a mine. It was put into operation in 1724. But when it proved to be a failure it was dismantled. In 1733 a series of modified methods were introduced but all proved inadequate. Finally, J. K. Hell (1713-1789), a native Slovak engineer and machinist, installed his own machinery at the entrance of the mine in Banska stiavnica in 1749. It proved successful, and soon afterwards he installed his invention in a SLOVAKIA 157 number of deep mine shafts. Later Hell developed a better atmospheric type of mine-pump. Mining methods for gold, silver and lead remained primitive and time consuming. It was Born's amalgamation process, developed and adapted from the Spanish types employed in the mines of South America, which reduced the time of processing silver from six weeks to approximately twelve hours. Moreover, wood was reduced to a minimum and lead was saved in the process. A silver metallurgical plant was built in Sklene Teplice, Slovakia, in 1785, and a lead mill or foundry was constructed in Ulmanka, near Stare Hory, in 1788. Sometime in the 14th century the manufacture of glass was introduced into Slovakia, most likely from the Czech plants in Bohemia. At first, ordinary glass was made, and only later quality glassware was produced for use in the metal and chemical plants in the country. We present a brief summary of the life-work of the following Slovak pioneers in technology. Some of these early scientific technicians are known, some but little known, but their work has all been at least partially evaluated. STEFAN A. JEDLfK Among the earliest inventors in Slovakia was Stefan Ananian Jedlik (1800-1896), who came from the village of Zemne, near Kollarovo, Slovakia. A talented youth he chose the priesthood as a life's vocation. In 1831 he was assigned as a teacher to the Gymnasium ( Junior College ) in Bratislava. Soon his work in Physics won the attention of the administration at the University of Budapest, where he was destined to teach for the next four decades. That is why the Magyars claim him as a Hungarian scientist although he stoutly maintained he was a Slovak. As an electro-technician Jedlik won wide acclaim when electricity was still in its infancy. As early as 1829 in his research in electro-magnetism, he hit upon the theory that an electro-magnet must oscillate simultaneously around another electro-magnet once the current is turned on. His experiments proved the theory true and his primitive motor was the forerunner of the induction motor. 158 SLOVAKIA Although Arag, a French physicist, is credited with the discovery of the theory of electro-magnetism , Jedlik's first motor was certainly closer to the idea of the induction motor than Arag's ideas in theoretical form. Unfortunately, the Slovak scientific genius did not publicize his discovery because he dismissed the motor as economically impractical because it depended on power from an expensive source he himself developed, and which a railroad firm adopted not merely for its own use for its telegraph system but actually put it on the market for general use later. In the late 1850's Jedlik discovered the principle of the self-generating dynamo in which a spark at the magnetic pole is sufficient to give it the initial impetus and gradually the electric current generated will attain maximum power. Werner Siemens, a German pioneer in this field, is given credit for the discovery of the dynamo-electric principle which he patented in 1866 despite the fact that Jedlik and others had actually made the discovery before Siemens registered his patent rights. So far it has been ascertained that Jedlik patented approximately eighty (80 ) patents, mostly in the electromagnetic field. Atoms, Jedlik declared, could be split by a high electric current. Matter, he said, consisted of a radio-active primate, later confirmed by the discovery of radium. AUREL STODOLA World renown was won by another Slovak, namely, Aurel Stodola (1859-1942) in the field of electro-technology indirectly, for he developed the idea of the extensive industrial use of electricity by inventing the steam and gas turbines. He always made it quite clear that he was a Slovak who was born in Liptovsky Sv. Mikulas, Slovakia. His first studies in Levoca were supplemented at the technological institute in Budapest. Here he won a scholarship to study at the technological school in Zilrich, Switzerland. After two years of work on the railways of Hungary, Stodola went for further study at the technical college in Charlotteburg in Germany, and then in Paris. He returned to his native homeland where he remained only a short time SLOVAKIA 159 because his services were required by the Rustanka firm in Prague. In the 1880's Parsons and Laval's steam turbines caught the interest of Stodola who now began concentrating upon perfecting their theoretical ideas and putting them into practical use. His success won him a professorship at the Technological Institute in Ztirich, Switzerland in 1892. Here he remained until 1929. During this period he trained hundreds of experts of two generations in the field of steam and gas turbines. Stodola's life-work in the design and manufacture of turbine engines, which he continued to perfect constantly, remains unique in the scientific world. He won the Watt medal and the Nobel prize in science. JOZEF MURGAS Jozef Murgas (1864-1929), world famous pioneer in wireless telegraphy, was born in Tajov, near Banska Bystrica, Slovakia. He was born of a peasant family and early in life was destined to study for the priesthood. His talents were many, however, particularly in art. Soon after ordination he was sent by his bishop to study at the Academy of Art in Munich. For some reason shortly before completing his course of study at the Academy, he was recalled to Slovakia for pastoral work. Because of his ardent patriotism he incurred the hostility of the pro-Magyar ecclesiastical authorities. Upon hearing of the need for priests for Slovak immigrant communities, he immediately applied for this apostolate. Accordingly, he was sent to the anthracite city of Wilkes-Barre in northeastern Pennsylvania. Father Murgas' apostolate as pastor of a thriving Slovak parish was marked by devoted service to his Slovak people. In his spare time he did some painting, but his experiments in wireless teiegraphy began to take up most of his leisure moments. In his scientific laboratory, which he built himself at one end of the parsonage, the priest-scientist experimented in attempts to send messages by air. At first he used the Morse code but later replaced it with a tone system, which he patented in 1904. By 1911 he obtained about a dozen additional patents. Private speculators and syndicates sensed that his experiments were on the right track to revolutionize the communications' system, and they bombarded Father Mur- 160 SLOVAKIA gas with offers. Finally, the inventor accepted the bid from a Philadelphia syndicate, the Aether or Ether Telegraph Company, which furnished him with a new laboratory in return for his patent rights. But he had to erect the necessary towers for transmitting and receiving the messages. This Father Murgas did by constructing twin towers, each 60 meters in height, one near his home in Wilkes-Barre and the other about ten miles distant near Scranton, Pa. It is a matter of historical record that in 1905 Father Murgas succeeded in sending a message from his hometower to Scranton. Before he could pursue his experimentation further, however, a violent storm damaged the wooden towers and destroyed the antenas. His company refused to advance the money necessary for repairs and soon after the syndicate was dissolved. Apparently, Father Murgas was unable to raise enough money to make the repairs himself. Moreover, he became embroiled in a patent suit with Marconi (who was subsequently to be credited with the invention of modern radio) and Fessenden. Although Father Murgas won the law-suit, the government controls imposed on all means of communicati on at the outbreak of World War I prevented him from following up his initial success. Thus ended the scientific career of the great Slovak pioneer in wireless telegraphy. From this time until his death in 1929 he devoted all his time exclusively to pastoral service and patriotic work among his Slovak people. JOZEF M. PETZVAL Jozef Maximilian Petzval (Pecval)-180 7-1895-was a Slovak despite claims by Magyars and Austrians to the contrary. He was born in Spisska Bela in Slovakia. After completing his schooling in Podolinec, Levoca and the Lyceum in Kosice (in Slovakia) he attended the polytechnical institute at the University of Budapest. He paid his own way from his salary as a city engineer. After receiving his doctorate in mathematics he obtained a professorship at the University of Vienna in 1836. Petzval secured living quarters in an abandoned monastery on Kahlenberg hill above the city. Here he established his own mechanical laboratory where he began producing SLOVAKIA 161 special optical lens of such quality so that soon they were in demand in all parts of the world. When the daguerrotype photo apparatus appeared on the scene in the 1830's Petzval opened his own studio where he made invaluable contributions to modern photography. By 1840 he developed a photo lens that increased the degree of light ten-fold, thereby considerably decreasing the time of exposure. Voigtlander, an optician in Vienna, became the recipient of a real windfall when Petzval surrendered his formulas in the science of optics to him in return for a contract. Voigtlander refused to live up to the agreement. Accordingly, Petzval became so bitterly involved in litigation that this caused him to become a recluse . .. a final outcome of his misanthropic tendencies. Petzval developed the basics for the production of lens for people afflicted with astigmatism, and his process was adopted in the 1880's by the great Zeiss corporation in Jena. From Petzval's laboratories came the first high-power telescopes and fieldglasses, super electric spotlights and other improvements in the field of optics, as well as new developments in the mathematical sciences. It was only during World War II that Petzval's name was discovered inscribed (in German) on a memorial tablet in his birthplace in Spisska Bela, Slovakia. STEFAN BANIC stefan Banic, the inventor of the parachute, emigrated from his native Slovakia in search of a job in the U.S. He worked at odd jobs and tinkered with an invention that resulted in the making of the first real, workable parachute for which he obtained patent rights from the U.S. Patent Office in 1914. Banic sold the patent rights to a company for a mere pittance and the company made millions on government orders from the U.S. Army Air force during the first World War. (A. A. Hoch, Vyndlezy, ktore zmenili svet (Inventions which changed the world). Published by Mlade Leta, Bratislava, 1959).  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 Famous Slovak Inventors Description An account of the resource from A. A. Hoch, Vynálezy, ktoré zmenili svet (Inventions Which Changed the World), pub. Mladé Letá, Bratislava, 1959. covers Štefan A. Jedlík, Aurel Stodola, Jozef Murgaš, Jozef M. Petzval, Štefan Banič Slovakia, Vol. 24 (No. 47), 1974 pp. 156-161 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hoch, Alois Adalbert, 1888-1978 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1974 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/dc4c8882b864b26602b53f8832e69f24.pdf 395f55d674e2e1cd0c8467de9b7ffe0f PDF Text Text REVIEWS ��SLOVAKIA 103 Nauka reci slovenskej [Nauka reci slovenskej vistavena od Ludevita Stura], Ludevit Stur, Vol. l : Faksimile povodneho vydania na vydanie pripravili Eubomir Durovic and Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006. 228 pages, facsimile of the 1846 grammar text. Nauka reci slovenskej : Komentare, Bibliograjia, Vol. 2, Eugen Jona, Eubomir Durovic, Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006 . 323 pp., commentary, bibliography, and various indices. GERALD J. SABO , S.J. John Carroll University This two-volume publication is a singular event. The first volume is a facsimile edition of the 1846 grammar by Eudovit Stur (1815-56), whose availability inside Slovakia is quite limited, and outside Slovakia is virtually non-existent. The second volume enhances the grammar with background information, providing detailed analysis of and commentary by eminent Slovak linguists, among them Eubomir Durovic. Both volumes appear on the 160th anniversary of the grammar' s original publication, but also the 150th anniversary of Stur's accidental death. Lutheran pastors and Catholic priests worked on the codification of Slovak from the eighteenth century through the mid-nineteenth. In the l 720s the Slovak Lutheran pastors and scholars Matej Bel and Daniel Krrnan published the Bible in the primarily Czech linguistic form espoused by Slovak Lutherans. In his 1746 grammar the Lutheran pastor Pavel Dolezal presented Slovak and Czech as two dialects of one language- Czechoslovak. In the 1750s the Catholic Camaldolese monks translated the Bible into Slovak for their own useespecially in readings for the liturgical year, a significant accomplishment that would be discovered only in the mid-twentieth century. In the late 1780s the Catholic priest Anton Bemolak initiated the extensive Catholic efforts for codifying Slovak and then promoted his codified norm. For his codification Bemolak drew upon the Slovak that had been nurtured through the activities and �104 SLOVAKIA publications of the Jesuit university in Trnava since 1635 , and that in the twentieth century Slovak linguists would call "Cultural WestSlovak." Among Bernolak's various language-related writings, he realized a grammar and even a five-language dictionary in six large volumes, completed and published in the 1820s by the priest Jur[ aj] Palkovic. Through their writings, two priests helped spread Bernolak's codified Slovak- Juraj Fandly in his prose works, and Jan Holly in his extensive epic and lyric poetry. Thanks to Holly, Fandly, and others, Bernolak-Slovak (bernolakovcina) became the acceptable and promoted means of expression among Slovak Catholics through the 1840s. During this period, Lutherans continued to publish various literary and other works in biblictina ("Biblical language," in effect, the version of Czech used in the Bohemian Brethren 's Kralice Bible of the late sixteenth century with varying mixtures of Slovak language elements through the nineteenth century). The extent of such writing is clear from the four-volume biographic compilation of Slovak Lutheran poets (1806-12) by the pastor Bohuslav Tablic. Although Slovak Lutherans were a decided minority in the Slovak region of the Kingdom of Hungary, despite their quite modest numbers they remained a well-educated group that strove to retain this distinction in contrast to the much more numerous but less-educated fellow Christian-Catholics. Indeed, the Lutherans especially employed and espoused biblictina in their cultural and liturgical activities to emphasize their relationship with Czech Protestants, thereby increasing their group's numerical strength and enhancing their cultural status. Given this, the Lutherans' reasoning could well have been why should they adopt a linguistic norm created and promoted by the majority Catholic population that was not as educated or cultivated as they? In 1803 Slovak Lutherans established a Chair of Czechoslovak Language and Literature at their lycee in Bratislava. Jiri [Juraj] Palkovic was the first and only holder of this Chair ( 1803-50), and helped to foster Slovak Lutheran publications and cultural exchange. At the Lutheran lycee in Bratislava students and staff became the nucleus for the Lutheran promotion of Slavic/Slovak consciousness in response to the increasing Magyarization in Slovakia. I:udovit Stur studied at the lycee between 1829 and 1834. After his student years from 1835-3 7, Stur was vice-president of the Czecho-Slavic Society, whose 1836 almanach Plody (Fruits) of various writings �SLOVAKIA 105 also represented a manifesto of Slovak national consciousness and identity. On April I 0, 1836 Stur wrote to the Protestant Czech/Moravian cultural figure and historian Frantisek Palacky emphasizing the need for unity among Slovaks and Czechs. As Stt'.ir pointed out, the Czech language used by Lutherans in the Slovak area was not accessible to Catholic Slovaks, and thus there was a need for some combination of the Czech and Slovak language to provide for Slovak and Czech unity and understanding. The Czechs were unwilling to accept Stur's proposal. Although on February I, 1837 Stur became an unremunerated deputy to Jiff Palkovic, on April 5th the Czecho-Slavic society halted its activites because of a government ban on student societies. Stur served as a deputy to Palkovic during 1837-38 and 1840-43 , with his university study at Halle between those periods. After a lengthy investigation, on December 31, 1843 the Bratislava convention of the Lutheran Church relieved Stur of his position as Palkovic's deputy, after which he devoted himself to scholarly, journalistic, and political activity. By 1843 Stur had come to view Slovak as a distinct Slavic language, especially vis-a-vis Czech. According to the Lutheran poet Samo Hrobon, on February 14, 1843 a meeting of various Lutheran lycee students/alumni and their professor L. Stur marked the "day of resurrection of Slovak" (J6na, vol. 2: 31 ). In mid-July of 1843 Stur met with the Lutheran pastors Jozef Miloslav Hurban and Michal Miloslav Hodza at Hurban's parish in Hlboke for the purpose of creating a di stinct Slovak norm. A day after that discussion the three met with the Catholic priest-poet Jan Holly at the latter's parish in Dobra Yoda and received Holly's blessing for their endeavor. At the founding gathering in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas for the journal Tatrin during August 26-28, 1844, Stur's Slovak norm was publicly proclaimed (Durovic, vol. 2: 59). In codifying Slovak as a distinct language, Stur prepared two texts: one explaining the need for writing in Slovak and a grammar of Slovak based on the Central Slovak dialect of Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas (Durovic, vol. 2: 62). Both these texts would be published only in 1846. In vo lume 2 of this publication, three linguists focus on Stur and his grammar. Eugen J6na's study provides a very detailed commentary on Stur, hi s evolving writing activity related to Slovak, especially the two texts of 1846, as well as the influences on Stur's cultural, political, and linguistic thinking (pp. 11-47). Cubomir Durovic has �106 SLOVAKIA the most extensive study (51-257). In his introduction, Durovic discusses Stur's grammar and Slovak in relation to the two editions ( 1809 and 1819) of the Czech/Bohemian grammar by Josef Dobrovsky and various Slovak Lutheran cultural publications (58-63) . This is followed by an extensive and meticulous analysis of Stur's grammar (64-194) with reference to various nineteenth - and twentiethcentury linguistic writings listed at the end (195-196). Completing f:>urovic's study are three indices in relation to his commentary on Stur's grammar proper: an index of words, morphemes, and phonemes (195-227); a "phonematicifonematicky" index of interpreted morphemes and words (229-3 I); and a topic/subject index (233-57). Slavo Ondrejovic concludes this volume with two bibliographies: one of Stur's personal and linguistic works published from 1841 through 2003 (259-68), and a select one on writings about Stur that concern language and linguistic questions published from 1817 through 2006 (269-323). In their introduction to the second volume, Durovic and Ondrejovic have noted the need for such a publication and the lengthy process involved in realizing this work. Specialists in Slovak linguistics, especially in the historical development of contemporary Slovak, will appreciate their efforts for many years to come. Likewise, Slovakia-based, but especially international specialists in Slovak culture and history, will also enhance their understanding of the codifycation of Slovak by Stur and his Lutheran colleagues. Andras Gero, The Jewish Criterion in Hungary, translated from the Magyar by Alan Campbell. Boulder, Colorado, Social Science Monographs: Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York, 2007. 153 pp., notes, biographical notes, photographs, index. YESHA YAHU A. JELINEK Beer-Sheva, Israel This is both a confusing and challenging book. The challenge comes in trying to clarify the definition of a Jew. The confusion comes in trying to define a Jew from Hungary. Of the book's five chapters, the first two were the most confusing. Gero first sets out to discuss Hungarian Jewry. However, he does not differentiate (as do all Slavic languages) between "Hunga- �SLOVAKIA 107 rian" and "Magyar." "Hungary" until 1918 was a geographico-political term for the lands of the Crown of St. Stephen. "Magyar" referred to the largest ethnic (and ruling) group in the Kingdom of Hungary. For contemporary Magyars, as for Gero, such a differentiation does not exist. He equated "Hungary" with "Magyarorszag" (the land of the Magyars). Therefore, when Gero analyzes the "Hungarian Jew" (Magyar Zsid6 ), we do not really understand who he has in mind. Jews appeared on the territory between the Carpathian mountains and the Balkans in the Roman period, much earlier than the Slavs or Magyars. They inhabited the Kingdom of Hungary, initially ruled by the Arpad dynasty and later the Habsburgs . They were not considered to be Magyars. Only in the 19 th century did the Magyars try to "Magyarize" the Jews, as well as the other non-Magyar nationalities. Gero knows these facts, but avoids them. For Gero, there were only "Hungarian Jews" in the entire Kingdom of Hungary. He seems to be entirely unaware of ethnic divisions within Jewry- the existence of Slovak, Rusin , Croat, Transylvanian, etc. Jews. While Gero devotes much space to a rather intelligent discussion of the living conditions, historical environment, and ethnic survival of Magyar Jews, he ignores the fact that Jews in Hungary lived among different nations. He is aware of the oppresssive Magyar nationalism, and criticizes it severely in his last three chapters, but remains unaware of the varieties of Judaism within the Kingdom. The challenging part of this book is the thoughtful discussion of Jewish existence in Hungary and the relations of Jews with the Gentile majority. This discussion forces the reader to re-evaluate quite a few accepted notions about Jewish life in Hungary. Unfortunately, Gero is not familiar with the history of the various Jewish groups in the Kingdom of Hungary. This becomes clear when one compares Jewish life on the Pannonian Plain (today's Hungary) with that of Upper Hungary (Slovakia) or with Sub-Carpathian Rus. Furthermore, he erroneously refers to Hungarian Jews "leaving the ghetto" in the 19 th century. Only Bratislava and a few cities in the Burgenland had "ghettos." That is why Jews who left Moravia for Hungary, or Galicia for Hungary in the 19 th century, suddenly found much greater freedom than they had ever fe lt before. Gero 's lack of knowledge about the Slovak and Rusin portions of the Kingdom of Hungary becomes clear when he discusses Jewish �108 SLOVAKIA conversions to Christianity and the rise of Zionism. For instance, while conversion to Christianity on the Pannonian Plain was not uncommon, it was rare in Upper Hungary or in Sub-Carpathian Rus. When discussing Zionism, Gero neglected its manifestations on Slovak territory and did not perceive that it was weak in the Magyar counties because it was persecuted by the Hungarian government. On the other hand, in Upper Hungary, where Zionizm was weak, Chasidism was strong. Chasidic rabbis were bitter enemies of Zionism. Therefore, one must tread carefully when discussing the strength or weakness of Zionism in Hungary. The most challenging part of Gero's book deals with the rise of anti-Semitism at the end of the 19 th century. Here he deals with the riddle of who is a Jew and when is he considered as such, and under what conditions . Most of Gero's arguments deal only with the Magyar portion of Hungary, which is a pity, because, if he had dug deeper, he could have made the case that it was largely the Magyars who taught the other ethnic groups to hate the Jews. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. I (1913-1938). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Ladislav Susko. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SA V, 2002 . 567 pp. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. 2: (193 8-1944). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Katarina Hradska. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SAV, 2007 . 696 pp. DANIEL E. MILLER University of West Florida, Pensacola The editors of this set of two volumes assembled the speeches and articles of Jozef Tiso (1887-1947) to provide researchers with a valuable source for the history of Slovak politics covering the periods from shortly before the Great War until the Munich Agreement and then from October 1938 until just before 29 August 1944, the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising. Each volume has a very brief introduction and a table of contents that lists the numbered documents in chronological order (this review cites the volume and document numbers). The first volume contains 267 documents and five addenda; the second, 389 documents and 10 addenda. Together, �SLOVAKIA 109 they contain 671 documents on 1,226 pages with no introductions or summaries for each document to color the readers ' opinions. The editors cited multiple sources for each selection, including Slovak archives and newspapers throughout Slovakia. They included explanatory notes, some of which are rather detailed, about individuals, groups, events, terms, and foreign phrases (as a theologian, Tiso had a propensity to use Latin phrases). Some footnotes point out discrepancies in the speeches as they appeared in the various periodicals. In their efforts to be thorough, the editors included journalists' paraphrased summaries of Tiso's speeches when actual texts were unavailable. Furthermore, they did not overlook minor comments, the shortest of which is a mere two lines (l/ 177). Significant gaps raise questions about the completeness of the collection. At the beginning of his career as a priest, Tiso 's publications were understandably sparse, but several selections toward the end of the Great War and immediately afterward are missing. At least a dozen of Tiso's articles appeared in 1917 and 1918 in Papok Kozlonye [Priests' Bulletin] and Duchovny pastier [Spiritual Shepherd], all of which James Mace Ward cites in his dissertation, "No Saint: Jozef Tiso, 1887-1947" (Stanford University, 2008, pp. 63-65), with proper notations about pseudonyms and, in some cases, authorship. By his own admission, after the war Tiso edited and wrote articles for Nyitra/Nitra. In contrast, the first volume of Tiso ' s speeches and articles for the same period contain only a few articles. Oddly enough, there are only five entries in 1929 and 1930 and seven in 1931 , all speeches, aside from one, and an average of 23 entries per year for the previous five years and 15 for the following five years. Additional citations are in Ward's work, including police reports. Police agents attended every open party meeting for all political parties during the First Republic, and they reported the comments of speakers, the reactions of the crowds, and any incidents . The material from these reports is no less valid than the redacted summaries of Tiso ' s speeches that appeared in the press, and they would have filled the voids in Tiso ' s public addresses in these two volumes . While Tiso indeed might have been preoccupied in 1929-1931 , undoubtedly more publications and addresses exist, especially in light of the 1917-1 8 omissions. At times, Tiso ' s silence was intentional. In his 65 months as president of the Slovak Republic, Tiso produced an average of sli- �110 SLOVAKIA ghtly more than five speeches and articles each month, but the frequency declined over time. Most likely, Tiso withdrew from public view with the mounting legitimacy crisis in the Slovak Republic resulting from Germany's losses on the Eastern Front, as well as the prospect of the Allies recreating Czechoslovakia at the war's end and criminalizing Slovakia 's clerical-fascist regime. As a result, in the first eight months of 1944, there are only 23 entries, That is less than three speeches and articles for each month . The speeches and articles in these two volumes portray Tiso as priest, ideologist, party politician, parliamentarian, cabinet minister, and president. The value of this collection is greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly, researchers are relieved that they have the bulk of Tiso 's works at their fingertips and need not spend countless hours scouring sources and fearing that they overlooked something. Furthermore, the assemblage of Tiso 's works in one venue facilitates fresh perspectives on his career. A change in Tiso 's speaking style is apparent in the two volumes. The paucity of his speeches before he became a cabinet minister in 1927 is striking, and it is unfortunate that more texts and transcripts of speeches do not exist from this time. Nevertheless, it is impossible that Tiso could have built his popularity solely on the basis of articles, and the police reports could have made the evidence from this period more balanced . Tiso's speeches in the decade from 1927 until 1938 were disciplined- they had a single topic and a logical argument. This is especially true of his carefully crafted speeches in the National Assembly and before selected audiences. As president, Tiso addressed a wide variety of audiences with speeches that lacked focus and often contained topics not well suited for his listeners. As a result, he analyzed the development of the Slovak Republic with respect to the fate of other East-Central European states while addressing Catholics on a pilgrimage (Il/135). When celebrating the electrification of a district, he spoke about the wonders of electricity, encouraged factory workers and farmers to cooperate in building the state, and admonished listeners about observing the laws regarding economic matters (II/221 ). At a religious gathering in 1942, he criticized efforts to count all Greek-Catholic Slovaks as Rusyns and shortly afterward justified the confiscation of Jewish property with the slogan "Slovakia for Slovaks" (II/282). Aside from being an undisciplined extemporaneous speaker, one possible explanation for the �SLOVAKIA 111 change in style was Tiso ' s need to account for the policies of the state in the simplest terms for the broadest range of listeners. Between 1918 and 1938, Tiso's public comments and writings focused in part or exclusively on the need for Slovak autonomy as fulfilling the promise of the Pittsburgh Agreement. The tenor of his mesages heightened over the years, and in February 193 7 he referred to Czechoslovakia as an "aberration of democracy" (1/243), although he uttered plenty of vituperative condemnations of the First Republic both before and afterward. Despite efforts to cooperate with supporters of Slovak autonomy in the camp of Lutheran Slovaks within the Slovak National Party and even Hungarian politicians in the 1930s, Tiso tirelessly strove to bind Slovak identity with the Catholic faith, to link the leadership of the nation to the Catholic clergy, and to advance his Hlinka' s Slovak People's Party as the only major political party to recognize and defend the Slovak nation as unique. After the Munich Agreement, Tiso became minister for Slovak affairs and then on October 6, 1938 premier of an autonomous Slovakia. During this time, Tiso concentrated on policy and restructuring the political system, which essentially made Slovakia a oneparty state. After Slovak independence on 14 March 1939, Tiso served as prime minister and then, beginning in October 1939, he became the republic ' s president. Tiso now sought to legitimize the new republic, justifying its independence and thanking Adolf Hitler for extending his protection to the Slovaks. Tiso linked Slovakia to Germany's successes and Germany's leadership in the construction of a new Europe. Beginning in 1943, roughly coinciding with the end of the Battle of Stalingrad, Tiso's references to Hitler and Germany became sparse, and Tiso did not mention either in his address in 1944 on the fifth anniversary of the Slovak state (ll/374). Tiso obviously wanted to distance himself from Hitler, but fewer references to his patron also suggest the limits of Tiso's acceptance of his own earlier rhetoric. Throughout the war, Tiso's description of Slovakia ' s mission on the Eastern Front as a struggle against Bolshevism, with its Jewish and anti-Christian influences, remained constant. In the final document dated 6 August 1944, Tiso ended with a prophetic statement: "we cannot deny that the Bolsheviks are at the border and that they promise the scaffold!" (II/389) . The two volumes reveal much about the development of Tiso's anti-Semitism. There are few references to Jews in Tiso ' s statements �112 SLOVAKIA between the world wars, and at one point in 1934, he even invited Jews, Germans, Hungarians, and Czechs in Slovakia to join with Slovaks in demanding autonomy (l/202). Nevertheless, there are occasional anti-Jewish comments, such as Ti so's call for land from the church estates parceled under the land reform to go to Catholic farmers , not Jews, nonbelievers, and speculators (l/78). During the Second Czecho-Slovak Republic, Tiso identified Jews as a foreign element whose presence in Slovak society must be proportionate to their numbers. Nevertheless, he warned that Jews should not become the objects of "hatred and sadistic tendencies" (I/32). His rhetoric against Jews heightened when Slovakia became independent, and in August 1942 he justified the removal of Jews from Slovak society as the elimination of an enemy, an act of self-defense in keeping with Christian morals. Loving oneself is a precept from God, according to Tiso, "and I think there is no need to convince anyone that the Jewish element endangers the life of a Slovak" (11/287). There is little evidence in these two volumes to suggest that Tiso 's antiSemitism was anything but genuine, but the addition of Tiso's intensely anti-Semitic Ny itra/Nitra articles make his hatred of Jews indisputable. The editors are preparing a third vo lume to cover the conversations of Hitler and Tiso as well as Tiso 's statements from the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising on 29 August 1944 through his 1946-1947 trial. They indicated their intent to include in the third volume addenda for the first two volumes and expressed their wish that historians inform them of additional documents. The inclusion of missing items- those signed with a pseudonym or abbreviated name and those whose authorship is disputable- is absoutely essential , not only for the convenience of researchers, but also for the sake of objectivity. Perhaps they can be in a section of their own. The editors had planned to include three indexes in the second volume, and one can assume that these essential tools for researchers will appear in the planned third volume. Specialists on Slovak affairs in the Habsburg Monarchy, the First Czechoslovak Republic, and the first Slovak Republic are greatly indebted to Fabricius, Susko, Hradska, and the others who contributed to the production of these two volumes . They anxiously await the appearance of the third volume in this indispensable series. �SLOVAKIA 113 Max Domarus, Th e Complete Hitler: A Digital Desktop Reference to His Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945. Wauconda, Ill. : Bolchazy-Carducci, 2007. (CD-ROM edition). VASILLIS VOURKOUTIOTIS University of Ottawa While documentary collections concerning the Third Reich are not, generally speaking, difficult to come by, few students are exposed to the actual words of Adolf Hitler except as summarized by other compilers in wider works . The exception to this has been Max Domtarus' four-volume collection of Hitler's speeches. The compilation of this resource was linked to the history it attempted to capture. In 1932, Max Domarus was only twenty-two years old. Yet, he realized that in Adolf Hitler, Germany and the world were faced with a new phenomenon whose significance should not be underestimated. He began, in that year, to collect and compile as many of Hitler's speeches as he could find , and continued the project through the war years until Hitler' s death in 1945 . After the war, Domarus supplemented his collection as much as possible, and the resulting work, which included his annotations and commentary, was a four-volume set published in German. For each year in question, the reader is offered a detailed summary of events, and photographs from the Domarus archive. Full endnotes for each section yield bibliographical citations, as well as additional explanatory commentary. Each volume also contains a list of abbreviations which users will find helpful. Although some of Domarus' commentaries have been superceded by historical research, his perceptions remain as interesting in several instances as the speeches they comment upon. The four-volume set, even though it only covers Hitler's speeches from 1932 onward, remains the best single collection of the dictator's words. With this CD, Domarus's publishers have brought an important printed historical resource into the modem information age. An English-language translation accompanies the original German text, bringing to the user eight volumes of material in a single disk. Although presented in a chronological format, the speeches are in a searchable PDF format, allowing the student or researcher the ability to scan years of �114 SLOVAKIA material for keywords . For those with the language abilities and desire, the English version can be easily compared for accuracy with the German original. Given how long Hitler could speak for at a single event, it is not surprising that Domarus felt the need to offer exerpts rather than a stenographic record. This may strike some as a potential drawback, and might lead some researches to seek the full text of a particular speech of interest. The vast majority of users, however, will not find this a significant issue; Domarus' work has remained the standard reference for university libraries since its first publication in 1962 with good reason. Two versions of the CD ROM exist, the Standard and ePremium. In addition to the advantages of the Standard, the ePremium addition allows the user to print, copy and paste text directly from the PDF files into one's own documents, and add commentary to the texts. These enhancements will be of interest to those who work closely enough with the material in their own research. On the whole, in making both the English and German versions of Domarus' compilations available in such a format, the publishers have not only made an important work more accessible, but also provided a service to both students and academics alike. James Ramon Felak After Hitler, Before Stalin: Catholics, Communists, and Democrats in Slovakia, 1945-1948. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. xv-261 pp. , notes, bibliography, index. M. MARK STOLARIK University of Ottawa Having perceived a negl ected period of history, James R. Felak set out to tell the story of the role of Catholicism in Slovakia in the period 1945-48, especially its relationship with the Communist and Democratic Parties. The essence of the book is that, even though both the Communists and the Lutheran leaders of the Democratic Party were either hostile to or suspicious of the Roman Catholic Church, both courted Roman Catholic voters in order to attain political power in post-war Slovakia. Having combed the relevant Slovak archives, and read the Communist, Lutheran and Roman Catholic press, along with most secondary sources on the subject, Felak carefully related what actually �SLOVAKIA 115 transpired in Slovakia in the three years after the Second World War. He pointed out that the post-war National Front government that came into existence on April 3, 1945, reduced the pre-war political parties of Czechoslovakia from 16 to 5, and in Slovakia permitted only the Communists and Democrats. The two strongest pre-war political parties, Hlinka Slovak People's Party and the Czechoslovak Agrarian Party were banned as "collaborationist". That meant that the minority Lutherans could (and did) join the newly-formed Democratic Party, but the majority Catholics were disenfranchised. As a result, both the Communists and Democrats courted Catholic voters in anticipation of the May, 1946 elections, while simultaneously attacking the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, the self-appointed Slovak National Council, with its executive Board of Commissioners, nationalized all religious schools, seized most Catholic institutions, severely limited the size of the Catholic press and imprisoned two Slovak bishops. On the other hand, the Communists tried to persuade Catholic voters to vote for their party, because the Democrats were largely Lutherans . Indeed, the Communists even supported the creation of a Christian Republican Party, but the Catholics and Communists could not agree on its name, and this project fell through. The Lutherans, on the other hand, also wooed the Catholics by promising to split future political representation and patronage with them on the basis of a 7:3 ratio in favor of the Catholics. The Catholics found this promise more enticing than Communist overtures and, as a result, the Catholic and Lutheran politicians reached the so-called April Agreement on March 31, 1946. Since they were now united, the Catholics and Lutherans both supported the Democratic Party and won the 1946 elections with a convincing majority of 62%. Since they had lost the elections, the Communist Party of Slovakia went on the offensive. With the collusion of the government in Prague, where the Communists had more influence, and where certain Czech parties resented Slovak home-rule, Slovak Communists, led by Gustav Husak, negotiated the "Third Prague Agreement" of June 27, 1946, by which the Slovak National Council and the Board of Commissioners subordinated themselves to the Prague government. Then the Slovak Communists decided to try for treason the Reverend Jozef Tiso, former president of the first Slovak Republic ( 1939-1945). They saw to it that the National Court was domina- �116 SLOVAKIA ted by Communists who, as expected, found Tiso guilty and sentenced him to death on April 15, 1947. The hapless Democrats on the executive of the Board of Commissioners failed to recommend clemency and left the final verdict to the government in Prague, which upheld the verdict, as did president Benes, and Tiso was hanged on April 17. After this fiasco, Slovak Catholics lost faith in the Democratic Party, just as the Communists began their offensive against it. In the summer and fall of 194 7 the Communists fabricated an anti-state conspiracy against certain Catholic Democrats. On this basis Gustav Husak on October 31 staged a mini-coup in Slovakia by (with Prague support) illegally dissolving and then reappointing the Board of Commissioners in favor of the Communists. This was a prelude to similar tactics by the Communists in Prague in February of 1948, when three non-Communist parties resigned from the government in the hope of toppling it. Instead, the Communists, led by Klement Gottwald offered to form a new government and president Edvard Benes approved it. Thus, by February of 1948 the Communists had completed their takeover of both the Slovak and Czechoslovak governments and instituted totalitarian rule for the next 40 years, during which they tried (but failed) to completely destroy the Roman Catholic church in Czechoslovakia. Felak's book is well-written and comprehensive. Perhaps his greatest contribution is that he laid to rest the oft-repeated Slovak complaint that president Benes arranged for Tiso's death. Instead, as Felak convincingly shows, it was the incompetence of the Lutheradominated executive of the Board of Commissioners which was most responsible because of its inability to reach a consensus on the issue of clemency. They essentially "passed the buck" to Prague, where Tiso had few friends and that sealed his doom. In spite of Felak's meticulous scholarship, the book contained a few glitches and one omission. The slang expression "First off "appeared a few times (p.6), Stanislav Kirschbaum's first name was shortened to Stanley in footnote 5 on page 217, the surname Viktorin was misspelled Victory (p.63), and Banovce nad Bebravou was identified as Tiso's home town (p.100), when that honor goes to Vel'ka Bytca. Perhaps the greatest omission is the revelation that Ferdinand Durcansky, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the first Slovak Republic, who fled to the west after the war and tried to �SLOVAKIA 117 organize an anti-state underground movement in post-war Slovakia, was actually controlled by Kim Philby, the notorious British spy who was, in fact, working for the KGB . Mark Aarons and John Loftus, on the basis of research in the files of the CIA in Washington, revealed this interesting detail in their Ratlines: How the Vatican Networks Betrayed Western Intelligence to the Soviets (London, 1991 ), pp. 21 19 and footnotes 46-50, page 334. Thus, the anti-state conspiracy of 1947 was carefully staged from abroad by the KGB as an excuse for the communist takeover of Slovakia. Edward Snajdr, Nature Protests: The End of Ecology in Slovakia. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2008 . xiii242 pp., photographs, notes, bibliography, list of interviews, index. JURAJ HOCMAN University of Ottawa Edward Snajdr, an American cultural anthropologist at New York University, examined Slovakia's emerging civic environmental protection movement in the communist era and its rapid disappearance during the country 's post-communist transformation (19851995). The author did his fieldwork in situ and that is why it is particularly interesting to read about his experience. In the first two chapters, Snajdr focuses on urban and extraurban contexts of social life in communist Slovakia while providing general, yet adequate, historical background. The author traces the origins of environmental movements among young Slovaks and Czechs that had begun with associations such as SZOPK (Slovensky zvaz ochrancov prfrody a kraj iny - the Slovak Union of Protectors of Nature and the Countryside) in Slovakia and Brontosaurus in the Czech lands. He contrasts the difference between the effectiveness of state legislation designed to protect the environment in the massively and insensitively industrialized Slovakia, with spontaneous projects of young people whose aims were to improve the quality of the environment that surrounded them. Despite their local character, those efforts were not only efficient, but also inspirational. Snajdr then proceeds to the period from 1985 to 1989 during which environmentalist activities spread to the politics of discontent with the communist regime. He stresses the significance of the acce- �118 SLOVAKIA lerated drive for environmental protection in Slovakia during the period of perestroika and glasnost in the case of the samizdat Bratislava Nahlas (Bratislava Aloud). This publication, which voiced the concerns of ordinary citizens regarding disrespectful and harmful socio-economic policies of the communist regime, was prohibited by state authorities. Its editor, Jan Budaj, who became one of the most visible leaders of the "Velvet Revolution" in Slovakia in the fall of 1989, as well as the samizdat' s distributors, were harassed by the communist secret police (the StB). The fall of the communist regime might have become the new beginning of a friendlier approach to environmental protection in Slovakia. That is where the second part of the story begins. A new political reality in Eastern Europe, which was closely tied to nationalism, brought a new perspective on how to cope with the legacy of communism and its negative ecological effects. The members of the Slovak Green Party (Strana zelenych), which was formed in November of 1989, and was represented in the new Slovak parliament, took a firm stand against the completion of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros dam on the Danube river, which formed the Slovak-Hungarian border. This started as a joint venture of the communist governments of Czechoslovakia and Hungary under a treaty signed in I 977. Hungary withdrew from the project at the end of the 1980s, bowing to pressure from ecologists at home and abroad. To Slovaks, as Snajdr observes, the project was a matter of national prestige and a rallying point against warnings of environmental risks that stood in the forefront of Hungary 's concerns. Snajdr elaborates on how its chief engineer, Julius Binder, defended the completion of the Slovak part of the project and gained the support of the Slovak public. From then on the Greens (Zeleni), who, in the meantime, split into two groups, the Czecho-Slovak federalists and the Slovak nationalists, started slipping into political obscurity and eventually returned to small and isolated projects of landscape revitalization at various locations . Thus, "nation won over nature" and Slovakia, together with representatives of the ecology movement, entered into an age of post-ecology. The book paints a credible picture of a former communist regime unconcerned with the ecological impact of insensitive industrialization and socio-economic modernization. The first part of the study, which analyzes the evolution of environmental protection, is more �SLOVAKIA 119 cohesive than the second. If the second part appears a bit fragmentary, it is due to the overall ruptured character of the ecology movement in Slovakia in the second half of the 1990s. Though the sympathies of the author towards a cleaner environment cannot be overlooked, he did not take sides in intra and extra-national political conflicts. Apart from a few minor aberrations, such as the subtler use of the geographic term the Czech lands or the Czech Republic instead of Bohemia when referring to the second half of the 20 th century; and the incorrect transliteration of Gabcikovo-Nagymaros instead of GNagymaros, and Kvacian (gen . or accus; Slovak) instead of Kvacany (nom.), the book profits from its narrative and analysis based on the author's knowledge of theory and his authentic experience. It is an insightful contribution to the discourse on the continuing multilayered evolution of post-communist states and societies in Eastern Europe, in which ecology has played an important part. With Slovakia now being a member of the European Union and a signatory of international treaties on environmental protection, it would be interesting to discover whether the previous gap between government and civic initiatives has remained the same or has disappeared. � REVIEWS ��SLOVAKIA 103 Nauka reci slovenskej [Nauka reci slovenskej vistavena od Ludevita Stura], Ludevit Stur, Vol. l : Faksimile povodneho vydania na vydanie pripravili Eubomir Durovic and Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006. 228 pages, facsimile of the 1846 grammar text. Nauka reci slovenskej : Komentare, Bibliograjia, Vol. 2, Eugen Jona, Eubomir Durovic, Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006 . 323 pp., commentary, bibliography, and various indices. GERALD J. SABO , S.J. John Carroll University This two-volume publication is a singular event. The first volume is a facsimile edition of the 1846 grammar by Eudovit Stur (1815-56), whose availability inside Slovakia is quite limited, and outside Slovakia is virtually non-existent. The second volume enhances the grammar with background information, providing detailed analysis of and commentary by eminent Slovak linguists, among them Eubomir Durovic. Both volumes appear on the 160th anniversary of the grammar' s original publication, but also the 150th anniversary of Stur's accidental death. Lutheran pastors and Catholic priests worked on the codification of Slovak from the eighteenth century through the mid-nineteenth. In the l 720s the Slovak Lutheran pastors and scholars Matej Bel and Daniel Krrnan published the Bible in the primarily Czech linguistic form espoused by Slovak Lutherans. In his 1746 grammar the Lutheran pastor Pavel Dolezal presented Slovak and Czech as two dialects of one language- Czechoslovak. In the 1750s the Catholic Camaldolese monks translated the Bible into Slovak for their own useespecially in readings for the liturgical year, a significant accomplishment that would be discovered only in the mid-twentieth century. In the late 1780s the Catholic priest Anton Bemolak initiated the extensive Catholic efforts for codifying Slovak and then promoted his codified norm. For his codification Bemolak drew upon the Slovak that had been nurtured through the activities and �104 SLOVAKIA publications of the Jesuit university in Trnava since 1635 , and that in the twentieth century Slovak linguists would call "Cultural WestSlovak." Among Bernolak's various language-related writings, he realized a grammar and even a five-language dictionary in six large volumes, completed and published in the 1820s by the priest Jur[ aj] Palkovic. Through their writings, two priests helped spread Bernolak's codified Slovak- Juraj Fandly in his prose works, and Jan Holly in his extensive epic and lyric poetry. Thanks to Holly, Fandly, and others, Bernolak-Slovak (bernolakovcina) became the acceptable and promoted means of expression among Slovak Catholics through the 1840s. During this period, Lutherans continued to publish various literary and other works in biblictina ("Biblical language," in effect, the version of Czech used in the Bohemian Brethren 's Kralice Bible of the late sixteenth century with varying mixtures of Slovak language elements through the nineteenth century). The extent of such writing is clear from the four-volume biographic compilation of Slovak Lutheran poets (1806-12) by the pastor Bohuslav Tablic. Although Slovak Lutherans were a decided minority in the Slovak region of the Kingdom of Hungary, despite their quite modest numbers they remained a well-educated group that strove to retain this distinction in contrast to the much more numerous but less-educated fellow Christian-Catholics. Indeed, the Lutherans especially employed and espoused biblictina in their cultural and liturgical activities to emphasize their relationship with Czech Protestants, thereby increasing their group's numerical strength and enhancing their cultural status. Given this, the Lutherans' reasoning could well have been why should they adopt a linguistic norm created and promoted by the majority Catholic population that was not as educated or cultivated as they? In 1803 Slovak Lutherans established a Chair of Czechoslovak Language and Literature at their lycee in Bratislava. Jiri [Juraj] Palkovic was the first and only holder of this Chair ( 1803-50), and helped to foster Slovak Lutheran publications and cultural exchange. At the Lutheran lycee in Bratislava students and staff became the nucleus for the Lutheran promotion of Slavic/Slovak consciousness in response to the increasing Magyarization in Slovakia. I:udovit Stur studied at the lycee between 1829 and 1834. After his student years from 1835-3 7, Stur was vice-president of the Czecho-Slavic Society, whose 1836 almanach Plody (Fruits) of various writings �SLOVAKIA 105 also represented a manifesto of Slovak national consciousness and identity. On April I 0, 1836 Stur wrote to the Protestant Czech/Moravian cultural figure and historian Frantisek Palacky emphasizing the need for unity among Slovaks and Czechs. As Stt'.ir pointed out, the Czech language used by Lutherans in the Slovak area was not accessible to Catholic Slovaks, and thus there was a need for some combination of the Czech and Slovak language to provide for Slovak and Czech unity and understanding. The Czechs were unwilling to accept Stur's proposal. Although on February I, 1837 Stur became an unremunerated deputy to Jiff Palkovic, on April 5th the Czecho-Slavic society halted its activites because of a government ban on student societies. Stur served as a deputy to Palkovic during 1837-38 and 1840-43 , with his university study at Halle between those periods. After a lengthy investigation, on December 31, 1843 the Bratislava convention of the Lutheran Church relieved Stur of his position as Palkovic's deputy, after which he devoted himself to scholarly, journalistic, and political activity. By 1843 Stur had come to view Slovak as a distinct Slavic language, especially vis-a-vis Czech. According to the Lutheran poet Samo Hrobon, on February 14, 1843 a meeting of various Lutheran lycee students/alumni and their professor L. Stur marked the "day of resurrection of Slovak" (J6na, vol. 2: 31 ). In mid-July of 1843 Stur met with the Lutheran pastors Jozef Miloslav Hurban and Michal Miloslav Hodza at Hurban's parish in Hlboke for the purpose of creating a di stinct Slovak norm. A day after that discussion the three met with the Catholic priest-poet Jan Holly at the latter's parish in Dobra Yoda and received Holly's blessing for their endeavor. At the founding gathering in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas for the journal Tatrin during August 26-28, 1844, Stur's Slovak norm was publicly proclaimed (Durovic, vol. 2: 59). In codifying Slovak as a distinct language, Stur prepared two texts: one explaining the need for writing in Slovak and a grammar of Slovak based on the Central Slovak dialect of Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas (Durovic, vol. 2: 62). Both these texts would be published only in 1846. In vo lume 2 of this publication, three linguists focus on Stur and his grammar. Eugen J6na's study provides a very detailed commentary on Stur, hi s evolving writing activity related to Slovak, especially the two texts of 1846, as well as the influences on Stur's cultural, political, and linguistic thinking (pp. 11-47). Cubomir Durovic has �106 SLOVAKIA the most extensive study (51-257). In his introduction, Durovic discusses Stur's grammar and Slovak in relation to the two editions ( 1809 and 1819) of the Czech/Bohemian grammar by Josef Dobrovsky and various Slovak Lutheran cultural publications (58-63) . This is followed by an extensive and meticulous analysis of Stur's grammar (64-194) with reference to various nineteenth - and twentiethcentury linguistic writings listed at the end (195-196). Completing f:>urovic's study are three indices in relation to his commentary on Stur's grammar proper: an index of words, morphemes, and phonemes (195-227); a "phonematicifonematicky" index of interpreted morphemes and words (229-3 I); and a topic/subject index (233-57). Slavo Ondrejovic concludes this volume with two bibliographies: one of Stur's personal and linguistic works published from 1841 through 2003 (259-68), and a select one on writings about Stur that concern language and linguistic questions published from 1817 through 2006 (269-323). In their introduction to the second volume, Durovic and Ondrejovic have noted the need for such a publication and the lengthy process involved in realizing this work. Specialists in Slovak linguistics, especially in the historical development of contemporary Slovak, will appreciate their efforts for many years to come. Likewise, Slovakia-based, but especially international specialists in Slovak culture and history, will also enhance their understanding of the codifycation of Slovak by Stur and his Lutheran colleagues. Andras Gero, The Jewish Criterion in Hungary, translated from the Magyar by Alan Campbell. Boulder, Colorado, Social Science Monographs: Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York, 2007. 153 pp., notes, biographical notes, photographs, index. YESHA YAHU A. JELINEK Beer-Sheva, Israel This is both a confusing and challenging book. The challenge comes in trying to clarify the definition of a Jew. The confusion comes in trying to define a Jew from Hungary. Of the book's five chapters, the first two were the most confusing. Gero first sets out to discuss Hungarian Jewry. However, he does not differentiate (as do all Slavic languages) between "Hunga- �SLOVAKIA 107 rian" and "Magyar." "Hungary" until 1918 was a geographico-political term for the lands of the Crown of St. Stephen. "Magyar" referred to the largest ethnic (and ruling) group in the Kingdom of Hungary. For contemporary Magyars, as for Gero, such a differentiation does not exist. He equated "Hungary" with "Magyarorszag" (the land of the Magyars). Therefore, when Gero analyzes the "Hungarian Jew" (Magyar Zsid6 ), we do not really understand who he has in mind. Jews appeared on the territory between the Carpathian mountains and the Balkans in the Roman period, much earlier than the Slavs or Magyars. They inhabited the Kingdom of Hungary, initially ruled by the Arpad dynasty and later the Habsburgs . They were not considered to be Magyars. Only in the 19 th century did the Magyars try to "Magyarize" the Jews, as well as the other non-Magyar nationalities. Gero knows these facts, but avoids them. For Gero, there were only "Hungarian Jews" in the entire Kingdom of Hungary. He seems to be entirely unaware of ethnic divisions within Jewry- the existence of Slovak, Rusin , Croat, Transylvanian, etc. Jews. While Gero devotes much space to a rather intelligent discussion of the living conditions, historical environment, and ethnic survival of Magyar Jews, he ignores the fact that Jews in Hungary lived among different nations. He is aware of the oppresssive Magyar nationalism, and criticizes it severely in his last three chapters, but remains unaware of the varieties of Judaism within the Kingdom. The challenging part of this book is the thoughtful discussion of Jewish existence in Hungary and the relations of Jews with the Gentile majority. This discussion forces the reader to re-evaluate quite a few accepted notions about Jewish life in Hungary. Unfortunately, Gero is not familiar with the history of the various Jewish groups in the Kingdom of Hungary. This becomes clear when one compares Jewish life on the Pannonian Plain (today's Hungary) with that of Upper Hungary (Slovakia) or with Sub-Carpathian Rus. Furthermore, he erroneously refers to Hungarian Jews "leaving the ghetto" in the 19 th century. Only Bratislava and a few cities in the Burgenland had "ghettos." That is why Jews who left Moravia for Hungary, or Galicia for Hungary in the 19 th century, suddenly found much greater freedom than they had ever fe lt before. Gero 's lack of knowledge about the Slovak and Rusin portions of the Kingdom of Hungary becomes clear when he discusses Jewish �108 SLOVAKIA conversions to Christianity and the rise of Zionism. For instance, while conversion to Christianity on the Pannonian Plain was not uncommon, it was rare in Upper Hungary or in Sub-Carpathian Rus. When discussing Zionism, Gero neglected its manifestations on Slovak territory and did not perceive that it was weak in the Magyar counties because it was persecuted by the Hungarian government. On the other hand, in Upper Hungary, where Zionizm was weak, Chasidism was strong. Chasidic rabbis were bitter enemies of Zionism. Therefore, one must tread carefully when discussing the strength or weakness of Zionism in Hungary. The most challenging part of Gero's book deals with the rise of anti-Semitism at the end of the 19 th century. Here he deals with the riddle of who is a Jew and when is he considered as such, and under what conditions . Most of Gero's arguments deal only with the Magyar portion of Hungary, which is a pity, because, if he had dug deeper, he could have made the case that it was largely the Magyars who taught the other ethnic groups to hate the Jews. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. I (1913-1938). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Ladislav Susko. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SA V, 2002 . 567 pp. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. 2: (193 8-1944). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Katarina Hradska. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SAV, 2007 . 696 pp. DANIEL E. MILLER University of West Florida, Pensacola The editors of this set of two volumes assembled the speeches and articles of Jozef Tiso (1887-1947) to provide researchers with a valuable source for the history of Slovak politics covering the periods from shortly before the Great War until the Munich Agreement and then from October 1938 until just before 29 August 1944, the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising. Each volume has a very brief introduction and a table of contents that lists the numbered documents in chronological order (this review cites the volume and document numbers). The first volume contains 267 documents and five addenda; the second, 389 documents and 10 addenda. Together, �SLOVAKIA 109 they contain 671 documents on 1,226 pages with no introductions or summaries for each document to color the readers ' opinions. The editors cited multiple sources for each selection, including Slovak archives and newspapers throughout Slovakia. They included explanatory notes, some of which are rather detailed, about individuals, groups, events, terms, and foreign phrases (as a theologian, Tiso had a propensity to use Latin phrases). Some footnotes point out discrepancies in the speeches as they appeared in the various periodicals. In their efforts to be thorough, the editors included journalists' paraphrased summaries of Tiso's speeches when actual texts were unavailable. Furthermore, they did not overlook minor comments, the shortest of which is a mere two lines (l/ 177). Significant gaps raise questions about the completeness of the collection. At the beginning of his career as a priest, Tiso 's publications were understandably sparse, but several selections toward the end of the Great War and immediately afterward are missing. At least a dozen of Tiso's articles appeared in 1917 and 1918 in Papok Kozlonye [Priests' Bulletin] and Duchovny pastier [Spiritual Shepherd], all of which James Mace Ward cites in his dissertation, "No Saint: Jozef Tiso, 1887-1947" (Stanford University, 2008, pp. 63-65), with proper notations about pseudonyms and, in some cases, authorship. By his own admission, after the war Tiso edited and wrote articles for Nyitra/Nitra. In contrast, the first volume of Tiso ' s speeches and articles for the same period contain only a few articles. Oddly enough, there are only five entries in 1929 and 1930 and seven in 1931 , all speeches, aside from one, and an average of 23 entries per year for the previous five years and 15 for the following five years. Additional citations are in Ward's work, including police reports. Police agents attended every open party meeting for all political parties during the First Republic, and they reported the comments of speakers, the reactions of the crowds, and any incidents . The material from these reports is no less valid than the redacted summaries of Tiso ' s speeches that appeared in the press, and they would have filled the voids in Tiso ' s public addresses in these two volumes . While Tiso indeed might have been preoccupied in 1929-1931 , undoubtedly more publications and addresses exist, especially in light of the 1917-1 8 omissions. At times, Tiso ' s silence was intentional. In his 65 months as president of the Slovak Republic, Tiso produced an average of sli- �110 SLOVAKIA ghtly more than five speeches and articles each month, but the frequency declined over time. Most likely, Tiso withdrew from public view with the mounting legitimacy crisis in the Slovak Republic resulting from Germany's losses on the Eastern Front, as well as the prospect of the Allies recreating Czechoslovakia at the war's end and criminalizing Slovakia 's clerical-fascist regime. As a result, in the first eight months of 1944, there are only 23 entries, That is less than three speeches and articles for each month . The speeches and articles in these two volumes portray Tiso as priest, ideologist, party politician, parliamentarian, cabinet minister, and president. The value of this collection is greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly, researchers are relieved that they have the bulk of Tiso 's works at their fingertips and need not spend countless hours scouring sources and fearing that they overlooked something. Furthermore, the assemblage of Tiso 's works in one venue facilitates fresh perspectives on his career. A change in Tiso 's speaking style is apparent in the two volumes. The paucity of his speeches before he became a cabinet minister in 1927 is striking, and it is unfortunate that more texts and transcripts of speeches do not exist from this time. Nevertheless, it is impossible that Tiso could have built his popularity solely on the basis of articles, and the police reports could have made the evidence from this period more balanced . Tiso's speeches in the decade from 1927 until 1938 were disciplined- they had a single topic and a logical argument. This is especially true of his carefully crafted speeches in the National Assembly and before selected audiences. As president, Tiso addressed a wide variety of audiences with speeches that lacked focus and often contained topics not well suited for his listeners. As a result, he analyzed the development of the Slovak Republic with respect to the fate of other East-Central European states while addressing Catholics on a pilgrimage (Il/135). When celebrating the electrification of a district, he spoke about the wonders of electricity, encouraged factory workers and farmers to cooperate in building the state, and admonished listeners about observing the laws regarding economic matters (II/221 ). At a religious gathering in 1942, he criticized efforts to count all Greek-Catholic Slovaks as Rusyns and shortly afterward justified the confiscation of Jewish property with the slogan "Slovakia for Slovaks" (II/282). Aside from being an undisciplined extemporaneous speaker, one possible explanation for the �SLOVAKIA 111 change in style was Tiso ' s need to account for the policies of the state in the simplest terms for the broadest range of listeners. Between 1918 and 1938, Tiso's public comments and writings focused in part or exclusively on the need for Slovak autonomy as fulfilling the promise of the Pittsburgh Agreement. The tenor of his mesages heightened over the years, and in February 193 7 he referred to Czechoslovakia as an "aberration of democracy" (1/243), although he uttered plenty of vituperative condemnations of the First Republic both before and afterward. Despite efforts to cooperate with supporters of Slovak autonomy in the camp of Lutheran Slovaks within the Slovak National Party and even Hungarian politicians in the 1930s, Tiso tirelessly strove to bind Slovak identity with the Catholic faith, to link the leadership of the nation to the Catholic clergy, and to advance his Hlinka' s Slovak People's Party as the only major political party to recognize and defend the Slovak nation as unique. After the Munich Agreement, Tiso became minister for Slovak affairs and then on October 6, 1938 premier of an autonomous Slovakia. During this time, Tiso concentrated on policy and restructuring the political system, which essentially made Slovakia a oneparty state. After Slovak independence on 14 March 1939, Tiso served as prime minister and then, beginning in October 1939, he became the republic ' s president. Tiso now sought to legitimize the new republic, justifying its independence and thanking Adolf Hitler for extending his protection to the Slovaks. Tiso linked Slovakia to Germany's successes and Germany's leadership in the construction of a new Europe. Beginning in 1943, roughly coinciding with the end of the Battle of Stalingrad, Tiso's references to Hitler and Germany became sparse, and Tiso did not mention either in his address in 1944 on the fifth anniversary of the Slovak state (ll/374). Tiso obviously wanted to distance himself from Hitler, but fewer references to his patron also suggest the limits of Tiso's acceptance of his own earlier rhetoric. Throughout the war, Tiso's description of Slovakia ' s mission on the Eastern Front as a struggle against Bolshevism, with its Jewish and anti-Christian influences, remained constant. In the final document dated 6 August 1944, Tiso ended with a prophetic statement: "we cannot deny that the Bolsheviks are at the border and that they promise the scaffold!" (II/389) . The two volumes reveal much about the development of Tiso's anti-Semitism. There are few references to Jews in Tiso ' s statements �112 SLOVAKIA between the world wars, and at one point in 1934, he even invited Jews, Germans, Hungarians, and Czechs in Slovakia to join with Slovaks in demanding autonomy (l/202). Nevertheless, there are occasional anti-Jewish comments, such as Ti so's call for land from the church estates parceled under the land reform to go to Catholic farmers , not Jews, nonbelievers, and speculators (l/78). During the Second Czecho-Slovak Republic, Tiso identified Jews as a foreign element whose presence in Slovak society must be proportionate to their numbers. Nevertheless, he warned that Jews should not become the objects of "hatred and sadistic tendencies" (I/32). His rhetoric against Jews heightened when Slovakia became independent, and in August 1942 he justified the removal of Jews from Slovak society as the elimination of an enemy, an act of self-defense in keeping with Christian morals. Loving oneself is a precept from God, according to Tiso, "and I think there is no need to convince anyone that the Jewish element endangers the life of a Slovak" (11/287). There is little evidence in these two volumes to suggest that Tiso 's antiSemitism was anything but genuine, but the addition of Tiso's intensely anti-Semitic Ny itra/Nitra articles make his hatred of Jews indisputable. The editors are preparing a third vo lume to cover the conversations of Hitler and Tiso as well as Tiso 's statements from the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising on 29 August 1944 through his 1946-1947 trial. They indicated their intent to include in the third volume addenda for the first two volumes and expressed their wish that historians inform them of additional documents. The inclusion of missing items- those signed with a pseudonym or abbreviated name and those whose authorship is disputable- is absoutely essential , not only for the convenience of researchers, but also for the sake of objectivity. Perhaps they can be in a section of their own. The editors had planned to include three indexes in the second volume, and one can assume that these essential tools for researchers will appear in the planned third volume. Specialists on Slovak affairs in the Habsburg Monarchy, the First Czechoslovak Republic, and the first Slovak Republic are greatly indebted to Fabricius, Susko, Hradska, and the others who contributed to the production of these two volumes . They anxiously await the appearance of the third volume in this indispensable series. �SLOVAKIA 113 Max Domarus, Th e Complete Hitler: A Digital Desktop Reference to His Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945. Wauconda, Ill. : Bolchazy-Carducci, 2007. (CD-ROM edition). VASILLIS VOURKOUTIOTIS University of Ottawa While documentary collections concerning the Third Reich are not, generally speaking, difficult to come by, few students are exposed to the actual words of Adolf Hitler except as summarized by other compilers in wider works . The exception to this has been Max Domtarus' four-volume collection of Hitler's speeches. The compilation of this resource was linked to the history it attempted to capture. In 1932, Max Domarus was only twenty-two years old. Yet, he realized that in Adolf Hitler, Germany and the world were faced with a new phenomenon whose significance should not be underestimated. He began, in that year, to collect and compile as many of Hitler's speeches as he could find , and continued the project through the war years until Hitler' s death in 1945 . After the war, Domarus supplemented his collection as much as possible, and the resulting work, which included his annotations and commentary, was a four-volume set published in German. For each year in question, the reader is offered a detailed summary of events, and photographs from the Domarus archive. Full endnotes for each section yield bibliographical citations, as well as additional explanatory commentary. Each volume also contains a list of abbreviations which users will find helpful. Although some of Domarus' commentaries have been superceded by historical research, his perceptions remain as interesting in several instances as the speeches they comment upon. The four-volume set, even though it only covers Hitler's speeches from 1932 onward, remains the best single collection of the dictator's words. With this CD, Domarus's publishers have brought an important printed historical resource into the modem information age. An English-language translation accompanies the original German text, bringing to the user eight volumes of material in a single disk. Although presented in a chronological format, the speeches are in a searchable PDF format, allowing the student or researcher the ability to scan years of �114 SLOVAKIA material for keywords . For those with the language abilities and desire, the English version can be easily compared for accuracy with the German original. Given how long Hitler could speak for at a single event, it is not surprising that Domarus felt the need to offer exerpts rather than a stenographic record. This may strike some as a potential drawback, and might lead some researches to seek the full text of a particular speech of interest. The vast majority of users, however, will not find this a significant issue; Domarus' work has remained the standard reference for university libraries since its first publication in 1962 with good reason. Two versions of the CD ROM exist, the Standard and ePremium. In addition to the advantages of the Standard, the ePremium addition allows the user to print, copy and paste text directly from the PDF files into one's own documents, and add commentary to the texts. These enhancements will be of interest to those who work closely enough with the material in their own research. On the whole, in making both the English and German versions of Domarus' compilations available in such a format, the publishers have not only made an important work more accessible, but also provided a service to both students and academics alike. James Ramon Felak After Hitler, Before Stalin: Catholics, Communists, and Democrats in Slovakia, 1945-1948. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. xv-261 pp. , notes, bibliography, index. M. MARK STOLARIK University of Ottawa Having perceived a negl ected period of history, James R. Felak set out to tell the story of the role of Catholicism in Slovakia in the period 1945-48, especially its relationship with the Communist and Democratic Parties. The essence of the book is that, even though both the Communists and the Lutheran leaders of the Democratic Party were either hostile to or suspicious of the Roman Catholic Church, both courted Roman Catholic voters in order to attain political power in post-war Slovakia. Having combed the relevant Slovak archives, and read the Communist, Lutheran and Roman Catholic press, along with most secondary sources on the subject, Felak carefully related what actually �SLOVAKIA 115 transpired in Slovakia in the three years after the Second World War. He pointed out that the post-war National Front government that came into existence on April 3, 1945, reduced the pre-war political parties of Czechoslovakia from 16 to 5, and in Slovakia permitted only the Communists and Democrats. The two strongest pre-war political parties, Hlinka Slovak People's Party and the Czechoslovak Agrarian Party were banned as "collaborationist". That meant that the minority Lutherans could (and did) join the newly-formed Democratic Party, but the majority Catholics were disenfranchised. As a result, both the Communists and Democrats courted Catholic voters in anticipation of the May, 1946 elections, while simultaneously attacking the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, the self-appointed Slovak National Council, with its executive Board of Commissioners, nationalized all religious schools, seized most Catholic institutions, severely limited the size of the Catholic press and imprisoned two Slovak bishops. On the other hand, the Communists tried to persuade Catholic voters to vote for their party, because the Democrats were largely Lutherans . Indeed, the Communists even supported the creation of a Christian Republican Party, but the Catholics and Communists could not agree on its name, and this project fell through. The Lutherans, on the other hand, also wooed the Catholics by promising to split future political representation and patronage with them on the basis of a 7:3 ratio in favor of the Catholics. The Catholics found this promise more enticing than Communist overtures and, as a result, the Catholic and Lutheran politicians reached the so-called April Agreement on March 31, 1946. Since they were now united, the Catholics and Lutherans both supported the Democratic Party and won the 1946 elections with a convincing majority of 62%. Since they had lost the elections, the Communist Party of Slovakia went on the offensive. With the collusion of the government in Prague, where the Communists had more influence, and where certain Czech parties resented Slovak home-rule, Slovak Communists, led by Gustav Husak, negotiated the "Third Prague Agreement" of June 27, 1946, by which the Slovak National Council and the Board of Commissioners subordinated themselves to the Prague government. Then the Slovak Communists decided to try for treason the Reverend Jozef Tiso, former president of the first Slovak Republic ( 1939-1945). They saw to it that the National Court was domina- �116 SLOVAKIA ted by Communists who, as expected, found Tiso guilty and sentenced him to death on April 15, 1947. The hapless Democrats on the executive of the Board of Commissioners failed to recommend clemency and left the final verdict to the government in Prague, which upheld the verdict, as did president Benes, and Tiso was hanged on April 17. After this fiasco, Slovak Catholics lost faith in the Democratic Party, just as the Communists began their offensive against it. In the summer and fall of 194 7 the Communists fabricated an anti-state conspiracy against certain Catholic Democrats. On this basis Gustav Husak on October 31 staged a mini-coup in Slovakia by (with Prague support) illegally dissolving and then reappointing the Board of Commissioners in favor of the Communists. This was a prelude to similar tactics by the Communists in Prague in February of 1948, when three non-Communist parties resigned from the government in the hope of toppling it. Instead, the Communists, led by Klement Gottwald offered to form a new government and president Edvard Benes approved it. Thus, by February of 1948 the Communists had completed their takeover of both the Slovak and Czechoslovak governments and instituted totalitarian rule for the next 40 years, during which they tried (but failed) to completely destroy the Roman Catholic church in Czechoslovakia. Felak's book is well-written and comprehensive. Perhaps his greatest contribution is that he laid to rest the oft-repeated Slovak complaint that president Benes arranged for Tiso's death. Instead, as Felak convincingly shows, it was the incompetence of the Lutheradominated executive of the Board of Commissioners which was most responsible because of its inability to reach a consensus on the issue of clemency. They essentially "passed the buck" to Prague, where Tiso had few friends and that sealed his doom. In spite of Felak's meticulous scholarship, the book contained a few glitches and one omission. The slang expression "First off "appeared a few times (p.6), Stanislav Kirschbaum's first name was shortened to Stanley in footnote 5 on page 217, the surname Viktorin was misspelled Victory (p.63), and Banovce nad Bebravou was identified as Tiso's home town (p.100), when that honor goes to Vel'ka Bytca. Perhaps the greatest omission is the revelation that Ferdinand Durcansky, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the first Slovak Republic, who fled to the west after the war and tried to �SLOVAKIA 117 organize an anti-state underground movement in post-war Slovakia, was actually controlled by Kim Philby, the notorious British spy who was, in fact, working for the KGB . Mark Aarons and John Loftus, on the basis of research in the files of the CIA in Washington, revealed this interesting detail in their Ratlines: How the Vatican Networks Betrayed Western Intelligence to the Soviets (London, 1991 ), pp. 21 19 and footnotes 46-50, page 334. Thus, the anti-state conspiracy of 1947 was carefully staged from abroad by the KGB as an excuse for the communist takeover of Slovakia. Edward Snajdr, Nature Protests: The End of Ecology in Slovakia. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2008 . xiii242 pp., photographs, notes, bibliography, list of interviews, index. JURAJ HOCMAN University of Ottawa Edward Snajdr, an American cultural anthropologist at New York University, examined Slovakia's emerging civic environmental protection movement in the communist era and its rapid disappearance during the country 's post-communist transformation (19851995). The author did his fieldwork in situ and that is why it is particularly interesting to read about his experience. In the first two chapters, Snajdr focuses on urban and extraurban contexts of social life in communist Slovakia while providing general, yet adequate, historical background. The author traces the origins of environmental movements among young Slovaks and Czechs that had begun with associations such as SZOPK (Slovensky zvaz ochrancov prfrody a kraj iny - the Slovak Union of Protectors of Nature and the Countryside) in Slovakia and Brontosaurus in the Czech lands. He contrasts the difference between the effectiveness of state legislation designed to protect the environment in the massively and insensitively industrialized Slovakia, with spontaneous projects of young people whose aims were to improve the quality of the environment that surrounded them. Despite their local character, those efforts were not only efficient, but also inspirational. Snajdr then proceeds to the period from 1985 to 1989 during which environmentalist activities spread to the politics of discontent with the communist regime. He stresses the significance of the acce- �118 SLOVAKIA lerated drive for environmental protection in Slovakia during the period of perestroika and glasnost in the case of the samizdat Bratislava Nahlas (Bratislava Aloud). This publication, which voiced the concerns of ordinary citizens regarding disrespectful and harmful socio-economic policies of the communist regime, was prohibited by state authorities. Its editor, Jan Budaj, who became one of the most visible leaders of the "Velvet Revolution" in Slovakia in the fall of 1989, as well as the samizdat' s distributors, were harassed by the communist secret police (the StB). The fall of the communist regime might have become the new beginning of a friendlier approach to environmental protection in Slovakia. That is where the second part of the story begins. A new political reality in Eastern Europe, which was closely tied to nationalism, brought a new perspective on how to cope with the legacy of communism and its negative ecological effects. The members of the Slovak Green Party (Strana zelenych), which was formed in November of 1989, and was represented in the new Slovak parliament, took a firm stand against the completion of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros dam on the Danube river, which formed the Slovak-Hungarian border. This started as a joint venture of the communist governments of Czechoslovakia and Hungary under a treaty signed in I 977. Hungary withdrew from the project at the end of the 1980s, bowing to pressure from ecologists at home and abroad. To Slovaks, as Snajdr observes, the project was a matter of national prestige and a rallying point against warnings of environmental risks that stood in the forefront of Hungary 's concerns. Snajdr elaborates on how its chief engineer, Julius Binder, defended the completion of the Slovak part of the project and gained the support of the Slovak public. From then on the Greens (Zeleni), who, in the meantime, split into two groups, the Czecho-Slovak federalists and the Slovak nationalists, started slipping into political obscurity and eventually returned to small and isolated projects of landscape revitalization at various locations . Thus, "nation won over nature" and Slovakia, together with representatives of the ecology movement, entered into an age of post-ecology. The book paints a credible picture of a former communist regime unconcerned with the ecological impact of insensitive industrialization and socio-economic modernization. The first part of the study, which analyzes the evolution of environmental protection, is more �SLOVAKIA 119 cohesive than the second. If the second part appears a bit fragmentary, it is due to the overall ruptured character of the ecology movement in Slovakia in the second half of the 1990s. Though the sympathies of the author towards a cleaner environment cannot be overlooked, he did not take sides in intra and extra-national political conflicts. Apart from a few minor aberrations, such as the subtler use of the geographic term the Czech lands or the Czech Republic instead of Bohemia when referring to the second half of the 20 th century; and the incorrect transliteration of Gabcikovo-Nagymaros instead of GNagymaros, and Kvacian (gen . or accus; Slovak) instead of Kvacany (nom.), the book profits from its narrative and analysis based on the author's knowledge of theory and his authentic experience. It is an insightful contribution to the discourse on the continuing multilayered evolution of post-communist states and societies in Eastern Europe, in which ecology has played an important part. With Slovakia now being a member of the European Union and a signatory of international treaties on environmental protection, it would be interesting to discover whether the previous gap between government and civic initiatives has remained the same or has disappeared. � 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 2010, Vol. 40 Description An account of the resource Vol. 40 (No. 74-75), 2010. 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 2010 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 REVIEWS SLOVAKIA 103 Nauka reci slovenskej [Nauka reci slovenskej vistavena od Ludevita Stura], Ludevit Stur, Vol. l : Faksimile povodneho vydania na vydanie pripravili Eubomir Durovic and Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006. 228 pages, facsimile of the 1846 grammar text. Nauka reci slovenskej : Komentare, Bibliograjia, Vol. 2, Eugen Jona, Eubomir Durovic, Slavomir Ondrejovic. Bratislava: VEDA, 2006 . 323 pp., commentary, bibliography, and various indices. GERALD J. SABO , S.J. John Carroll University This two-volume publication is a singular event. The first volume is a facsimile edition of the 1846 grammar by Eudovit Stur (1815-56), whose availability inside Slovakia is quite limited, and outside Slovakia is virtually non-existent. The second volume enhances the grammar with background information, providing detailed analysis of and commentary by eminent Slovak linguists, among them Eubomir Durovic. Both volumes appear on the 160th anniversary of the grammar' s original publication, but also the 150th anniversary of Stur's accidental death. Lutheran pastors and Catholic priests worked on the codification of Slovak from the eighteenth century through the mid-nineteenth. In the l 720s the Slovak Lutheran pastors and scholars Matej Bel and Daniel Krrnan published the Bible in the primarily Czech linguistic form espoused by Slovak Lutherans. In his 1746 grammar the Lutheran pastor Pavel Dolezal presented Slovak and Czech as two dialects of one language- Czechoslovak. In the 1750s the Catholic Camaldolese monks translated the Bible into Slovak for their own useespecially in readings for the liturgical year, a significant accomplishment that would be discovered only in the mid-twentieth century. In the late 1780s the Catholic priest Anton Bemolak initiated the extensive Catholic efforts for codifying Slovak and then promoted his codified norm. For his codification Bemolak drew upon the Slovak that had been nurtured through the activities and 104 SLOVAKIA publications of the Jesuit university in Trnava since 1635 , and that in the twentieth century Slovak linguists would call "Cultural WestSlovak." Among Bernolak's various language-related writings, he realized a grammar and even a five-language dictionary in six large volumes, completed and published in the 1820s by the priest Jur[ aj] Palkovic. Through their writings, two priests helped spread Bernolak's codified Slovak- Juraj Fandly in his prose works, and Jan Holly in his extensive epic and lyric poetry. Thanks to Holly, Fandly, and others, Bernolak-Slovak (bernolakovcina) became the acceptable and promoted means of expression among Slovak Catholics through the 1840s. During this period, Lutherans continued to publish various literary and other works in biblictina ("Biblical language," in effect, the version of Czech used in the Bohemian Brethren 's Kralice Bible of the late sixteenth century with varying mixtures of Slovak language elements through the nineteenth century). The extent of such writing is clear from the four-volume biographic compilation of Slovak Lutheran poets (1806-12) by the pastor Bohuslav Tablic. Although Slovak Lutherans were a decided minority in the Slovak region of the Kingdom of Hungary, despite their quite modest numbers they remained a well-educated group that strove to retain this distinction in contrast to the much more numerous but less-educated fellow Christian-Catholics. Indeed, the Lutherans especially employed and espoused biblictina in their cultural and liturgical activities to emphasize their relationship with Czech Protestants, thereby increasing their group's numerical strength and enhancing their cultural status. Given this, the Lutherans' reasoning could well have been why should they adopt a linguistic norm created and promoted by the majority Catholic population that was not as educated or cultivated as they? In 1803 Slovak Lutherans established a Chair of Czechoslovak Language and Literature at their lycee in Bratislava. Jiri [Juraj] Palkovic was the first and only holder of this Chair ( 1803-50), and helped to foster Slovak Lutheran publications and cultural exchange. At the Lutheran lycee in Bratislava students and staff became the nucleus for the Lutheran promotion of Slavic/Slovak consciousness in response to the increasing Magyarization in Slovakia. I:udovit Stur studied at the lycee between 1829 and 1834. After his student years from 1835-3 7, Stur was vice-president of the Czecho-Slavic Society, whose 1836 almanach Plody (Fruits) of various writings SLOVAKIA 105 also represented a manifesto of Slovak national consciousness and identity. On April I 0, 1836 Stur wrote to the Protestant Czech/Moravian cultural figure and historian Frantisek Palacky emphasizing the need for unity among Slovaks and Czechs. As Stt'.ir pointed out, the Czech language used by Lutherans in the Slovak area was not accessible to Catholic Slovaks, and thus there was a need for some combination of the Czech and Slovak language to provide for Slovak and Czech unity and understanding. The Czechs were unwilling to accept Stur's proposal. Although on February I, 1837 Stur became an unremunerated deputy to Jiff Palkovic, on April 5th the Czecho-Slavic society halted its activites because of a government ban on student societies. Stur served as a deputy to Palkovic during 1837-38 and 1840-43 , with his university study at Halle between those periods. After a lengthy investigation, on December 31, 1843 the Bratislava convention of the Lutheran Church relieved Stur of his position as Palkovic's deputy, after which he devoted himself to scholarly, journalistic, and political activity. By 1843 Stur had come to view Slovak as a distinct Slavic language, especially vis-a-vis Czech. According to the Lutheran poet Samo Hrobon, on February 14, 1843 a meeting of various Lutheran lycee students/alumni and their professor L. Stur marked the "day of resurrection of Slovak" (J6na, vol. 2: 31 ). In mid-July of 1843 Stur met with the Lutheran pastors Jozef Miloslav Hurban and Michal Miloslav Hodza at Hurban's parish in Hlboke for the purpose of creating a di stinct Slovak norm. A day after that discussion the three met with the Catholic priest-poet Jan Holly at the latter's parish in Dobra Yoda and received Holly's blessing for their endeavor. At the founding gathering in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas for the journal Tatrin during August 26-28, 1844, Stur's Slovak norm was publicly proclaimed (Durovic, vol. 2: 59). In codifying Slovak as a distinct language, Stur prepared two texts: one explaining the need for writing in Slovak and a grammar of Slovak based on the Central Slovak dialect of Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas (Durovic, vol. 2: 62). Both these texts would be published only in 1846. In vo lume 2 of this publication, three linguists focus on Stur and his grammar. Eugen J6na's study provides a very detailed commentary on Stur, hi s evolving writing activity related to Slovak, especially the two texts of 1846, as well as the influences on Stur's cultural, political, and linguistic thinking (pp. 11-47). Cubomir Durovic has 106 SLOVAKIA the most extensive study (51-257). In his introduction, Durovic discusses Stur's grammar and Slovak in relation to the two editions ( 1809 and 1819) of the Czech/Bohemian grammar by Josef Dobrovsky and various Slovak Lutheran cultural publications (58-63) . This is followed by an extensive and meticulous analysis of Stur's grammar (64-194) with reference to various nineteenth - and twentiethcentury linguistic writings listed at the end (195-196). Completing f:>urovic's study are three indices in relation to his commentary on Stur's grammar proper: an index of words, morphemes, and phonemes (195-227); a "phonematicifonematicky" index of interpreted morphemes and words (229-3 I); and a topic/subject index (233-57). Slavo Ondrejovic concludes this volume with two bibliographies: one of Stur's personal and linguistic works published from 1841 through 2003 (259-68), and a select one on writings about Stur that concern language and linguistic questions published from 1817 through 2006 (269-323). In their introduction to the second volume, Durovic and Ondrejovic have noted the need for such a publication and the lengthy process involved in realizing this work. Specialists in Slovak linguistics, especially in the historical development of contemporary Slovak, will appreciate their efforts for many years to come. Likewise, Slovakia-based, but especially international specialists in Slovak culture and history, will also enhance their understanding of the codifycation of Slovak by Stur and his Lutheran colleagues. Andras Gero, The Jewish Criterion in Hungary, translated from the Magyar by Alan Campbell. Boulder, Colorado, Social Science Monographs: Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York, 2007. 153 pp., notes, biographical notes, photographs, index. YESHA YAHU A. JELINEK Beer-Sheva, Israel This is both a confusing and challenging book. The challenge comes in trying to clarify the definition of a Jew. The confusion comes in trying to define a Jew from Hungary. Of the book's five chapters, the first two were the most confusing. Gero first sets out to discuss Hungarian Jewry. However, he does not differentiate (as do all Slavic languages) between "Hunga- SLOVAKIA 107 rian" and "Magyar." "Hungary" until 1918 was a geographico-political term for the lands of the Crown of St. Stephen. "Magyar" referred to the largest ethnic (and ruling) group in the Kingdom of Hungary. For contemporary Magyars, as for Gero, such a differentiation does not exist. He equated "Hungary" with "Magyarorszag" (the land of the Magyars). Therefore, when Gero analyzes the "Hungarian Jew" (Magyar Zsid6 ), we do not really understand who he has in mind. Jews appeared on the territory between the Carpathian mountains and the Balkans in the Roman period, much earlier than the Slavs or Magyars. They inhabited the Kingdom of Hungary, initially ruled by the Arpad dynasty and later the Habsburgs . They were not considered to be Magyars. Only in the 19 th century did the Magyars try to "Magyarize" the Jews, as well as the other non-Magyar nationalities. Gero knows these facts, but avoids them. For Gero, there were only "Hungarian Jews" in the entire Kingdom of Hungary. He seems to be entirely unaware of ethnic divisions within Jewry- the existence of Slovak, Rusin , Croat, Transylvanian, etc. Jews. While Gero devotes much space to a rather intelligent discussion of the living conditions, historical environment, and ethnic survival of Magyar Jews, he ignores the fact that Jews in Hungary lived among different nations. He is aware of the oppresssive Magyar nationalism, and criticizes it severely in his last three chapters, but remains unaware of the varieties of Judaism within the Kingdom. The challenging part of this book is the thoughtful discussion of Jewish existence in Hungary and the relations of Jews with the Gentile majority. This discussion forces the reader to re-evaluate quite a few accepted notions about Jewish life in Hungary. Unfortunately, Gero is not familiar with the history of the various Jewish groups in the Kingdom of Hungary. This becomes clear when one compares Jewish life on the Pannonian Plain (today's Hungary) with that of Upper Hungary (Slovakia) or with Sub-Carpathian Rus. Furthermore, he erroneously refers to Hungarian Jews "leaving the ghetto" in the 19 th century. Only Bratislava and a few cities in the Burgenland had "ghettos." That is why Jews who left Moravia for Hungary, or Galicia for Hungary in the 19 th century, suddenly found much greater freedom than they had ever fe lt before. Gero 's lack of knowledge about the Slovak and Rusin portions of the Kingdom of Hungary becomes clear when he discusses Jewish 108 SLOVAKIA conversions to Christianity and the rise of Zionism. For instance, while conversion to Christianity on the Pannonian Plain was not uncommon, it was rare in Upper Hungary or in Sub-Carpathian Rus. When discussing Zionism, Gero neglected its manifestations on Slovak territory and did not perceive that it was weak in the Magyar counties because it was persecuted by the Hungarian government. On the other hand, in Upper Hungary, where Zionizm was weak, Chasidism was strong. Chasidic rabbis were bitter enemies of Zionism. Therefore, one must tread carefully when discussing the strength or weakness of Zionism in Hungary. The most challenging part of Gero's book deals with the rise of anti-Semitism at the end of the 19 th century. Here he deals with the riddle of who is a Jew and when is he considered as such, and under what conditions . Most of Gero's arguments deal only with the Magyar portion of Hungary, which is a pity, because, if he had dug deeper, he could have made the case that it was largely the Magyars who taught the other ethnic groups to hate the Jews. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. I (1913-1938). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Ladislav Susko. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SA V, 2002 . 567 pp. Tiso, Jozef Prejavy a clanky. Vol. 2: (193 8-1944). Ed. Miroslav Fabricius and Katarina Hradska. Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press and Historicky ustav SAV, 2007 . 696 pp. DANIEL E. MILLER University of West Florida, Pensacola The editors of this set of two volumes assembled the speeches and articles of Jozef Tiso (1887-1947) to provide researchers with a valuable source for the history of Slovak politics covering the periods from shortly before the Great War until the Munich Agreement and then from October 1938 until just before 29 August 1944, the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising. Each volume has a very brief introduction and a table of contents that lists the numbered documents in chronological order (this review cites the volume and document numbers). The first volume contains 267 documents and five addenda; the second, 389 documents and 10 addenda. Together, SLOVAKIA 109 they contain 671 documents on 1,226 pages with no introductions or summaries for each document to color the readers ' opinions. The editors cited multiple sources for each selection, including Slovak archives and newspapers throughout Slovakia. They included explanatory notes, some of which are rather detailed, about individuals, groups, events, terms, and foreign phrases (as a theologian, Tiso had a propensity to use Latin phrases). Some footnotes point out discrepancies in the speeches as they appeared in the various periodicals. In their efforts to be thorough, the editors included journalists' paraphrased summaries of Tiso's speeches when actual texts were unavailable. Furthermore, they did not overlook minor comments, the shortest of which is a mere two lines (l/ 177). Significant gaps raise questions about the completeness of the collection. At the beginning of his career as a priest, Tiso 's publications were understandably sparse, but several selections toward the end of the Great War and immediately afterward are missing. At least a dozen of Tiso's articles appeared in 1917 and 1918 in Papok Kozlonye [Priests' Bulletin] and Duchovny pastier [Spiritual Shepherd], all of which James Mace Ward cites in his dissertation, "No Saint: Jozef Tiso, 1887-1947" (Stanford University, 2008, pp. 63-65), with proper notations about pseudonyms and, in some cases, authorship. By his own admission, after the war Tiso edited and wrote articles for Nyitra/Nitra. In contrast, the first volume of Tiso ' s speeches and articles for the same period contain only a few articles. Oddly enough, there are only five entries in 1929 and 1930 and seven in 1931 , all speeches, aside from one, and an average of 23 entries per year for the previous five years and 15 for the following five years. Additional citations are in Ward's work, including police reports. Police agents attended every open party meeting for all political parties during the First Republic, and they reported the comments of speakers, the reactions of the crowds, and any incidents . The material from these reports is no less valid than the redacted summaries of Tiso ' s speeches that appeared in the press, and they would have filled the voids in Tiso ' s public addresses in these two volumes . While Tiso indeed might have been preoccupied in 1929-1931 , undoubtedly more publications and addresses exist, especially in light of the 1917-1 8 omissions. At times, Tiso ' s silence was intentional. In his 65 months as president of the Slovak Republic, Tiso produced an average of sli- 110 SLOVAKIA ghtly more than five speeches and articles each month, but the frequency declined over time. Most likely, Tiso withdrew from public view with the mounting legitimacy crisis in the Slovak Republic resulting from Germany's losses on the Eastern Front, as well as the prospect of the Allies recreating Czechoslovakia at the war's end and criminalizing Slovakia 's clerical-fascist regime. As a result, in the first eight months of 1944, there are only 23 entries, That is less than three speeches and articles for each month . The speeches and articles in these two volumes portray Tiso as priest, ideologist, party politician, parliamentarian, cabinet minister, and president. The value of this collection is greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly, researchers are relieved that they have the bulk of Tiso 's works at their fingertips and need not spend countless hours scouring sources and fearing that they overlooked something. Furthermore, the assemblage of Tiso 's works in one venue facilitates fresh perspectives on his career. A change in Tiso 's speaking style is apparent in the two volumes. The paucity of his speeches before he became a cabinet minister in 1927 is striking, and it is unfortunate that more texts and transcripts of speeches do not exist from this time. Nevertheless, it is impossible that Tiso could have built his popularity solely on the basis of articles, and the police reports could have made the evidence from this period more balanced . Tiso's speeches in the decade from 1927 until 1938 were disciplined- they had a single topic and a logical argument. This is especially true of his carefully crafted speeches in the National Assembly and before selected audiences. As president, Tiso addressed a wide variety of audiences with speeches that lacked focus and often contained topics not well suited for his listeners. As a result, he analyzed the development of the Slovak Republic with respect to the fate of other East-Central European states while addressing Catholics on a pilgrimage (Il/135). When celebrating the electrification of a district, he spoke about the wonders of electricity, encouraged factory workers and farmers to cooperate in building the state, and admonished listeners about observing the laws regarding economic matters (II/221 ). At a religious gathering in 1942, he criticized efforts to count all Greek-Catholic Slovaks as Rusyns and shortly afterward justified the confiscation of Jewish property with the slogan "Slovakia for Slovaks" (II/282). Aside from being an undisciplined extemporaneous speaker, one possible explanation for the SLOVAKIA 111 change in style was Tiso ' s need to account for the policies of the state in the simplest terms for the broadest range of listeners. Between 1918 and 1938, Tiso's public comments and writings focused in part or exclusively on the need for Slovak autonomy as fulfilling the promise of the Pittsburgh Agreement. The tenor of his mesages heightened over the years, and in February 193 7 he referred to Czechoslovakia as an "aberration of democracy" (1/243), although he uttered plenty of vituperative condemnations of the First Republic both before and afterward. Despite efforts to cooperate with supporters of Slovak autonomy in the camp of Lutheran Slovaks within the Slovak National Party and even Hungarian politicians in the 1930s, Tiso tirelessly strove to bind Slovak identity with the Catholic faith, to link the leadership of the nation to the Catholic clergy, and to advance his Hlinka' s Slovak People's Party as the only major political party to recognize and defend the Slovak nation as unique. After the Munich Agreement, Tiso became minister for Slovak affairs and then on October 6, 1938 premier of an autonomous Slovakia. During this time, Tiso concentrated on policy and restructuring the political system, which essentially made Slovakia a oneparty state. After Slovak independence on 14 March 1939, Tiso served as prime minister and then, beginning in October 1939, he became the republic ' s president. Tiso now sought to legitimize the new republic, justifying its independence and thanking Adolf Hitler for extending his protection to the Slovaks. Tiso linked Slovakia to Germany's successes and Germany's leadership in the construction of a new Europe. Beginning in 1943, roughly coinciding with the end of the Battle of Stalingrad, Tiso's references to Hitler and Germany became sparse, and Tiso did not mention either in his address in 1944 on the fifth anniversary of the Slovak state (ll/374). Tiso obviously wanted to distance himself from Hitler, but fewer references to his patron also suggest the limits of Tiso's acceptance of his own earlier rhetoric. Throughout the war, Tiso's description of Slovakia ' s mission on the Eastern Front as a struggle against Bolshevism, with its Jewish and anti-Christian influences, remained constant. In the final document dated 6 August 1944, Tiso ended with a prophetic statement: "we cannot deny that the Bolsheviks are at the border and that they promise the scaffold!" (II/389) . The two volumes reveal much about the development of Tiso's anti-Semitism. There are few references to Jews in Tiso ' s statements 112 SLOVAKIA between the world wars, and at one point in 1934, he even invited Jews, Germans, Hungarians, and Czechs in Slovakia to join with Slovaks in demanding autonomy (l/202). Nevertheless, there are occasional anti-Jewish comments, such as Ti so's call for land from the church estates parceled under the land reform to go to Catholic farmers , not Jews, nonbelievers, and speculators (l/78). During the Second Czecho-Slovak Republic, Tiso identified Jews as a foreign element whose presence in Slovak society must be proportionate to their numbers. Nevertheless, he warned that Jews should not become the objects of "hatred and sadistic tendencies" (I/32). His rhetoric against Jews heightened when Slovakia became independent, and in August 1942 he justified the removal of Jews from Slovak society as the elimination of an enemy, an act of self-defense in keeping with Christian morals. Loving oneself is a precept from God, according to Tiso, "and I think there is no need to convince anyone that the Jewish element endangers the life of a Slovak" (11/287). There is little evidence in these two volumes to suggest that Tiso 's antiSemitism was anything but genuine, but the addition of Tiso's intensely anti-Semitic Ny itra/Nitra articles make his hatred of Jews indisputable. The editors are preparing a third vo lume to cover the conversations of Hitler and Tiso as well as Tiso 's statements from the beginning of the Slovak National Uprising on 29 August 1944 through his 1946-1947 trial. They indicated their intent to include in the third volume addenda for the first two volumes and expressed their wish that historians inform them of additional documents. The inclusion of missing items- those signed with a pseudonym or abbreviated name and those whose authorship is disputable- is absoutely essential , not only for the convenience of researchers, but also for the sake of objectivity. Perhaps they can be in a section of their own. The editors had planned to include three indexes in the second volume, and one can assume that these essential tools for researchers will appear in the planned third volume. Specialists on Slovak affairs in the Habsburg Monarchy, the First Czechoslovak Republic, and the first Slovak Republic are greatly indebted to Fabricius, Susko, Hradska, and the others who contributed to the production of these two volumes . They anxiously await the appearance of the third volume in this indispensable series. SLOVAKIA 113 Max Domarus, Th e Complete Hitler: A Digital Desktop Reference to His Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945. Wauconda, Ill. : Bolchazy-Carducci, 2007. (CD-ROM edition). VASILLIS VOURKOUTIOTIS University of Ottawa While documentary collections concerning the Third Reich are not, generally speaking, difficult to come by, few students are exposed to the actual words of Adolf Hitler except as summarized by other compilers in wider works . The exception to this has been Max Domtarus' four-volume collection of Hitler's speeches. The compilation of this resource was linked to the history it attempted to capture. In 1932, Max Domarus was only twenty-two years old. Yet, he realized that in Adolf Hitler, Germany and the world were faced with a new phenomenon whose significance should not be underestimated. He began, in that year, to collect and compile as many of Hitler's speeches as he could find , and continued the project through the war years until Hitler' s death in 1945 . After the war, Domarus supplemented his collection as much as possible, and the resulting work, which included his annotations and commentary, was a four-volume set published in German. For each year in question, the reader is offered a detailed summary of events, and photographs from the Domarus archive. Full endnotes for each section yield bibliographical citations, as well as additional explanatory commentary. Each volume also contains a list of abbreviations which users will find helpful. Although some of Domarus' commentaries have been superceded by historical research, his perceptions remain as interesting in several instances as the speeches they comment upon. The four-volume set, even though it only covers Hitler's speeches from 1932 onward, remains the best single collection of the dictator's words. With this CD, Domarus's publishers have brought an important printed historical resource into the modem information age. An English-language translation accompanies the original German text, bringing to the user eight volumes of material in a single disk. Although presented in a chronological format, the speeches are in a searchable PDF format, allowing the student or researcher the ability to scan years of 114 SLOVAKIA material for keywords . For those with the language abilities and desire, the English version can be easily compared for accuracy with the German original. Given how long Hitler could speak for at a single event, it is not surprising that Domarus felt the need to offer exerpts rather than a stenographic record. This may strike some as a potential drawback, and might lead some researches to seek the full text of a particular speech of interest. The vast majority of users, however, will not find this a significant issue; Domarus' work has remained the standard reference for university libraries since its first publication in 1962 with good reason. Two versions of the CD ROM exist, the Standard and ePremium. In addition to the advantages of the Standard, the ePremium addition allows the user to print, copy and paste text directly from the PDF files into one's own documents, and add commentary to the texts. These enhancements will be of interest to those who work closely enough with the material in their own research. On the whole, in making both the English and German versions of Domarus' compilations available in such a format, the publishers have not only made an important work more accessible, but also provided a service to both students and academics alike. James Ramon Felak After Hitler, Before Stalin: Catholics, Communists, and Democrats in Slovakia, 1945-1948. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. xv-261 pp. , notes, bibliography, index. M. MARK STOLARIK University of Ottawa Having perceived a negl ected period of history, James R. Felak set out to tell the story of the role of Catholicism in Slovakia in the period 1945-48, especially its relationship with the Communist and Democratic Parties. The essence of the book is that, even though both the Communists and the Lutheran leaders of the Democratic Party were either hostile to or suspicious of the Roman Catholic Church, both courted Roman Catholic voters in order to attain political power in post-war Slovakia. Having combed the relevant Slovak archives, and read the Communist, Lutheran and Roman Catholic press, along with most secondary sources on the subject, Felak carefully related what actually SLOVAKIA 115 transpired in Slovakia in the three years after the Second World War. He pointed out that the post-war National Front government that came into existence on April 3, 1945, reduced the pre-war political parties of Czechoslovakia from 16 to 5, and in Slovakia permitted only the Communists and Democrats. The two strongest pre-war political parties, Hlinka Slovak People's Party and the Czechoslovak Agrarian Party were banned as "collaborationist". That meant that the minority Lutherans could (and did) join the newly-formed Democratic Party, but the majority Catholics were disenfranchised. As a result, both the Communists and Democrats courted Catholic voters in anticipation of the May, 1946 elections, while simultaneously attacking the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, the self-appointed Slovak National Council, with its executive Board of Commissioners, nationalized all religious schools, seized most Catholic institutions, severely limited the size of the Catholic press and imprisoned two Slovak bishops. On the other hand, the Communists tried to persuade Catholic voters to vote for their party, because the Democrats were largely Lutherans . Indeed, the Communists even supported the creation of a Christian Republican Party, but the Catholics and Communists could not agree on its name, and this project fell through. The Lutherans, on the other hand, also wooed the Catholics by promising to split future political representation and patronage with them on the basis of a 7:3 ratio in favor of the Catholics. The Catholics found this promise more enticing than Communist overtures and, as a result, the Catholic and Lutheran politicians reached the so-called April Agreement on March 31, 1946. Since they were now united, the Catholics and Lutherans both supported the Democratic Party and won the 1946 elections with a convincing majority of 62%. Since they had lost the elections, the Communist Party of Slovakia went on the offensive. With the collusion of the government in Prague, where the Communists had more influence, and where certain Czech parties resented Slovak home-rule, Slovak Communists, led by Gustav Husak, negotiated the "Third Prague Agreement" of June 27, 1946, by which the Slovak National Council and the Board of Commissioners subordinated themselves to the Prague government. Then the Slovak Communists decided to try for treason the Reverend Jozef Tiso, former president of the first Slovak Republic ( 1939-1945). They saw to it that the National Court was domina- 116 SLOVAKIA ted by Communists who, as expected, found Tiso guilty and sentenced him to death on April 15, 1947. The hapless Democrats on the executive of the Board of Commissioners failed to recommend clemency and left the final verdict to the government in Prague, which upheld the verdict, as did president Benes, and Tiso was hanged on April 17. After this fiasco, Slovak Catholics lost faith in the Democratic Party, just as the Communists began their offensive against it. In the summer and fall of 194 7 the Communists fabricated an anti-state conspiracy against certain Catholic Democrats. On this basis Gustav Husak on October 31 staged a mini-coup in Slovakia by (with Prague support) illegally dissolving and then reappointing the Board of Commissioners in favor of the Communists. This was a prelude to similar tactics by the Communists in Prague in February of 1948, when three non-Communist parties resigned from the government in the hope of toppling it. Instead, the Communists, led by Klement Gottwald offered to form a new government and president Edvard Benes approved it. Thus, by February of 1948 the Communists had completed their takeover of both the Slovak and Czechoslovak governments and instituted totalitarian rule for the next 40 years, during which they tried (but failed) to completely destroy the Roman Catholic church in Czechoslovakia. Felak's book is well-written and comprehensive. Perhaps his greatest contribution is that he laid to rest the oft-repeated Slovak complaint that president Benes arranged for Tiso's death. Instead, as Felak convincingly shows, it was the incompetence of the Lutheradominated executive of the Board of Commissioners which was most responsible because of its inability to reach a consensus on the issue of clemency. They essentially "passed the buck" to Prague, where Tiso had few friends and that sealed his doom. In spite of Felak's meticulous scholarship, the book contained a few glitches and one omission. The slang expression "First off "appeared a few times (p.6), Stanislav Kirschbaum's first name was shortened to Stanley in footnote 5 on page 217, the surname Viktorin was misspelled Victory (p.63), and Banovce nad Bebravou was identified as Tiso's home town (p.100), when that honor goes to Vel'ka Bytca. Perhaps the greatest omission is the revelation that Ferdinand Durcansky, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the first Slovak Republic, who fled to the west after the war and tried to SLOVAKIA 117 organize an anti-state underground movement in post-war Slovakia, was actually controlled by Kim Philby, the notorious British spy who was, in fact, working for the KGB . Mark Aarons and John Loftus, on the basis of research in the files of the CIA in Washington, revealed this interesting detail in their Ratlines: How the Vatican Networks Betrayed Western Intelligence to the Soviets (London, 1991 ), pp. 21 19 and footnotes 46-50, page 334. Thus, the anti-state conspiracy of 1947 was carefully staged from abroad by the KGB as an excuse for the communist takeover of Slovakia. Edward Snajdr, Nature Protests: The End of Ecology in Slovakia. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2008 . xiii242 pp., photographs, notes, bibliography, list of interviews, index. JURAJ HOCMAN University of Ottawa Edward Snajdr, an American cultural anthropologist at New York University, examined Slovakia's emerging civic environmental protection movement in the communist era and its rapid disappearance during the country 's post-communist transformation (19851995). The author did his fieldwork in situ and that is why it is particularly interesting to read about his experience. In the first two chapters, Snajdr focuses on urban and extraurban contexts of social life in communist Slovakia while providing general, yet adequate, historical background. The author traces the origins of environmental movements among young Slovaks and Czechs that had begun with associations such as SZOPK (Slovensky zvaz ochrancov prfrody a kraj iny - the Slovak Union of Protectors of Nature and the Countryside) in Slovakia and Brontosaurus in the Czech lands. He contrasts the difference between the effectiveness of state legislation designed to protect the environment in the massively and insensitively industrialized Slovakia, with spontaneous projects of young people whose aims were to improve the quality of the environment that surrounded them. Despite their local character, those efforts were not only efficient, but also inspirational. Snajdr then proceeds to the period from 1985 to 1989 during which environmentalist activities spread to the politics of discontent with the communist regime. He stresses the significance of the acce- 118 SLOVAKIA lerated drive for environmental protection in Slovakia during the period of perestroika and glasnost in the case of the samizdat Bratislava Nahlas (Bratislava Aloud). This publication, which voiced the concerns of ordinary citizens regarding disrespectful and harmful socio-economic policies of the communist regime, was prohibited by state authorities. Its editor, Jan Budaj, who became one of the most visible leaders of the "Velvet Revolution" in Slovakia in the fall of 1989, as well as the samizdat' s distributors, were harassed by the communist secret police (the StB). The fall of the communist regime might have become the new beginning of a friendlier approach to environmental protection in Slovakia. That is where the second part of the story begins. A new political reality in Eastern Europe, which was closely tied to nationalism, brought a new perspective on how to cope with the legacy of communism and its negative ecological effects. The members of the Slovak Green Party (Strana zelenych), which was formed in November of 1989, and was represented in the new Slovak parliament, took a firm stand against the completion of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros dam on the Danube river, which formed the Slovak-Hungarian border. This started as a joint venture of the communist governments of Czechoslovakia and Hungary under a treaty signed in I 977. Hungary withdrew from the project at the end of the 1980s, bowing to pressure from ecologists at home and abroad. To Slovaks, as Snajdr observes, the project was a matter of national prestige and a rallying point against warnings of environmental risks that stood in the forefront of Hungary 's concerns. Snajdr elaborates on how its chief engineer, Julius Binder, defended the completion of the Slovak part of the project and gained the support of the Slovak public. From then on the Greens (Zeleni), who, in the meantime, split into two groups, the Czecho-Slovak federalists and the Slovak nationalists, started slipping into political obscurity and eventually returned to small and isolated projects of landscape revitalization at various locations . Thus, "nation won over nature" and Slovakia, together with representatives of the ecology movement, entered into an age of post-ecology. The book paints a credible picture of a former communist regime unconcerned with the ecological impact of insensitive industrialization and socio-economic modernization. The first part of the study, which analyzes the evolution of environmental protection, is more SLOVAKIA 119 cohesive than the second. If the second part appears a bit fragmentary, it is due to the overall ruptured character of the ecology movement in Slovakia in the second half of the 1990s. Though the sympathies of the author towards a cleaner environment cannot be overlooked, he did not take sides in intra and extra-national political conflicts. Apart from a few minor aberrations, such as the subtler use of the geographic term the Czech lands or the Czech Republic instead of Bohemia when referring to the second half of the 20 th century; and the incorrect transliteration of Gabcikovo-Nagymaros instead of GNagymaros, and Kvacian (gen . or accus; Slovak) instead of Kvacany (nom.), the book profits from its narrative and analysis based on the author's knowledge of theory and his authentic experience. It is an insightful contribution to the discourse on the continuing multilayered evolution of post-communist states and societies in Eastern Europe, in which ecology has played an important part. With Slovakia now being a member of the European Union and a signatory of international treaties on environmental protection, it would be interesting to discover whether the previous gap between government and civic initiatives has remained the same or has disappeared.  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 Book Reviews, Slovakia, Vol. 40 (No. 74-75) Description An account of the resource includes:<br /><ul><li>Ludevít Štúr (Ľudovít Štúr), Nauka reči slovensky (Gerald J. Sabo), p. 103</li> <li>András Gerö, The Jewish Criterion in Hungary (Yeshayahu A. Jelinek), p. 106</li> <li>Miroslav Fabricius, ed., Tiso, Jozef: Prejavy a články, vol. 1 (1913-1938) and vol. 2 (1938-1944) (Daniel E. Miller), p. 108</li> <li>Max Domarus, The Complete Hitler: A Digital Desktop Reference to His Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945 (Vasillis Vourkoutiotis), p. 113</li> <li>James Roman Felak, After Hitler, Before Stalin: Catholics, Communists, and Democrats in Slovakia, 1945-1948 (M. Mark Stolarik), p. 114</li> <li>Edward Snajdr, Nature Protests: The End of Ecology in Slovakia (Juraj Hocman), p. 117</li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hocman, Juraj Jelinek, Yeshayahu A. Miller, Daniel E. (Daniel Edward), 1954- Sabo, Gerald J., 1945–2020 Stolarik, M. Mark, 1943- Vourkoutiotis, Vasilis, 1970- Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2010 LCNAF LCNAF+dates https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b49f58106e26d9b609f40427f2a0c22d.pdf 5013aa35164ccd986cee7bb9e2e6c268 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 73 SEEMING AND BEING: CONTEXTUALIZING THE HISTORY OF POST - COMMUNIST SLOVAKIA Juraj Hocman The year 1989 marked the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia and the beginning of Slovakia's road to independence. For the Slovaks this year also revealed the gap between their perception of national history and how it was viewed from the outside. In the 1990s, a new generation of western scholars contrasted the post-communist change of Czechoslovakia' s two nations. In their studies of modem Slovak society they rarely went beyond 1918. They relied very much on general accounts and traditional dichotomies between the Czechs and Slovaks, such as 'industrial' versus 'rural,' 'secular' versus 'religious,' ' progressive' versus 'backward.' 1 This was why in the 1990s the Slovaks continued to be seen as a "non-historic" nation hastily modernized during the communist era. Since it was mostly invisible in Austria-Hungary and Czechoslovakia, Slovak history automatically appeared as ruptured and fragmented. Following the downfall of the communist regime and the creation of the independent Slovak Republic in January of 1993, the country's image was primarily associated with radical nationalism, intolerance towards its minorities and an unstable domestic political scene. All of these seemed to have been sufficient to explain Slovakia' s failure to achieve a functioning democracy in the mid-1990s. In the early 2000s, a secondwave of scholarly interest in Slovakia began. Attracted by the country' s economic progress and an overall social and political stability, western scholars turned their attention to what had seemed in the 1990s as a satisfactory explanation for the peculiarities of Slovakia's evolution as a post-communist state. Some of them came to the conclusion that the existing stereotypes stemmed from preconceived methodological approaches, even unfamiliarity with the facts .2 The1 Abby Innes, Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001 ), ix-xi. 2 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition : What Creates the Image of Slovakia?" In Slovakia after Communism and Meciarism, ed. Kieran Williams (London: School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies, 2000), 26. �74 SLOVAKIA refore, a better understanding of what was happening in the country since its creation requires a broader historical approach. 1. Seeming and Being in the History of East and West. The self-challenging motto of the Andrassy family of Hungarian nobles, Non videri, sed esse (Not Seeming but Being), which inspired medieval and early modern societies, stands in direct opposition to modem approaches to social reality that tend to place image over substance.3 In this regard small nations are at greater risk of being overlooked, even misjudged by bigger nations. 4 While it is hardly imaginable that the views of a Slovak or a Czech scholar on the history of Great Britain, the United States or Canada would have the same resonance and impact on the international image of those countries, western scholars have scrutinized the history of Czechoslovakia and its two nations with significant consequences.5 This could happen since the capacity of Slovak historians to conduct independent research and publish the results during the communist era was subject to ideological indoctrination and political constraints. Moreover, Slovak historians, in contrast to their Czech colleagues, until recently did not work systematically on a conceptualization of Slovak history and the minimalization of its invisibility. Such a course would have helped to "sell" their cause abroad - the legitimacy and viability of the existence of Slovakia as a sovereign state - long after its creation. In the 1990s this gap was filled by foreign scholars and the media in a way that simplified and, in some cases, distorted the mostly unknown Slovak history waiting for its reinterpretation at home and rediscovery abroad. The Slovaks were depicted, in terms of their 3 Eva Smelkova and Julius Barczi, "Andrassyovci a Rozi\ava," Forum Historiae 2/2008, p.5. Accessed at www.forumhistoriae.sk/FH 2/smelkova. df 4 See the interview with the Norwegian publicist and writer Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom" on the parallels between the historical evolution of the Slovaks and the small Scandinavian nations in the 19th century. Literarny tyidennik, August 12, 1994, pp. I and 11. 5 Even large states are vulnerable to intrusions into their national histories that contradict domestic interpretations. See the internet article "Russia Will Never Let Anyone Falsify [the] History of [the] Second World War" which refers to the image of the soldiers of the Red Army in WW II as looters and rapists . Russia has created a special committee to counteract the "attempts at distorting history to the detriment of Russi a's interest. " Pravda (Moscow). Accessed at www.pravda.ru, May 20, 2009 . �SLOVAKIA 75 missing statehood, as a non-historic nation, which, after the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993, cured its historical complexes and democratic deficiencies at the expense of their advanced neighbors with whom they shared a common history - the Czechs and the Magyars. 6 To that, some Slovak scholars and politicians reacted with fervor instead of providing a systemic and efficient alternative.7 Consequently, they created solitary and isolated interprettations of Slovak history that clashed with stereotypes and automatically brought about the risk of being viewed either as hard-core nationalists or revisionists.8 In the early 2000s, western scholars such as Karen Henderson, Abby Innes, Cas Mudde and others expressed their doubts concerning cliches linked to Slovak history. The progress in the rediscovery of Slovak history in the West since the beginning of the 2000s cannot be overlooked as the new generation of scholars did their fieldwork in the Slovak Republic and critically examined the earlier interpretations of Slovak history emerging in the 1990s. 9 Although the trend of foreign and Slovak historians coming closer in their interpretations is growing, a lot of work remains to be done by both sides.10 6 George Schopflin, Nations, Identity, Power (New York: New York University Press, 2000), 280-297 ("The Slovak case study"). 7 Looking for internationally-known personalities with Slovak origins at any cost to improve the image of Slovakia could result in quite opposite effects. See Greg Steinmetz's article, "Slovaks desperately searching for famous countrymen," The Globe and Mail, April 27, 1996. Similarly, the publishing of another variant of the multi-volume "History of Slovakia" in the Slovak language with short resumes in German, English, French and Russian, and picture books with descriptive texts designed for common readers are hardly ways to provide a conceptual and critical synthesis of Slovak history known and accepted internationally. 8 Franti~ek Vnuk, Milan Durica and other historians grouped around the Matica slovens/ca. 9 Next to Karen Henderson and Abby Innes, the best examples are the recent works by Tim Haughton and John A. Scherpereel cited in this article. The British scholar George Schopflin sees a great challenge for historians of East Central Europe to become familiar with the Anglo-Saxon, German, French, Russian, and Italian scholarly literature. For consequences regarding Slovak history see George Schopflin, "Vytvaranie eur6pskej kulturnej identity? Stredna Europa v rozfaenej Eur6pskej unii," Listy SFPA, March-April 2003 , pp.2-3. 10 " .. . it is hardly surprising that any effort to straighten the Slovak spine is seen as nationalism, the equivalent of n[N]azism, fascism and the oppression of minorities. It may be hard to believe but the greatest enemies of Slovakia are Slovaks themselves. On several occasions, I have had an opportunity to witness the way in which Slovak historians have given lectures on Slovakia to foreign audiences. Nearly all of �76 SLOVAKIA Furthermore, in the modem era the role of the media in building popular perceptions on the basis of simplified interpretations of historical developments has been increasing. A reasonable objection can be made as to why a scholarly study should be bothered by what the media say. In short, the media can popularize history more effectively than scholars who create their interpretations only after years of studying a particular problem. Thus, in creating a public image, it is the media which paints the larger picture, not scholars. 11 Paraphrasing Clausewitz, the media may be seen as the continuation of historiography and social science by other means. 12 This was evident in the case of Slovakia's image as hyper-nationalist in the early 1990s and during the country's quasi-miraculous instant awakening in 1998. Views by the media helped to reduce this phase in modem Slovak history to the Manichean conflict between 'evil' and 'good' politicians, and, implicitly, between the 'progressive' and 'backward' electorates and segments of Slovak society. 13 them have had one thing in common: they present the Slovaks as a nation without a history, without culture and traditions - and surprise - as the oppressor of minorities. Nor do they neglect to mention Slovakia's facist and Nazi past. Their spiritual kin in the West have gone so far in their blind, ignorant hatred as to blame the Slovaks for the hanging of Communists and Jews in Kosice in January of 1945. According to one German commentator, the massacres in Kosice were ' one of the last abominations of the fascist Slovak state and ally of Adolf Hitler. ' The fact that Kosice belonged to Hungary at that time and that this sad, vile act was committed by the Hungarian fascists "Wild Rose Crosses," is apparently of interest to no one, the least to our own historians." Darina Vergesova, "Dajte Duricovi pokoj," Kritika & Kon text, nos. 2-3 ( 1997), pp.59-60. 11 "A separate chapter in our [Slovak] media is that of the methodical loss of national memory," Pavo! Dinka, S/ovenske media: Met6dy manipulacie (Bratislava: PPA, 2008), 21. Due to its image inherited from the 1990s, Slovakia was depicted in three films - "Hostel" (2004), "Eurotrip" (2004) and "Hostel 2" (2007) - as a nest of danf:erous and perverted criminals and mafia. For details see www.imdb.com 2 On the shift of the media in the time of globalization from being the Fourth Power (provider of information) to the Fifth Power (manipulator of information) see the article by Ignacio Ramonet, "Le cinquieme pouvoir," Le Monde Diplomatique, Apri l-Mai (2005), pp.74-78 "Dans la nouvelle guerre ideologique qu 'impose la mondialisation, !es medias sont utilisees comme une arme de combat. L' information, en raison de son explosion, de sa multiplication, de sa surabondance, de ses partis pris, se trouve litteralement contaminee, empoisonnee par toute sorte des mensonges, pollue par !es rumeurs, !es distorsions, !es manipulations." Ibid., p.77. 13 Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), p.308. A survey conducted in Slovakia in the mid- l 990s focused on the degree of tolerance towards minorities, disrespect for the law by politi- �SLOVAKIA 77 Next to the risk of perspectives based on simplified portrayals of reality stands the problem of divergent approaches towards the same phenomena in the history of the East and West. The classic saying goes "if disease is beautiful, it is generally someone else's disease." 14 Apart from its complimentary aspect, Chesterton's aphorism can be applied to nationalism and its negative characteristics associated primarily with the East. In the 1990s, the resurrected nationalism of East Central Europe gained a negative image linked to the ethnocentric nationalism of the 19th century. This resulted in the categorization of post-communist states into progressive ones and those which lagged behind. It is true that the downfall of Communism and the subsequent disintegration of the Communist Bloc resulted in an explosion of ethnic tensions. When examining the roots of nationalism and its capacity for political and social mobilezation, it should become clear that the same primordial instincts attributed to the East had existed among western literati in the 19th century. In multiethnic Britain the same elements of linguistic and ethnic tensions shaped by romantic nationalism can be found in historical novels designed with the same purpose as those by writers in East Central Europe. 15 The similarities between the nation-building processes in W estem and East Central Europe can particularly be observed in the creation of multi-ethnic Great Britain as a political nation during the period 1707-1837, where the impact of external threats helped her to overcome the historical centripetal tendencies based on ethnic diversity. 16 What worked in Great Britain did not work in Austria- cians, positive opinions on the communist regime before its fall and engagement in civic association activities. 14 Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Orthodoxy (London: The Bodley Head, 1949), p.12. 15 On the Norman-Saxon ethno-linguistic division and societal hierarchy in medieval England see Sir Walter Scott's historical novel Ivanhoe (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998). 16 Linda Colley, Britons: Forg ing the Nation 1707-/837 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992). For the major argument of the book see the introduction, pp.1-9. See also the comparison of the Magyars with the English "who have violently Anglicized ten millions of Irishmen and Scottsmen" made by a Magyar Deputy in the Hungarian Diet in 1879 in justification of the forced Magyarization . R.W. Seton-Watson, Racial Problems in Hungary (London: Archibald Constable, 1908; reprinted in New York by Howard Fertig, 1972), 217 . There is a significant difference. Whereas Great Britain made, at least formally, its Compromise in 1707, the radical part of Magyar political elites failed to do it until it was too late. �78 SLOVAKIA Hungary from 1848 to 1918 and in Czechoslovakia, where centripetal tendencies eventually prevailed. Recalling the indication by Cas Mudde of double standards in explaining ' bad' and 'good' nationalism in Slovakia during the period 1989-1992, 17 nationalism, in general, appeared as progressive when it had helped to create nation-states in the West from the 16th to the 19th centuries, whereas it became perverted in state-building processes in post-communist Eastern Europe in the 1990s. 18 Though the concerns of multi-ethnic states about the possible consequences of various forms of nationalism, past and future, to which modem historiography and political science have legitimately pointed, are understandable, the common roots of nationalism should not be forgotten. This will help us to avoid the traps of nationalism's general recrimination in post-communist East Central Europe, including Slovakia, regardless of the context within which it emerged and had been shaped. 19 In addition to the perception of the Slovaks as intolerant nationalists, the image of the country has been that of a non-historic nation due to the viewing of unexplored parts of Slovak history as myths. Robert Pynsent suggests that a myth can appear either as a "normal neutral narrative of concem," 20 or it can be a "bridge too far" in re17 Cas Mudde, "Civil society in post-communist Europe: Lessons from the ' dark side,"' In Uncivil society? Contentious politics in post-communist Europe, eds. Petr Kopecky and Cas Mudde (London and New York: Routledge, 2003), 161. 18 For the opposite view see Egil Lejon who sees the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993 as a result of Slovak historical traditions and an emancipation movement which accelerated in 1848 and later. Interview with Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom," Literarny tyzdennik, August 12, 1994, p.11. Lejon suggests that the Slovaks are not nationalistic enough in terms of what modem nationalism requires: cultural self-confidence, national pride, and loyalty. 19 See Kedourie on the selective use of the antonyms 'progressive ' - ' regressive ' in regard to nationalism in the Marxist interpretation of history ('progressive' during the advent of capitalism replacing fe udalism, ' progressive' in the fight of colonial and post-colonial nations against imperialism, and ' regressive' within capitalism resisting socialism). Elie Kedourie, Nationalism (London: Hutchinson & Co Ltd., 1966), 90-91. Applying Mudde 's observation, the 'bad ' case of nationalism in the early 1990s was the split of Czechoslovakia, whereas the 'good' cases were the dismemberments of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. In contrast to the two latter, Slovak nationalism did not involve violence. 20 Robert Pynsent, Questions of Identity: Czech and Slovak Ideas of Nationality and Personality (Budapest-London-New York: Central European University Press, 1994), 87. �SLOVAKIA 79 gard to its practical implications in nation and state-building processes in Slovak history as implicated by G. Eyal, S.J. Cohen and T. Haughton. 2 1 While applying the first flexible definition, it may be postulated that myths are constantly emerging. An effective way to understand the essence of a myth in terms of its value as a possible source of historical facts is to compare both of its forms. The official mythology of the European Union is that it was born out of a sudden inspiration that had fallen upon Jean Monnet - a Romulus to the European Community - during his trip to the Alps. The idea was apparently instrumental in reconciling France and Germany during the meeting of Robert Schumann and Konrad Adenauer in May of 1950, which gave birth to the European Coal and Steel Community. 22 Others see this process in an all-European myth-deconstructing perspective as the outcome of the decisive involvement of the United States, tired of the French-German reluctance to reach an agreement. 23 Concurrently, some scholars have viewed the creation of the European Union in the early 1990s as the culmination of the tireless work of lobbyists, who had effectively executed the wishes of great corporations to create a common market which was about to grant the architects of the EU even greater eco- 21 See Gil Eyal, The Origins of Post-Communist Elites: from the Prague Spring to the Breakup of Czechoslovakia (Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 131 , and Tim Haughton, Constraints and Opportunities of Leadership in Post-Communist Europe (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 4-5. This is also the leitmotif of Shari J. Cohen's book Politics Without A Past: The Absence Of History In Postcommunist Nationalism (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1999). 22 "Chaque annee, si je le peux, je vais faire de grandes courses dans les Alpes .. .J'y retrouve l'expression de l'inquietude qui opressait l'Europe cinq ans apres la guerre: une autre guerre est proche devant nous si nous ne faisons rien. L' Allemagne n' en sera pas la cause, mais elle en sera l'enjeu. II faut qu'elle cesse d'etre un enjeu, qu 'elle devienne au contraire un lien. Seule la France peut actuellement prendre une initiative." Jean Monnet, Memoires (Paris: Fayard, 1997), 342. 23 John Gillingham, Coal, Steel and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge University Press, 1991 ). Particularly explicative is the role of the U.S. High Commissioner for Germany John McCloy in bringing the French and Germans together to the signing of the Treaty of Paris (April 18, 1951 ), which instituted the European Coal and Steel Community. Gillingham stressed the fact that McCloy "summoned" the German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer to his office for a "dressing down" for his unwillingness to sign the document. Ibid, 280. �80 SLOVAKIA nomic profits. 24 A different group of authors opposed such ignoble motives with their hagiographic vision of the institutional emergence of the European Community and the later European Union as the outcome of exceptional negotiating and diplomatic skills of supranational executives who were serving the citizens of Europe.25 It is clear that each perspective has its merits and this adds to the perplexing complexity of the issue and resulting interpretations. This variety of opinions points to the core of the problem linked to the non-historicity of Slovaks and their questionable ability to cope with more recent problems in the transformation of their society. The skeptically insinuated ' mythical' legacy of 9th century Great Moravia and the invisible link from it to modem Slovak politics, apart from its distance from the present, which partially legitimizes its appearance as a myth, disregards the simple fact that to the Slovaks it was a lighthouse, not a matrix blindly to follow in the creation of a sovereign modem Slovakia. There is no difference in this regard between small and big nations who honor their historical traditions that often blend with myths. Most importantly, it is not Great Moravia itself, but the connection between it and the 19th and 20th centuries that matters in the discourse on the historicity of Slovaks. This link was hardly reflected, let alone examined, by western scholars in the 1990s in contrast to their predecessors - the historians R.W. Seton-Watson, Robert A. Kann, Oscar Halecki, and C.A. Macartney.26 After the extinction of the Arpad dynasty (1301 ), which had represented the ethnic Magyars, the foreign rulers of the Kingdom of 24 Belen Balanya, Ann Doherty, Olivier Hoedeman, Adam Ma' anit and Erik Wesselius, Europe Inc.: Regional and Global Restructuring and the Rise of Corporate Power (London-Sterling, Virginia: Pluto Press, 2000). The authors stress their perception of the creation of the European Union as the result of a plan made by the European Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT) composed of 45 captains of the largest European transnational corporations. See Preface of the book, xi-xv. 25 Ken Endo, The Presidency of the Europ ean Commission under Jacques De/ors. The Politics of Shared Leadership (London : Macmillan, 1999). Helen Drake, Jacques De/ors. Perspectives on a European Leader (London-New York: Routledge, 2000). 26 For an attempt to see Slovak history in historical continuity by a foreign scholar see the chapter by the Austrian historian Arnold Suppan, "Die Slowakei zwischen Grossmahrischen Reich und Europaischer Union: Kontinuitaten und Diskontinui taten," in Plus Ultra. Die Welt Der Neuzeit. Festschrift far Alfred Kohler zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. F. Edelmayer, M. Fuchs, G. Heilingsetler, P. Rauscher (Munster: Aschendorf, 2008), 331-68. �SLOVAKIA 81 Hungary - the Anjous, the Luxembourgs, the Jagiellons, the Hahsburgs - were wisely and clairvoyantly tolerant towards the ethnic groups of Hungary as the state otherwise would have not survived for the next seven centuries.27 Once the glory of the Kingdom of Hungary and the privileges of a political nation were attributed to one nationality (the Magyars) in the 18th and 19th centuries, there was no choice for others, who felt degraded to second-class citizens, than to nourish and strengthen their own identities - linguistic, cultural, social, and political. Paradoxically, a tendency to be suspicious of the interpretations of Slovak history as an indivisible part of the history of the Kingdom of Hungary still prevails. Until a shift in this perception happens, Slovaks may be further viewed as a non-historic entity despite empirical and heuristic evidence that testifies to their genuine participation in the societal and institutional life of the kingdom they shared with others in times when language and ethnicity meant less than social status and class affiliation. 28 The myth versus 'myth' ambiguity in the interpretations of the history of East and West testifies to the existence of a wide range of applicable perspectives and alternative interpretations. A better awareness of this ambiguity, which exists in both East and West, may help us to also understand the reasons for the ruptures in Slovak history, fractured into its being and seeming. The most visible anoma- 27 Disregarding the multi-ethnic aspects and dynastic ruptures in the medieval and modern history of Hungary would be the same as excluding the early Plantagenets from the history of England due to their appearance as non-Anglo-Saxon, FrancoNorman, elements. The history of England would have to begin anew with the Tudors . The rupture progressive versus regressive (see Kedourie) in the history of the United States is observable in the interpretations of the reasons for the Civil War and its aftermath. A similar rupture (totalitarian+-+democratic) exists in the history of Germany before it became a democratic state. 28 "The Slovaks on their side lost their national existence [after the defeat of Great Moravia] in that of their Asiatic conquerors, entered into their ranks as soldiers, and participated thence-forward in all their fortunes .. .Their language however is the only remnant of their national existence which the Slovaks have preserved; in every other respect they belong to the Hungarian nation, of which they form an ingredient part, as the Magyars form another; and on the glory of whose valiant deeds they have an equal claim." Therese Albertine Louise von Jacob Robinson, Historical View of the Language and Literature of the Slavic Nation (New York: BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2006) (Reprint of the original version published by George P. Putnam in New York in 1851), 186-7. �82 SLOVAKIA lies of this split consequently appeared either as 'betrayals' or 'awakenings.' 2. Seeming and Being in Slovak History as a Part of the History of Czechoslovakia and Hungary. In 1991 Slovak historian Anton Hmko pointed out that the book by Slovak politician Ivan Derer on the rulings of the National Court in the First Czechoslovak Republic,29 written from the perspective of an ardent unitarist and "Czechoslovak," was conveniently accepted by Marxist historiography. The reason was obvious as the adversary was the same - the Slovak autonomist movement and the legacy of the wartime Slovak Republic (1939-1945). Having provided statistical data on the topics of the studies published by Slovak historians, Hrnko argued that the history of interwar Czechoslovakia ( 19181938) belonged to one of its most ideologically distorted segments. 30 This vacuum was filled by the works of court historians who helped to create myths as the politically and ideologically "subjective projection of desirable horizons." 31 If a 'myth' could emerge relatively recently with plenty of primary documents, one can ask the question - are there more of them? To respond to it at least in part, it is necessary to return to the early 1990s, when ideological constraints were removed from scholarship and academia and the attention of scholars and media turned towards nationalism. Miroslav Hroch's classification of nationalities in East Central Europe on their advancement in the national reawakening, which was published in the year when Czechoslovakia broke up, put the Slovaks a step behind the Czechs and the Magyars, without providing details, except for a very general reference. 32 This article suggests that, until the revolution of 1848, Slovaks did not lag behind 29 Ivan Derer, Slovensky vyvin a l'udacka zrada (Praha: Kvasnicka a Hamp!, I 946). Anton Hmko, "Zatemnene dejiny: Obraz medzivojnovej slovenskej spolocnosti v fracach slovenskych historikov," Literarny tyidennik, June 28, 1991 , p.10. 1 Marianna Oravcova, "The Ethnic and Cultural Dimension of National Emancipation: The Evocation of the Slovak Nation," in Language, Values and the Slovak Nation, eds. Tibor Pichler and Jana Gasparikova (Washington: Paideia Press, 1994), 11 . In the last sentence Oravcova refers to the article by Pavo! Horvath, "K niektorym otazkam historickych tradicii na Slovensku," Slovensky narodopis 1-2 (1986), 60-65 . 32 Miloslav Hroch, "From National Movement to the Fully-Formed Nation: The Nation-Building Process in Europe," New Left Review, 1/198 (March-April 1993), 64. 30 �SLOVAKIA 83 the Czechs in terms of the press, programs, the creation of a literary language and the petition movements. Hroch was more accurate when pointing to the forced Magyarization that started after 1867 as a major hindrance to Slovak national progress, including its social and economic aspects. Yet even that historical period has to be reexamined as it had not been a time of complete silence, although it would be convenient to see it in that way. Communist historiography in the 1950s gladly embraced the earlier idea that Slovaks had been saved by the Czechs from extinction as a nation, a concept which slipped into western scholarship. This hypothesis was based on censuses which showed the decreasing number of Slovak intelligentsia and schools as the 19th century progressed. These scholars concluded that the Slovaks would have been assimilated by the Magyars in one or two generations. 33 There had previously been two generations of Slovaks living under Magyarization from 1875 to 1914, yet the Slovak press, though under censorship and constant pressure, was full of political articles and calls for national, social and cultural progress. 34 Magyar elites knew very well that Slovak identity did not depend solely on schooling in their native language, but also on the family environment. Therefore, they forcibly took Slovak children from poor families and transported them to regions where Magyar was spoken. 35 The unrest in Turiec and Zvolen County in Central Slovakia that led to attacks on local Magyar authorities was a mixture of social and national elements. They testified to the continuing, even increasing Slovak resilience against Magyarization as observed by R. W. Seton-Watson. 36 Final33 For an argument against the traditional view that the Slovaks could not create their intelligentsia because of harsh Magyarization see Dusan Kovac, Roman Holec, Elena Jakesova, Elena Mannova, Milan Podrimavsky, Na zaciatku storocia, 19011914 (Bratislava: Veda, 2004), 44. 34 Milan Krajcovic, "Slovaci v emancipacnom pohybe nemad'arskych narodov," in Slovensko na zaciatku storocia: Spolocnost'. stat a narod v suradniciach doby, eds. Milan Podrimavsky and Dusan Kovac (Bratislava: Hu SA V, 1999), 48-65 . 35 "By the Law of 1891 , the State has deliberately assumed the attitude of the Sultans in earlier centuries. Just as the Christian rayah was regarded as a breedingmachine to supply janissaries, so to-day non-Magyars of Hungary are breedingmachines whose children must be taught Magyar from the earliest age in the hope that they may become renegades to the traditions of their ancestors." R.W. SetonWatson, Racial Problems in Hungary , 222. 36 Ibid., 394. Seton-Watson stressed that 92 .5% of the Liptov county inhabitants were Slovaks and 90.6% understood no Magyar. Ibid. , 332. �84 SLOVAKIA ly, in 1918, it was the masses of peasants and lower strata of Slovak society that had preserved, as lsmo Nurmi suggested, a high degree of self-consciousness. 37 They were instrumental in embracing the idea of their future coexistence with the Czechs under the provisions of the Pittsburgh Agreement, but under no circumstances with the Magyars. Without this support the few intellectuals at home and abroad could hardly have reached their political goals in October and November of 1918 when the Czechoslovak Republic was born. It is equally true that significant numbers of Slovak Magyarones gave up their ethnicity for the sake of their careers while following the example of the Slovak nobility and gentry which were "easily and gladly" Magyarized in the 19th century. 38 Still, it is hard to believe that three million Slovaks at home and abroad, with the most resistant of them in North America, would have been completely Magyarzsed even if Hungary had been preserved in its prewar boundaries . A possible analogy with the Irish resistance, underscored by the role played in national emancipation by leaders such as Milan R. Stefanik and Stefan Osusky, who left Hungary and vehemently fought for the Slovak cause abroad, comes to mind. Their work, done at the highest political and diplomatic levels, was supplemented by dozens of zealous Slovak national activists in the United States. 39 37 Ismo Nurmi, Slovakia - A Playground for Nationalism and National Identity, 1918-1920: Manifestations of the National identity of Slovaks (Helsinki : Suomen Historiallinen Seura, 1999), 45. 38 C.A . Macartney, Hungary and Her Successors. The Treaty of Trianon and its Consequences 1919-1937 (London : Oxford University Press, 1937), 91. 39 The Slovak press in North America - 30 newspapers with a circulation of 150,000 in 1914 - was such a force that the Hungarian government as early as in 1890 had banned the imports of some of them and began subsidi zing pro-Hungarian publications in the United States. M. Mark Stolarik, "The Slovak-American Press," in Sally M. Miller ed. , The Ethnic Press in the United States: A Historical Analysis and Handbook (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1987), 365. Count Albert Apponyi, one of the main protagonists of Magyarization and a representative of the Hungarian government on his visit to the United States attempted to present Hungary as a ftee and democratic country. He was denounced as a tyrant and pressed by a huge mob comprising members of "Slavic nationalities and Hungarian socialists" during his lectures. In Chicago, Apponyi escaped the fury of the mob and fled to his car only with the protection provided by the police. See The New York Times, February 25, 1911 , p. 3. For the Slovak resistence against the territorial aspirations of fascist Hungary see the boastful statement by Gustav Husak on February 28, 1945: "I openly declare that Slovakia' s frontiers [with Hungary] as they had existed in the [prewar] Czechoslovak Republic are stable. Slovakia is united and non-divisible. Any �SLOVAKIA 85 After World War II, Konstantin Culen, a Slovak publicist in exile, suggested that living with the Czechs was for the Slovaks a rather negative experience. 4°Culen's arguments were based on the constant rejection of Slovak autonomy in Czechoslovakia by President Edvard Benes, who had never shown any particular affection for the Slovaks, and the post-war execution of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, President of the wartime Slovak Republic. With the situation of the Slovaks in southern Slovakia ceded to Hungary by the Vienna Award of November 1938 in mind, it is legitimate to assume that cohabitation with the Czechs, though far from being idyllic, included fewer risks for the completion of Slovak national emancipation than their hypothetical existence in Hungary after WW I. Furthermore, the Czechs in 1918 were already significantly ahead of the Slovaks as far as societal cohesion and socio-economic progress of their societies were concerned. The animosity started with the Czech disrespect toward the Catholic Church and with their disregard for the continuing socio-economic underdevelopment of Slovakia. The problem became acute in the 1930s, when the Slovak intelligentsia, which had remarkably increased by that time, as well as ordinary citizens, could not find work in Slovakia because the best jobs were filled by the Czechs. In contrast to the situation that had existed in the 1920s, Slovaks were ready to become executives, administrators, teachers, lawyers and doctors. This happened in 1939 and after. Unfortunately, after WW II Czech political leaders, both civic and communist, were not willing to admit that the Slovaks had grown up and were able to govern themselves.41 The Czech historical experience was strongly influenced by the Protestant Reformation, secularism and greater industrial advancement due to their proximity to and cohabitation with the Germans. With the creation of Czechoslovakia after WW I, the Czechs proved themselves worthy followers of their predecessors and for a moment irredentism by Magyar fascists will end in vain. Our nation, which has been able to resist the military power of Germany, will find enough strength to firmly defend its borders." See the document "Z referatu Gustava Husaka na konferencii Komunistickej strany Slovenska," February 28, 1945. Dokumenty slovenskej narodnej identi2; a statnosti II (Bratislava: Narodne literarne centrum, 1998), 400. Konstantin Culen, Po Sviitoplukovi druha nasa hlava: Politicky i ivotopis Dr. Jozefa Tisu (Cleveland: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1947). 41 Carol Skalnik Leff, National Conflict in Czechoslovakia: the Making and Remaking of a State, 1918-1987 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 89. �86 SLOVAKIA also a barrier erected by the victorious Allies against German domination over Central and Eastern Europe. After the incorporation of Slovakia into Czechoslovakia, the national self-confidence of the Czechs was on the rise. After WW II, the Czechs led by the Communist Party, and with the mighty Soviet Union backing them, returned to the concept of a unitary Czechoslovakia. To them, the push for reforms in the 1960's, which was interpreted as the "Prague" rather than the "Czecho-Slovak Spring," was also a return to their national history. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the armies of the Warsaw Pact in August of 1968, led by the Soviet Union, their former liberator, and the only Slavic Superpower, was especially traumatic for the Czechs. This trauma, imposed from outside, was complemented by a domestic one: the effects of 'normalization' and federalization, both seen as a part of the chain of Slovak "betrayals." The Slovaks rebelled from 1920 onward. First, they asked for autonomy, then they allegedly "conspired" with the Magyars and the Poles against the prewar Republic, and eventually got a taste of the forbidden fruit of political emancipation in the form of their nominally independent state.42 Meanwhile, in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1945), the Czechs were ruled over and persecuted by the Germans. 43 With this perception of national history in Czech minds, the disappearance of the communist regime in 1989, which was allegedly harsher in the Czech Lands than in Slovakia, and which treated the Slovaks in the same way as did the First Czechoslovak Republic, was a golden opportunity to rebuild the state to Czech expectations. After recognizing that Slovaks were not willing to accept what they considered to be the continuation of the imbalance in the distribution of competences in a joint state in 1990-1992, the Czechs opted for the territorially-reduced variant of Czechoslovakia while inheriting its trademark. Since then, they have fared very well. 44 It 42 Leff, National Conflict, 26 and 164. For a Slovak perspective on the history of the Slovak-Czech and Czecho-Slovak relations since 1918 as the "history of broken pacts and unfulfilled promises," see Anton Hmko, "Politicke zapasy na Slovensku v lete a na jesen 1990," Historicky zbornik 10, no. I (2000), 77. 43 Though the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia had its own administration, it was an indivisible part of the Third Reich, which saw itself as a historic successor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. 44 See the article "Slovakia's Economy ls Doing Well, Too" by Peter Burian, The New York Times, June I, 1996. The author, charge d 'ajfaires of the Embassy of the �SLOVAKIA 87 may seem that this chapter of their history was closed and sealed. The aftermath of the "Velvet Divorce" and the relationship between the two former federal nations was not always rosy. Throughout the 1990s, it was not difficult to contrast the progress made by the Czech Republic with Slovakia's problems. In the early 2000s, with the Meciar era gone and economic advancement that surprised many, the previous negative image of Slovaks as nationalists turned to the delay in democratic transformation of their society. 45 In recent books on Czech history since the early medieval era the Slovaks are hardly mentioned. With Slovakia's progress in the integration processes, substitutes for Slovak nationalism appeared instantly.46 Despite mutual sympathies as documented by surveys of public opinion and praise by Slovak and Czech politicians of their good relations, from 1993 onward free of economic quarrels,47 the clash of bitter memories continued. They have ranged from topics such as investment opportunities by renowned international compa- Slovak Republic in Washington, responded to a similar article in the NYT on the Czech Republic doing well "with luck and without Slovakia," while providing data on GDP (7.4% growth), unemployment (7.4%), doubled foreign currency reserves, a £ositive trade balance and low foreign debt per capita ($800.00). 5 According to Professor Filip Palda from E Ecole nationale d 'administration publique in Montreal, "Separation in 1992 allowed the Czechs to halt the payola on which Slovaks had come to depend. Since separation in 1992, the Slovaks have gone the way of Argentina, whereas the Czechs are now preparing to enter the European Union." See "Argentina north" by Filip Palda. The Ottawa Citizen, January 21 , 2002. Anton Hykisch, former Slovak ambassador to Canada, opined that, for Hungary and the Czech Republic, Slovakia's economic success in the early 2000s was a big surprise which was hard for them to accept. Author interview with Anton Hykisch, Bratislava, June 5, 2007. 46 For a contrasting view on the political systems and parliamentarism in the Czech and Slovak Republics as advanced and less developed see Petr Kopecky, Parliaments in the Czech and Slovak Republics: Party competition and parliamentary institutionalization (London : Ashgate, 2001). The Czech political scientist Lubomir Kopecek opines that in comparison with the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary, the evolution of the Slovak political system is unfinished and the system itself is unstable. As a result, Slovakia is a "semi-consolidated democracy." Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), 307 and 3 10. 47 See the article "Klaus: Vzt'ahy Slovenska a Ceska m6zu byt' pri.kladom pre celu Eur6pu," Pravda, June 29, 2009. It became a tradition that the first official visits of the newly-elected presidents and prime ministers of the Czech and Slovak Republics have been with their closest neighbor. �88 SLOVAKIA nies, 48 to the often derogatory comments on domestic politics and rivalry in sports, with frequent references to the "sins" in national histories of the two nations .49 Until the revolutionary years 1848-1849, Slovaks and Magyars had cohabitated peacefully. Four decades of forced Magyarization after 1867 were hard for the Slovaks, yet there was still some moral and socio-political capital left for the improvement of mutual relationships. If this failed in 1918, Slovaks could hardly have been blamed for it as their political weight and influence in Hungary was marginal. In the fall of 193 8, after two decades of the existence of Czechoslovakia, Slovakia was stripped of its southern territories by the Vienna Award.50 Almost seven years of living in Hungary (19381945) returned the Slovaks in the south to a life which resembled what had existed before 1918. After the Second World War and until 1989, the relationship between the Slovaks and Magyars might have appeared as normal, but it was not. Once the Soviet Union was gone and the fate of Czechoslovakia disputed, the old animosities resurfaced . For all Slovak governments since 1989, the status of the Magyar minority became a litmus test in measuring the state of democracy in Slovakia by western governments and scholars. During the Meciar years, Magyars in Slovakia voiced their dissatisfaction with 48 According to a poll by the Czech Private Equity and Venture Capital Association based in Prague, four out of five of its economists and financial analysts said that foreign investment would flow to the Czech rather than to the Slovak Republic. See "Investori uprednostnia Cesko pred Slovenskom," Sme, May 29, 2009. Slovak readers rejected the idea as wishful thinking on the Czech side and suggested that a poll conducted by a Slovak-based company would have shown the opposite. 49 They frequently appear on the Czech web sites www.seznam.cz., www.idnes.cz and their Slovak counterparts www.sme.sk and www.pravda.sk. On April 1 of2009 when the Slovak national football team defeated its opponent in Prague in the qualifier for the Word Cup in South Africa (2010), debates among the fans of both teams turned to their common past with references to the "betrayal" in 1938-1939 and to the Slovak inferiority complex vis-a-vis the Czechs. Slovaks pointed to Czech compliance with German rule in the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia and affirmed that they did not measure themselves against the Czechs - a fixed idea on the Czech side. 50 Julius Mesaros, "Some Deformations in the Interpretation of Censuses in Recent Slovak-Magyar Controversies," In Slovak & Magyars, ed. Pavol Stevcek (Bratislava: Ministerstvo kultury, 1995), 63-84. The census of 1910 showed the presence of 885,397 Magyars on the territory which became part of Slovakia in 1918 (30.3% of the population). Mesaros argues that even "this number was not the result of natural development, or Slovak-Magyar and Magyar-Slovak bilingualism, but a result of the purposeful Magyarization and oppression of Slovaks." Ibid. , 78 . �SLOVAKIA 89 the approaches of Slovak governments in administrative, linguistic, financial and cultural matters. Claims made by their leaders for more tolerance and understanding by the Slovaks have been in stark contrast with the ambiguous language of the representatives of the Magyar minority regarding their possible autonomy. 5 1 While the Slovaks and the Czechs after 1992 were able to reach the highest level of mutual respect and understanding, Slovaks and Magyars remained mentally anchored in the period between 1918 and 1945. The trauma of Trianon in 1920 and their expulsion from South Slovakia in 1945-194 7 is deeply engraved in the minds of Magyars, as is the forced Magyarization and the effects of the Vienna Arbitration in the minds of the Slovaks. Each side continues to interpret the causes and outcomes of those events according to its own perception and sentiments. A partial solution to the problem - history textbooks written by Slovak and Magyar historians together - is to this date still "in progress" and it is hard to predict when and if they will ever be finished and distributed to schools in both countries. 52 History is firmly tied into daily politics in East Central Europe. Its revival outside of scholarly conferences and seminars and its use as a model for the present or future by politicians may lead to the release of a genie from his bottle. 53 This refers particularly to Slovakia as being possibly identified as the weakest link within an informal Little Entente. 54 If both nations do not want to waste what has 51 The representatives of the Magyar political parties in Slovakia (before 1998), with the exception of Miklos Duray and Pal Csaky from the SMK. (the Party of the Magyar Coalition), were careful about publicly speaking of autonomy for Magyars in Slovakia, though the idea of their political and administrative autonomy has frequently appeared - sotto voce - as their ultimate goal. Most recently, Duray admitted that territorial autonomy is unrealistic, but the chance for a vaguely defined "personal'' autonomy for the Magyar minority in Slovakia still exists. See the article "Ouray o vel'kom Mad'arsku nesniva, auton6mia je vsak podl'a neho realna," Pravda, August 4, 2009. 52 Vilaro Kratochvil, "K moznostiam oslabovania predsudkov a stereotypov v tvorbe ucebnic dejepisu," in Myty a predsudky v dejincich. Historickci konferencia 7. decembra 2004, ed. Attila Simon (Samorin-Dunajska Streda: Forum Institut pre vyskum mensin, 2005). 53 See the interview with Slovak historian Ivan Kamenec. "Kamenec: Politici su najhorsi ziaci hist6rie," Sme, May 9, 2009. Kamenec refers to the diverging interpretations of the period 1944-1948. 54 Serbia, Slovakia, Romania, in which Magyar minorities live. Jan Camogursky said that the highest challenge to Slovakia's foreign policy after accession into NATO and the EU remains the country's ability to face continuing interference by �90 SLOVAKIA remained positive from the legacy of their peaceful cohabitation, and if they wish to get rid of the shadows of the past, they have to reach a mutually respectful Slovak - Magyar and Magyar - Slovak Compromise. Not by political gestures, but by the inner force of their societies. Neither of the two nations, closely bound together for centuries, can separately pass this test of national and civic maturity.55 3. The Myth of a Sudden Awakening of Slovak Society in the 1998 Parliamentary Elections. The major problem in Slovak history from an outsider's perspective - its invisibility linked to a fragmented appearance as a part of the history of Hungary and Czechoslovakia - influenced also its recent domestic interpretations. In reference to the Slovak national anthem, sociologists Martin Butora and Zora Butorova compared Slovak society in 1989 to "Sleeping Beauty." 56 They went so far as to say that" .. . in November 1989, an overwhelming majority of people in Slovakia accepted political change passively." This view is similar to those that refer to "socialism with a human face" in the second half of the 1960s as a purely Czech affair, 57 and those that see Charright-wing Magyar politicians into Slovakia's domestic affairs through issues regardi ng the status of the Magyar minority in Slovakia. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. In a poll conducted in January of 2004, 21 .3% of participants identified Hungary as a major threat to Slovak national security. See Boris Benkovic, "Vyskumna sprava," in Verejnti mienka a politika. Medzintirodne vzt'ahy a zahranicnti politika Slovenskej republiky, ed. Miroslav Peknik (Brati slava: Veda, 2005), 38 (see Graph 9). 55 For the necessity for mutual respect between the Slovak majority and minorities that would lead to their loyalty to the state based on civic principles see Milan Zemko, "Modemy politicky narod," in Slovenskti ottizka dnes, ed. Laszlo Szigeti (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2007), 192 . Zemko refers to Renan ' s idea of a "nation as a daily plebiscite" in a continuous building of a Slovak political nation : "L'existence d' une nation est. .. plebiscite de tous lesj ours, comme !'existence de l'individu est affirmation perpetuelle de vie." Ernest Renan, "Qu'est-ce qu ' une nation?" Conference faite en Sorbonne, le 11 mars 1882. Oeuvres completes d 'Ernest Renan (Paris: Calmann Levy, editor, 1882), 27. 56 Martin Butora and Zora Butorova, "S lovakia's Democratic Awakening," Journal of Democracy 10, no. I (1999), 80. 5 Ibid, 83. See Jon Elster, Claus Offe and Ulbricht K. Preuss, Institutional design in post-communist societies: rebuilding the ship at sea (Cambridge - New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998). The authors came to the conclusion that "The 1968 vision of socialism with a human face was entirely a Czech, not Slovak phenomenon." Ibid. , 264. �SLOVAKIA 91 ter 77 as the only agent of civic resistance against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia. Earlier observations by Karen Henderson point to preconceived approaches to Slovak history suffering from "dangerous analytical misconceptions that have to work backward."58 Theories on the institution-building processes in communist and post-communist Czechoslovakia view the institutions emerging during the transitory period as a result of bricolage - the innovative building of new institutions by politicians who function as bricoleurs. 59 A similar approach can be taken when examining the most important moments in the modern history of Slovakia and their contrasting interpretations seen in "bricks." Works by political scientists are often based on deductive reasoning (see the scheme's Bricolage I, at the end of the article). Thus, if Slovakia deviated from its course towards western democracies in the mid-1990s (originally Brick A), the explanation was obvious: it happened because of the country's past, bound by the immaturity of its society following the breakup of Czechoslovakia, which stemmed from pervasive Slovak nationalism. This led to ungratefulness towards the Czechs and revenge towards the Magyars (Brick B). Likewise, it has been argued that a high degree of compliance with the communist regime and its detrimental impact on Slovak society kept societal life frozen (Brick C). Moreover, the weak economic base of Slovakia inherited from Hungary, along with the controversial character and legacy of wartime Slovakia (Brick D), did not help to eliminate the socio-economic backwardness, political inexperience of Slovaks and thus their negative international image (Brick E) . Deductive reasoning has its merits. It is even more convincing when supported by direct experience and contact with the subject of the study, buttressed by familiarity with primary sources. Foreign scholars who did their research in Slovakia in the late 1990s and throughout the 2000s, helped to broaden a variety of perspectives on Slovak history, which Slovak historians themselves have been unaware of. It is interesting to observe that western, not Slovak scholars, argue in favor of the capacity of Slovak society to build new institu58 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition: What Creates the Image of Slovaki a?" 26. 59 John A. Scherpereel, Governing the Czech Republic and Slovakia: Between State Socialism and the European Union (Boulder - London : First Forum Press, 2009), 68 . �92 SLOVAKIA tions during the communist and post-communist era (Scherpereel, Haughton) . Foreign scholars have referred to the importance of a "critical mass of educated citizens" and political stability in Slovakia prior to, during and after the "change" in 1998 (Henderson), and stressed the presence of a "profound and sizeable Slovak opposition to the culture of Communism" (A. Innes), whilst sociologists and political scientists at home (S. Szomolanyi, 0 . Gyarfasova, Z. Butorova, J. Marusiak) have been more skeptical. From a long-term historical perspective based on inductive reasoning, the context and nuances of Slovakia's post-communist transformation appear significantly different from a micro perspective as applied by the social sciences. This perspective suggests that, to understand the evolution of Slovak society with all its accomplishments and failures, the key is to start from the beginning, not from the end or the middle, and not by theories and generalizations, but with facts, particularly in contested perspectives. Interpretations based on deductive reasoning may result, and they often did, in theories on and explanations of the reasons for the still continuing building of the Slovak political nation and democracy in the country as an "unfinished business," turning it into "the hare versus turtle" race. Such perspectives attribute nationalism in the 1990s exclusively to the Slovaks, while ignoring the fears of Slovak society stemming from its historical experience, linked to the years 1867-1918, 19181919, 1938-1939, 1945-1948 and after. Moreover, such perspectives suffer from inner contradictions. Despite the partly beneficial impact of Czechoslovakia on Slovakia, the latter was in 1993, similar to the years 1918, 1938-1939 as well as during communist Czechoslovakia, socio-economically a less developed part of the common state. 60 Likewise, the Slovak political experience in prewar Czechoslovakia has been seen as weak due to the detrimental impact of a different and underdeveloped political culture inherited by the Slovaks from Hungary, for which two decades of the existence of democratic Czechoslovakia ( 1918-193 8) was too a short period to improve. 61 Consequently, due to the traditional "historic deficits" in the evolution of Slovak society, its civic attitu60 Miroslav Londak, "K niektorym problemom ekonomickeho vyvoja na Slovensku na prahu roka 1968," Historicke studie 44 (2006), p.188. 61 Kopecek, 27-34 and 311. �SLOVAKIA 93 des linked to pluralism during Communism did not develop properly.62 This perspective does seem not to apply to Slovakia's neighbors, the Magyars and the Poles, with their limited experience with parliamentary democracy before and after WW II, which were similar to Spain and Italy in the West. Hungary and Poland apparently redeemed themselves in the eyes of the West by the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the activities of the Solidarity Movement in Poland from 1980 onward. The question, however, is how could those events of undisputed civic bravery substitute for democracy as a system of governance that needs time to develop? By contrast, the longlasting non-compliance of Slovak society with the communist regime, as demonstrated by repeated large-scale participation in religious pilgrimages and demonstrations, has either been downplayed or referred to as having had no impact on politics in communist Czechoslovakia.63 After the 1998 parliamentary elections, Slovak sociologists and leaders of the non-governmental sector helped to create and spread a positive image of Slovak society by contrasting the Meciar era with the progress made in integration with western organizations during the two Dzurinda governments. 64 They suggested that the electoral behavior of voters in rural and economically underdeveloped regions, who voted in favor of the Movement for a Democratic Slo62 Based on a survey conducted in May of 1968, in which 69.5% of the respondents in the Czech Lands as compared with 54.6% in Slovakia supported the existence of more political parties. At the same time, 53 % of Czech participants saw positively the role of civic associations in political life, while in Slovakia it was only 32%. Kopecek, 143. 63 Kopecek stresses the continuity in Czech dissent linked to the reform movement in the I 960s and the role of Charter 77, which was signed by 1800 Czechs in comparison with two dozen Slovaks as the flag bearer of civic resistance against Communism in Czechoslovakia. Kopecek, p.145. Jan Camogursky vigorously opposes the assumption that religious dissent in Slovakia had a limited impact on the regime. According to him, the massive pilgrimages to Velehrad and Levoca helped to soften the harassment of dissenters and citizens by communist authorities. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. On a similar stance taken by Abby Innes see her book Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001), 36-37. 64 Such delineation is, technically, an anachronism, as the third Meciar government did not oppose integration, particularly into the EU, though it eventually brought Slovakia into international isolation. �94 SLOVAKIA vakia (HZDS) led by Vladimir Meciar and the Slovak National Party (SNS),65 resembled support for the Hlinka Slovak People 's Party (the tudaks) during the wartime Slovak Republic. In contrast to their earlier suggestions, these observers view positively the ability of Magyar communities in Slovakia, which live in rural areas and cast their votes exclusively for the Magyar political parties in each election 66 while referring to it as a "higher form of civic participation and social engagement." 67 Inductive reasoning provides the reader with the opportunity to view Slovakia's post-communist transformation in a complex, evolutionary perspective (see the scheme's Bricolage II): It consists of the following "bricks:" Brick A - "Antecedents" (1848-1918). The traditional view is that during and after the Revolutions of 1848-1849, Slovaks were aware that Magyars were not willing to allow them to exist autonomously and, hence, they started to design their political programs, build institutions, schools, and political parties . Fearing Panslavism, Magyar radicals attempted to Magyarize the nationalities in Hungary, including the Slovaks, with some success (Magyarones). As a consequence, some Slovak, mostly Pro65 The SNS, which, next to the Christian-Democratic Movement (KDH) in the early 1990s and the HZDS in the mid-1 990s was also compared with the HSCS, has always been supportive of the legacy of the Slovak National Uprising in stark contrast to the perspective of the l'udaks and the neo-l'udaks. The same holds for the HZDS. 66 Next to the SMK, a new party to represent both Magyars and Slovaks named the Most-Hid (The Bridge; Slovak and Magyar), was established in July of 2009. Its chairman became Bela Bugar, the former chairman of the SMK, who lost to Pal Csaky in the party elections in April of 2007 . See "Ministerstvo vnutra zaregistrovalo Bugarovu stranu," Pravda, July 3, 2009. ln the 2010 parliamentary elections another new political party, Freedom and Solidarity [SaS] appeared, and supplied ministers to the Radicova government but also caused it to collapse in October of 20 11. Only recently established parties are: Obycajni l'udia - nezavisle osobnosti (Ordinary People - Independent Personalities), Strana slobodne slovo (The Free Word Party), and 99% - Obciansky hlas (99% - A Citizen's Voice). 67 See the article "Mad'ari su aktivnejsi nez Slovaci, tvrdi prieskum," Sme, March 28 2009. The article refers to a survey conducted by the Slovak Academy of Sciences and its interpretation by Zora Butorova from the Institute for Public Affairs (TVO), a non-governmental think-tank. Slovak Magyars defending their rights, while keeping their traditions and the cohesiveness of their society intact, is praised as a positive quality. The same was not applied to the Slovaks in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia when they tried to do the same. �SLOVAKIA 95 testant, intellectuals, opted for cultural, and possibly political, cooperation with the Czechs. A majority of Slovaks, mostly Catholics, still believed that a solution for Slovakia within Hungary could be found. The period from 1890 to 1914, which was traditionally seen as the "dark ages" of Slovak national emancipation, brought about even more resilience against Magyarization. In October of 1918, the Slovaks joined the Czechs in a common state. They rejectted the offer by the Karolyi government for autonomy within Hungary. From November of 1918 onward, a series of military clashes occurred between Magyar and Czechoslovak troops. In June of 1919 the Hungarian Red Army invaded and occupied eastern and southern Slovakia for a short time. Difference (traditional views+-+the article): Slovaks were socially and politically active, not passive in Hungary, even during the time of the harshest Magyarization in 1890-1914, which coincided with the process of the formation of the Slovaks as a political nation. During and after WW I, Slovak leaders abroad and at home decided to join the Czechs in the new state of Czechoslovakia on the assumption they would receive autonomy as promised by the Pittsburgh Agreement of 1918. At the same time, the Slovak population demonstrated its strong dissatisfaction with the Magyar government and supported secession from Hungary by protests in which social and national aspects blended. Brick B - "Betrayals" (1918-1948). In prewar Czechoslovakia, the Slovaks were divided between the autonomists and the "Czechoslovaks." In this clash the CatholicProtestant controversy played an important role. Though the autonomists were seen in the Czech Lands as the destroyers of Czechoslovakia, they did not want to secede because they were afraid of territorial revisionism by the Poles and the Magyars. After Munich, Slovak political parties congregated in Zilina and expressed their support for Slovak autonomy within the rump second Czecho-Slovak Republic. The government of the nominally independent wartime Slovak Republic discriminated against and failed to protect its Jewish and Roma citizens from deportation to death camps. In the administrative and economic spheres, however, the Slovaks demonstrated their capacity to form a state and administer it themselves. Based on this experience, Slovak Communists, who had helped to �96 SLOVAKIA organize the Slovak National Uprising in 1944, expected Slovakia to receive autonomous status within the reconstituted Czechoslovakia. This was rejected by Czech presidents Edvard Benes, Klement Gottwald and Antonin Novotny. Difference: Slovaks were stereotyped in the Czech Lands as traitors since the 1920s. The fact that they did not want to secede from Czechoslovakia and remained in the second Czecho-Slovak Republic for half a year has been frequently overlooked. The socio-economic progress made by the wartime Slovak Republic, in contrast with the disinterest in Slovak affairs by previous centralist Czechoslovak governments, was significant. In May of 1946, the Communists were defeated in parliamentary elections in Slovakia, but not in the Czech Lands. By November of 1947, the Communists gained political control over Slovakia. The three Prague Agreements were viewed by the Slovaks as a betrayal, just as the Czechs viewed the aftermath of the Munich Agreement. Brick C - "Communism" (1948-1989). The idea of Slovak autonomy and economic equalization with the Czechs was adopted by Slovak Communists. The demand for reforming Communism in Slovakia grew with the accession to power in 1963 of the Slovak Alexander Dubcek. The return to national history and the drive for economic reform resulted in the idea of the federalization of Czechoslovakia. This was interpreted by the Czech side as a continuation of Slovak nationalism, because the debate in the Czech Lands was oriented towards political pluralism and economic reform. In 1969 came the removal of Dubcek, who was caught between the need for reform at home and the mistrust in him by political leaders of other communist countries. He was replaced by Gustav Husak, another Slovak, who embodied 'normalization.' Whereas Czechs intellectuals voiced their dissatisfaction with the Husak regime, Slovaks, allegedly, were compliant with it. Difference: Slovaks were no less active than the Czechs in initiating the reform movement in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s; in fact, they had helped to start it. Economic reform as a continuation of equalization stood in the forefront of the efforts of Slovak communist political leaders as well as economists. Federalization was important in regard to both political and economic competencies, whilst it was viewed by Czech society as another from of archetypal natio- �SLOVAKIA 97 nal reassertion of the Slovaks resembling the 19th century. Slovak society lived in a paradoxical situation: next to the material benefits received during 'normalization,' the traditionally religious Slovaks reacted to ideological indoctrination by massive participation in religious pilgrimages. In addition to the religious dissenters, who were active already in the 1970s, environmentalists began to play an important role in the early 1980s in making also the secular part of Slovak society aware of the risks stemming from insensitive industrialization. In 1989, Slovak society as a whole, and on its own initiative, rejected the communist regime by massive demonstrations against it. Brick D - "Division" (1993-1997). The "Velvet Revolution," similar to the "Prague Spring," indicated, how the fall of Communism in Czechoslovakia was perceived internationally. From the beginning, there was mistrust between the newly-emerging Slovak and Czech political elites. Each had its own symbol: they were Alexander Dubcek in Slovakia and Vaclav Havel in the Czech Lands . Since the former accepted the rather symbolic post of Speaker of the Federal Assembly in Prague, new political leaders emerged instantly in Slovakia, first and foremost Vladimir Meciar. In contrast to its federal partner, Slovakia had two more tasks: 1) to gain international recognition and 2) to deal with the status of the Magyar minority. Fighting on three fronts (the third were federal competences) simultaneously, Slovak politicians were divided. Eventually, it was the HZDS, led by Meciar, which prevailed. Contrary to its portrayal as anti-federalist and nationalist, the HZDS and its leader still aspired for a looser federation with the Czechs. This was unacceptable to the "technocrats," represented by Vaclav Klaus and Czech nationalists such as Miroslav Macek (both Civic Democratic Party; ODS) and Jan Kalvoda (Civic Democratic alliance; ODA). As a result, Slovak and Czech political leaders opted for the dissolution of Czechoslovakia as of December 31, 1992. Difference: In contrast to the traditional perspectives that interpret renewed Slovak efforts for building an "authentic federation" in the early 1990s at the expense of the Czechs, it is suggested that Slovaks wanted more powers in order to avoid the continuation of debates of constitutional discrepancies and socio-economic disparities that had started in the 1930s, continued in 1960s, and resurfaced at �98 SLOVAKIA the end of the communist regime in the late 1980s. Since the Czechs had controlled Czechoslovakia for decades, regardless of its constitutional form , they interpreted their own nationalism as "civicness," in contrast to the allegedly old-fashioned ethnic Slovak nationalism. Brick E - "Europe" ("The Awakening" and the "Change," 19982004). Since Slovaks were seen as passive in communist Czechoslovakia and their religious dissent was allegedly insignificant in terms of challenging the communist regime, new institutions and political parties had to emerge in the early 1990s. During the period 19901992, Slovaks allegedly once again focused on federal and national competencies, instead of building democracy and a market economy, which were Czech priorities. According to some sociologists, Slovakia missed the chance to experience its own Velvet Revolution. After the creation of independent Slovakia, the state had to re-build its structures and to strive for international recognition. It inherited a sensitive problem with the Magyar minority, which resulted in tensions regarding the use of the official and Magyar languages on territories with a mixed population. In the spring of 1994, pro-democratic and pro-western forces ousted Vladimir Meciar from office, yet the six following months was too a short a time for catching up with the rest of reforming post-communist countries, particularly Poland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Hungary. In the parliamentary elections in the fall of 1994, Vladimir Meciar returned to power. Allied with the nationalists and the radical left, he imposed a harsh rule over the National Council, the opposition and the media. As a result of the mysterious abduction of the son of President Michal Kovac, who dared to defy the government and Meciar himself, Slovakia began to lag behind in the European integration processes. In the 1998 parliamentary elections, the opposition political parties supported, though indirectly, by non-governmental organizations and awakened Slovak society, defeated the government that torpedoed its own formally proclaimed integrationist goals. The two subsequent governments, led by Mikulas Dzurinda, succeeded in transforming the country's negative international image and attracting foreign investments. Being politically stable, the country became a member of both NATO and the EU in 2004. �SLOVAKIA 99 Difference: When attempts to reach an agreement with the Czechs on an authentic federation failed, Slovaks received, somehow unexpectedly, their own state in a way resembling March of 1939. The accusations against Meciar as an authoritarian leader collided with divergent views on how national property should be privatized. After Meciar' s return to power in the fall of 1994, Slovakia continued in its efforts to join the European Union and NATO. It failed to become a member of the OECD due to the government's unwillingness to privatize strategic branches of the Slovak economy. Despite diplomatic and political warnings regarding the infamous causes of Michal Kovac, the denial of his parliamentary seat to Frantisek Gaulieder and the assassination of Robert Remias, who had information regarding the Kovac kidnapping, negotiations with the EU and NA TO continued. The "change" in 1998 brought about an influx of former representatives of the non-governmental sector into the various ministries, while many of those who remained loyal to their original mission of being the watchdogs over a young democracy were disillusioned. The fragmentation of old political parties and the emergence of new ones in the late l 990s and the early 2000s were complemented by scandals stemming from corruption. In contrast with the third Meciar government, where there were two camps clearly separated one from another, the situation in the first and second Dzurinda governments resembled wars of all against all. The only factor that kept the coalition together was fear of Meciar. Slovak society, which was tired of the endless chain of political conflicts and scandals, with what was left of its enthusiasm and energy, helped to complete the country's integration into the EU. As a part of the community of European nations, Slovaks have not only the right, but also the duty to expect that their ability to comply with the criteria for membership should be equaled by the ability of the Union to provide fair and indiscriminate treatment, free from paternalistic approaches. This will help the Slovaks to grow and appear as a modem and self-confident nation, visible and judged according to their efforts and accomplishments. Speculations on Slovakia's cultural and civilizational proximity with either the East or the West, which bothered so many domestic and foreign politicians and intellectuals in the mid-1990s, are secondary. Of primary importance is the ability of Slovak society to maintain and strengthen its internal integration and to continue to proceed in its mental trans- �100 SLOVAKIA formation . This requires the capacity and willingness of Slovak society to reproduce itself on the basis of its historical traditions, while embracing democratic values, as well as a pluralist and consensual system of governance and politics. At the same time, the membership of Slovakia and other Central Eastern European post-communist states in the European Union provides it with an opportunity to learn from the collapse of the former Communist Bloc by evolving into a community of truly equal members. Slovakia's Postcommunist Transformation from an Historical Perspective Scheme Seeming +- As ---+ Being t Method : Deductive Begins in the present Method: Inductive Begins in the past t t Perspective: Political Science Perspective: History and PSCI t t Objective: Explaining the present by interpreting the Objective: Understanding the present by interpreting the past by reconstructing the past t Depth of historical background: Medium t Retrograde horizon: Medium t Depth of historical background: High t Retrograde horizon : Distant yet connectable With the present t t Connectivity present---+past: Retrospective Connectivity past---+present: Chronological �SLOVAKIA t t Causality: Fragmented Bricolage I 101 Causality: Complex Divergence Brick A: Result Delayed Slovak postCommunist transfor- - low mation and integration with EU and NA TO Bricolage II Brick "Europe" Slovakia's integration delayed but completed on institutional level, continues on societal level t i Brick B: Sub-condition Breakup of Czechoslovakia Reason: prevalence of - high archetypical Slovak nationalism over the solution of practical problems Brick "Division" Split with the Czechs over disparities and competences, not national identity t i Brick C: Prerequisite 1 High degree of Slovak compliance with - high communist regime. Societal life completely Hibernated Brick "Communism" Slovaks partly compliant with communist regime; Refuse interference in religious matters, form environmental movement t i Brick D : Prerequisite 2 Brick "Betrayals" Week economic base -medium- Wartime Slovak Republic Inherited from Hungary; created out of necessity, Legacy of wartime Slovak economically viable. SloRepublic as a totalitarian vak autonomy rejected in State postwar Czechoslovakia t Brick E: Historical residua Slovaks politically passive; Their extinction as a nation Imminent, if not saved By Czechs -medium/high- i Brick"Antecedents" Slovaks resilient and socially active in A-H; opt for Czechoslovakia instead of Hungary � SLOVAKIA 73 SEEMING AND BEING: CONTEXTUALIZING THE HISTORY OF POST - COMMUNIST SLOVAKIA Juraj Hocman The year 1989 marked the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia and the beginning of Slovakia's road to independence. For the Slovaks this year also revealed the gap between their perception of national history and how it was viewed from the outside. In the 1990s, a new generation of western scholars contrasted the post-communist change of Czechoslovakia' s two nations. In their studies of modem Slovak society they rarely went beyond 1918. They relied very much on general accounts and traditional dichotomies between the Czechs and Slovaks, such as 'industrial' versus 'rural,' 'secular' versus 'religious,' ' progressive' versus 'backward.' 1 This was why in the 1990s the Slovaks continued to be seen as a "non-historic" nation hastily modernized during the communist era. Since it was mostly invisible in Austria-Hungary and Czechoslovakia, Slovak history automatically appeared as ruptured and fragmented. Following the downfall of the communist regime and the creation of the independent Slovak Republic in January of 1993, the country's image was primarily associated with radical nationalism, intolerance towards its minorities and an unstable domestic political scene. All of these seemed to have been sufficient to explain Slovakia' s failure to achieve a functioning democracy in the mid-1990s. In the early 2000s, a secondwave of scholarly interest in Slovakia began. Attracted by the country' s economic progress and an overall social and political stability, western scholars turned their attention to what had seemed in the 1990s as a satisfactory explanation for the peculiarities of Slovakia's evolution as a post-communist state. Some of them came to the conclusion that the existing stereotypes stemmed from preconceived methodological approaches, even unfamiliarity with the facts .2 The1 Abby Innes, Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001 ), ix-xi. 2 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition : What Creates the Image of Slovakia?" In Slovakia after Communism and Meciarism, ed. Kieran Williams (London: School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies, 2000), 26. �74 SLOVAKIA refore, a better understanding of what was happening in the country since its creation requires a broader historical approach. 1. Seeming and Being in the History of East and West. The self-challenging motto of the Andrassy family of Hungarian nobles, Non videri, sed esse (Not Seeming but Being), which inspired medieval and early modern societies, stands in direct opposition to modem approaches to social reality that tend to place image over substance.3 In this regard small nations are at greater risk of being overlooked, even misjudged by bigger nations. 4 While it is hardly imaginable that the views of a Slovak or a Czech scholar on the history of Great Britain, the United States or Canada would have the same resonance and impact on the international image of those countries, western scholars have scrutinized the history of Czechoslovakia and its two nations with significant consequences.5 This could happen since the capacity of Slovak historians to conduct independent research and publish the results during the communist era was subject to ideological indoctrination and political constraints. Moreover, Slovak historians, in contrast to their Czech colleagues, until recently did not work systematically on a conceptualization of Slovak history and the minimalization of its invisibility. Such a course would have helped to "sell" their cause abroad - the legitimacy and viability of the existence of Slovakia as a sovereign state - long after its creation. In the 1990s this gap was filled by foreign scholars and the media in a way that simplified and, in some cases, distorted the mostly unknown Slovak history waiting for its reinterpretation at home and rediscovery abroad. The Slovaks were depicted, in terms of their 3 Eva Smelkova and Julius Barczi, "Andrassyovci a Rozi\ava," Forum Historiae 2/2008, p.5. Accessed at www.forumhistoriae.sk/FH 2/smelkova. df 4 See the interview with the Norwegian publicist and writer Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom" on the parallels between the historical evolution of the Slovaks and the small Scandinavian nations in the 19th century. Literarny tyidennik, August 12, 1994, pp. I and 11. 5 Even large states are vulnerable to intrusions into their national histories that contradict domestic interpretations. See the internet article "Russia Will Never Let Anyone Falsify [the] History of [the] Second World War" which refers to the image of the soldiers of the Red Army in WW II as looters and rapists . Russia has created a special committee to counteract the "attempts at distorting history to the detriment of Russi a's interest. " Pravda (Moscow). Accessed at www.pravda.ru, May 20, 2009 . �SLOVAKIA 75 missing statehood, as a non-historic nation, which, after the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993, cured its historical complexes and democratic deficiencies at the expense of their advanced neighbors with whom they shared a common history - the Czechs and the Magyars. 6 To that, some Slovak scholars and politicians reacted with fervor instead of providing a systemic and efficient alternative.7 Consequently, they created solitary and isolated interprettations of Slovak history that clashed with stereotypes and automatically brought about the risk of being viewed either as hard-core nationalists or revisionists.8 In the early 2000s, western scholars such as Karen Henderson, Abby Innes, Cas Mudde and others expressed their doubts concerning cliches linked to Slovak history. The progress in the rediscovery of Slovak history in the West since the beginning of the 2000s cannot be overlooked as the new generation of scholars did their fieldwork in the Slovak Republic and critically examined the earlier interpretations of Slovak history emerging in the 1990s. 9 Although the trend of foreign and Slovak historians coming closer in their interpretations is growing, a lot of work remains to be done by both sides.10 6 George Schopflin, Nations, Identity, Power (New York: New York University Press, 2000), 280-297 ("The Slovak case study"). 7 Looking for internationally-known personalities with Slovak origins at any cost to improve the image of Slovakia could result in quite opposite effects. See Greg Steinmetz's article, "Slovaks desperately searching for famous countrymen," The Globe and Mail, April 27, 1996. Similarly, the publishing of another variant of the multi-volume "History of Slovakia" in the Slovak language with short resumes in German, English, French and Russian, and picture books with descriptive texts designed for common readers are hardly ways to provide a conceptual and critical synthesis of Slovak history known and accepted internationally. 8 Franti~ek Vnuk, Milan Durica and other historians grouped around the Matica slovens/ca. 9 Next to Karen Henderson and Abby Innes, the best examples are the recent works by Tim Haughton and John A. Scherpereel cited in this article. The British scholar George Schopflin sees a great challenge for historians of East Central Europe to become familiar with the Anglo-Saxon, German, French, Russian, and Italian scholarly literature. For consequences regarding Slovak history see George Schopflin, "Vytvaranie eur6pskej kulturnej identity? Stredna Europa v rozfaenej Eur6pskej unii," Listy SFPA, March-April 2003 , pp.2-3. 10 " .. . it is hardly surprising that any effort to straighten the Slovak spine is seen as nationalism, the equivalent of n[N]azism, fascism and the oppression of minorities. It may be hard to believe but the greatest enemies of Slovakia are Slovaks themselves. On several occasions, I have had an opportunity to witness the way in which Slovak historians have given lectures on Slovakia to foreign audiences. Nearly all of �76 SLOVAKIA Furthermore, in the modem era the role of the media in building popular perceptions on the basis of simplified interpretations of historical developments has been increasing. A reasonable objection can be made as to why a scholarly study should be bothered by what the media say. In short, the media can popularize history more effectively than scholars who create their interpretations only after years of studying a particular problem. Thus, in creating a public image, it is the media which paints the larger picture, not scholars. 11 Paraphrasing Clausewitz, the media may be seen as the continuation of historiography and social science by other means. 12 This was evident in the case of Slovakia's image as hyper-nationalist in the early 1990s and during the country's quasi-miraculous instant awakening in 1998. Views by the media helped to reduce this phase in modem Slovak history to the Manichean conflict between 'evil' and 'good' politicians, and, implicitly, between the 'progressive' and 'backward' electorates and segments of Slovak society. 13 them have had one thing in common: they present the Slovaks as a nation without a history, without culture and traditions - and surprise - as the oppressor of minorities. Nor do they neglect to mention Slovakia's facist and Nazi past. Their spiritual kin in the West have gone so far in their blind, ignorant hatred as to blame the Slovaks for the hanging of Communists and Jews in Kosice in January of 1945. According to one German commentator, the massacres in Kosice were ' one of the last abominations of the fascist Slovak state and ally of Adolf Hitler. ' The fact that Kosice belonged to Hungary at that time and that this sad, vile act was committed by the Hungarian fascists "Wild Rose Crosses," is apparently of interest to no one, the least to our own historians." Darina Vergesova, "Dajte Duricovi pokoj," Kritika & Kon text, nos. 2-3 ( 1997), pp.59-60. 11 "A separate chapter in our [Slovak] media is that of the methodical loss of national memory," Pavo! Dinka, S/ovenske media: Met6dy manipulacie (Bratislava: PPA, 2008), 21. Due to its image inherited from the 1990s, Slovakia was depicted in three films - "Hostel" (2004), "Eurotrip" (2004) and "Hostel 2" (2007) - as a nest of danf:erous and perverted criminals and mafia. For details see www.imdb.com 2 On the shift of the media in the time of globalization from being the Fourth Power (provider of information) to the Fifth Power (manipulator of information) see the article by Ignacio Ramonet, "Le cinquieme pouvoir," Le Monde Diplomatique, Apri l-Mai (2005), pp.74-78 "Dans la nouvelle guerre ideologique qu 'impose la mondialisation, !es medias sont utilisees comme une arme de combat. L' information, en raison de son explosion, de sa multiplication, de sa surabondance, de ses partis pris, se trouve litteralement contaminee, empoisonnee par toute sorte des mensonges, pollue par !es rumeurs, !es distorsions, !es manipulations." Ibid., p.77. 13 Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), p.308. A survey conducted in Slovakia in the mid- l 990s focused on the degree of tolerance towards minorities, disrespect for the law by politi- �SLOVAKIA 77 Next to the risk of perspectives based on simplified portrayals of reality stands the problem of divergent approaches towards the same phenomena in the history of the East and West. The classic saying goes "if disease is beautiful, it is generally someone else's disease." 14 Apart from its complimentary aspect, Chesterton's aphorism can be applied to nationalism and its negative characteristics associated primarily with the East. In the 1990s, the resurrected nationalism of East Central Europe gained a negative image linked to the ethnocentric nationalism of the 19th century. This resulted in the categorization of post-communist states into progressive ones and those which lagged behind. It is true that the downfall of Communism and the subsequent disintegration of the Communist Bloc resulted in an explosion of ethnic tensions. When examining the roots of nationalism and its capacity for political and social mobilezation, it should become clear that the same primordial instincts attributed to the East had existed among western literati in the 19th century. In multiethnic Britain the same elements of linguistic and ethnic tensions shaped by romantic nationalism can be found in historical novels designed with the same purpose as those by writers in East Central Europe. 15 The similarities between the nation-building processes in W estem and East Central Europe can particularly be observed in the creation of multi-ethnic Great Britain as a political nation during the period 1707-1837, where the impact of external threats helped her to overcome the historical centripetal tendencies based on ethnic diversity. 16 What worked in Great Britain did not work in Austria- cians, positive opinions on the communist regime before its fall and engagement in civic association activities. 14 Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Orthodoxy (London: The Bodley Head, 1949), p.12. 15 On the Norman-Saxon ethno-linguistic division and societal hierarchy in medieval England see Sir Walter Scott's historical novel Ivanhoe (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998). 16 Linda Colley, Britons: Forg ing the Nation 1707-/837 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992). For the major argument of the book see the introduction, pp.1-9. See also the comparison of the Magyars with the English "who have violently Anglicized ten millions of Irishmen and Scottsmen" made by a Magyar Deputy in the Hungarian Diet in 1879 in justification of the forced Magyarization . R.W. Seton-Watson, Racial Problems in Hungary (London: Archibald Constable, 1908; reprinted in New York by Howard Fertig, 1972), 217 . There is a significant difference. Whereas Great Britain made, at least formally, its Compromise in 1707, the radical part of Magyar political elites failed to do it until it was too late. �78 SLOVAKIA Hungary from 1848 to 1918 and in Czechoslovakia, where centripetal tendencies eventually prevailed. Recalling the indication by Cas Mudde of double standards in explaining ' bad' and 'good' nationalism in Slovakia during the period 1989-1992, 17 nationalism, in general, appeared as progressive when it had helped to create nation-states in the West from the 16th to the 19th centuries, whereas it became perverted in state-building processes in post-communist Eastern Europe in the 1990s. 18 Though the concerns of multi-ethnic states about the possible consequences of various forms of nationalism, past and future, to which modem historiography and political science have legitimately pointed, are understandable, the common roots of nationalism should not be forgotten. This will help us to avoid the traps of nationalism's general recrimination in post-communist East Central Europe, including Slovakia, regardless of the context within which it emerged and had been shaped. 19 In addition to the perception of the Slovaks as intolerant nationalists, the image of the country has been that of a non-historic nation due to the viewing of unexplored parts of Slovak history as myths. Robert Pynsent suggests that a myth can appear either as a "normal neutral narrative of concem," 20 or it can be a "bridge too far" in re17 Cas Mudde, "Civil society in post-communist Europe: Lessons from the ' dark side,"' In Uncivil society? Contentious politics in post-communist Europe, eds. Petr Kopecky and Cas Mudde (London and New York: Routledge, 2003), 161. 18 For the opposite view see Egil Lejon who sees the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993 as a result of Slovak historical traditions and an emancipation movement which accelerated in 1848 and later. Interview with Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom," Literarny tyzdennik, August 12, 1994, p.11. Lejon suggests that the Slovaks are not nationalistic enough in terms of what modem nationalism requires: cultural self-confidence, national pride, and loyalty. 19 See Kedourie on the selective use of the antonyms 'progressive ' - ' regressive ' in regard to nationalism in the Marxist interpretation of history ('progressive' during the advent of capitalism replacing fe udalism, ' progressive' in the fight of colonial and post-colonial nations against imperialism, and ' regressive' within capitalism resisting socialism). Elie Kedourie, Nationalism (London: Hutchinson & Co Ltd., 1966), 90-91. Applying Mudde 's observation, the 'bad ' case of nationalism in the early 1990s was the split of Czechoslovakia, whereas the 'good' cases were the dismemberments of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. In contrast to the two latter, Slovak nationalism did not involve violence. 20 Robert Pynsent, Questions of Identity: Czech and Slovak Ideas of Nationality and Personality (Budapest-London-New York: Central European University Press, 1994), 87. �SLOVAKIA 79 gard to its practical implications in nation and state-building processes in Slovak history as implicated by G. Eyal, S.J. Cohen and T. Haughton. 2 1 While applying the first flexible definition, it may be postulated that myths are constantly emerging. An effective way to understand the essence of a myth in terms of its value as a possible source of historical facts is to compare both of its forms. The official mythology of the European Union is that it was born out of a sudden inspiration that had fallen upon Jean Monnet - a Romulus to the European Community - during his trip to the Alps. The idea was apparently instrumental in reconciling France and Germany during the meeting of Robert Schumann and Konrad Adenauer in May of 1950, which gave birth to the European Coal and Steel Community. 22 Others see this process in an all-European myth-deconstructing perspective as the outcome of the decisive involvement of the United States, tired of the French-German reluctance to reach an agreement. 23 Concurrently, some scholars have viewed the creation of the European Union in the early 1990s as the culmination of the tireless work of lobbyists, who had effectively executed the wishes of great corporations to create a common market which was about to grant the architects of the EU even greater eco- 21 See Gil Eyal, The Origins of Post-Communist Elites: from the Prague Spring to the Breakup of Czechoslovakia (Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 131 , and Tim Haughton, Constraints and Opportunities of Leadership in Post-Communist Europe (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 4-5. This is also the leitmotif of Shari J. Cohen's book Politics Without A Past: The Absence Of History In Postcommunist Nationalism (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1999). 22 "Chaque annee, si je le peux, je vais faire de grandes courses dans les Alpes .. .J'y retrouve l'expression de l'inquietude qui opressait l'Europe cinq ans apres la guerre: une autre guerre est proche devant nous si nous ne faisons rien. L' Allemagne n' en sera pas la cause, mais elle en sera l'enjeu. II faut qu'elle cesse d'etre un enjeu, qu 'elle devienne au contraire un lien. Seule la France peut actuellement prendre une initiative." Jean Monnet, Memoires (Paris: Fayard, 1997), 342. 23 John Gillingham, Coal, Steel and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge University Press, 1991 ). Particularly explicative is the role of the U.S. High Commissioner for Germany John McCloy in bringing the French and Germans together to the signing of the Treaty of Paris (April 18, 1951 ), which instituted the European Coal and Steel Community. Gillingham stressed the fact that McCloy "summoned" the German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer to his office for a "dressing down" for his unwillingness to sign the document. Ibid, 280. �80 SLOVAKIA nomic profits. 24 A different group of authors opposed such ignoble motives with their hagiographic vision of the institutional emergence of the European Community and the later European Union as the outcome of exceptional negotiating and diplomatic skills of supranational executives who were serving the citizens of Europe.25 It is clear that each perspective has its merits and this adds to the perplexing complexity of the issue and resulting interpretations. This variety of opinions points to the core of the problem linked to the non-historicity of Slovaks and their questionable ability to cope with more recent problems in the transformation of their society. The skeptically insinuated ' mythical' legacy of 9th century Great Moravia and the invisible link from it to modem Slovak politics, apart from its distance from the present, which partially legitimizes its appearance as a myth, disregards the simple fact that to the Slovaks it was a lighthouse, not a matrix blindly to follow in the creation of a sovereign modem Slovakia. There is no difference in this regard between small and big nations who honor their historical traditions that often blend with myths. Most importantly, it is not Great Moravia itself, but the connection between it and the 19th and 20th centuries that matters in the discourse on the historicity of Slovaks. This link was hardly reflected, let alone examined, by western scholars in the 1990s in contrast to their predecessors - the historians R.W. Seton-Watson, Robert A. Kann, Oscar Halecki, and C.A. Macartney.26 After the extinction of the Arpad dynasty (1301 ), which had represented the ethnic Magyars, the foreign rulers of the Kingdom of 24 Belen Balanya, Ann Doherty, Olivier Hoedeman, Adam Ma' anit and Erik Wesselius, Europe Inc.: Regional and Global Restructuring and the Rise of Corporate Power (London-Sterling, Virginia: Pluto Press, 2000). The authors stress their perception of the creation of the European Union as the result of a plan made by the European Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT) composed of 45 captains of the largest European transnational corporations. See Preface of the book, xi-xv. 25 Ken Endo, The Presidency of the Europ ean Commission under Jacques De/ors. The Politics of Shared Leadership (London : Macmillan, 1999). Helen Drake, Jacques De/ors. Perspectives on a European Leader (London-New York: Routledge, 2000). 26 For an attempt to see Slovak history in historical continuity by a foreign scholar see the chapter by the Austrian historian Arnold Suppan, "Die Slowakei zwischen Grossmahrischen Reich und Europaischer Union: Kontinuitaten und Diskontinui taten," in Plus Ultra. Die Welt Der Neuzeit. Festschrift far Alfred Kohler zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. F. Edelmayer, M. Fuchs, G. Heilingsetler, P. Rauscher (Munster: Aschendorf, 2008), 331-68. �SLOVAKIA 81 Hungary - the Anjous, the Luxembourgs, the Jagiellons, the Hahsburgs - were wisely and clairvoyantly tolerant towards the ethnic groups of Hungary as the state otherwise would have not survived for the next seven centuries.27 Once the glory of the Kingdom of Hungary and the privileges of a political nation were attributed to one nationality (the Magyars) in the 18th and 19th centuries, there was no choice for others, who felt degraded to second-class citizens, than to nourish and strengthen their own identities - linguistic, cultural, social, and political. Paradoxically, a tendency to be suspicious of the interpretations of Slovak history as an indivisible part of the history of the Kingdom of Hungary still prevails. Until a shift in this perception happens, Slovaks may be further viewed as a non-historic entity despite empirical and heuristic evidence that testifies to their genuine participation in the societal and institutional life of the kingdom they shared with others in times when language and ethnicity meant less than social status and class affiliation. 28 The myth versus 'myth' ambiguity in the interpretations of the history of East and West testifies to the existence of a wide range of applicable perspectives and alternative interpretations. A better awareness of this ambiguity, which exists in both East and West, may help us to also understand the reasons for the ruptures in Slovak history, fractured into its being and seeming. The most visible anoma- 27 Disregarding the multi-ethnic aspects and dynastic ruptures in the medieval and modern history of Hungary would be the same as excluding the early Plantagenets from the history of England due to their appearance as non-Anglo-Saxon, FrancoNorman, elements. The history of England would have to begin anew with the Tudors . The rupture progressive versus regressive (see Kedourie) in the history of the United States is observable in the interpretations of the reasons for the Civil War and its aftermath. A similar rupture (totalitarian+-+democratic) exists in the history of Germany before it became a democratic state. 28 "The Slovaks on their side lost their national existence [after the defeat of Great Moravia] in that of their Asiatic conquerors, entered into their ranks as soldiers, and participated thence-forward in all their fortunes .. .Their language however is the only remnant of their national existence which the Slovaks have preserved; in every other respect they belong to the Hungarian nation, of which they form an ingredient part, as the Magyars form another; and on the glory of whose valiant deeds they have an equal claim." Therese Albertine Louise von Jacob Robinson, Historical View of the Language and Literature of the Slavic Nation (New York: BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2006) (Reprint of the original version published by George P. Putnam in New York in 1851), 186-7. �82 SLOVAKIA lies of this split consequently appeared either as 'betrayals' or 'awakenings.' 2. Seeming and Being in Slovak History as a Part of the History of Czechoslovakia and Hungary. In 1991 Slovak historian Anton Hmko pointed out that the book by Slovak politician Ivan Derer on the rulings of the National Court in the First Czechoslovak Republic,29 written from the perspective of an ardent unitarist and "Czechoslovak," was conveniently accepted by Marxist historiography. The reason was obvious as the adversary was the same - the Slovak autonomist movement and the legacy of the wartime Slovak Republic (1939-1945). Having provided statistical data on the topics of the studies published by Slovak historians, Hrnko argued that the history of interwar Czechoslovakia ( 19181938) belonged to one of its most ideologically distorted segments. 30 This vacuum was filled by the works of court historians who helped to create myths as the politically and ideologically "subjective projection of desirable horizons." 31 If a 'myth' could emerge relatively recently with plenty of primary documents, one can ask the question - are there more of them? To respond to it at least in part, it is necessary to return to the early 1990s, when ideological constraints were removed from scholarship and academia and the attention of scholars and media turned towards nationalism. Miroslav Hroch's classification of nationalities in East Central Europe on their advancement in the national reawakening, which was published in the year when Czechoslovakia broke up, put the Slovaks a step behind the Czechs and the Magyars, without providing details, except for a very general reference. 32 This article suggests that, until the revolution of 1848, Slovaks did not lag behind 29 Ivan Derer, Slovensky vyvin a l'udacka zrada (Praha: Kvasnicka a Hamp!, I 946). Anton Hmko, "Zatemnene dejiny: Obraz medzivojnovej slovenskej spolocnosti v fracach slovenskych historikov," Literarny tyidennik, June 28, 1991 , p.10. 1 Marianna Oravcova, "The Ethnic and Cultural Dimension of National Emancipation: The Evocation of the Slovak Nation," in Language, Values and the Slovak Nation, eds. Tibor Pichler and Jana Gasparikova (Washington: Paideia Press, 1994), 11 . In the last sentence Oravcova refers to the article by Pavo! Horvath, "K niektorym otazkam historickych tradicii na Slovensku," Slovensky narodopis 1-2 (1986), 60-65 . 32 Miloslav Hroch, "From National Movement to the Fully-Formed Nation: The Nation-Building Process in Europe," New Left Review, 1/198 (March-April 1993), 64. 30 �SLOVAKIA 83 the Czechs in terms of the press, programs, the creation of a literary language and the petition movements. Hroch was more accurate when pointing to the forced Magyarization that started after 1867 as a major hindrance to Slovak national progress, including its social and economic aspects. Yet even that historical period has to be reexamined as it had not been a time of complete silence, although it would be convenient to see it in that way. Communist historiography in the 1950s gladly embraced the earlier idea that Slovaks had been saved by the Czechs from extinction as a nation, a concept which slipped into western scholarship. This hypothesis was based on censuses which showed the decreasing number of Slovak intelligentsia and schools as the 19th century progressed. These scholars concluded that the Slovaks would have been assimilated by the Magyars in one or two generations. 33 There had previously been two generations of Slovaks living under Magyarization from 1875 to 1914, yet the Slovak press, though under censorship and constant pressure, was full of political articles and calls for national, social and cultural progress. 34 Magyar elites knew very well that Slovak identity did not depend solely on schooling in their native language, but also on the family environment. Therefore, they forcibly took Slovak children from poor families and transported them to regions where Magyar was spoken. 35 The unrest in Turiec and Zvolen County in Central Slovakia that led to attacks on local Magyar authorities was a mixture of social and national elements. They testified to the continuing, even increasing Slovak resilience against Magyarization as observed by R. W. Seton-Watson. 36 Final33 For an argument against the traditional view that the Slovaks could not create their intelligentsia because of harsh Magyarization see Dusan Kovac, Roman Holec, Elena Jakesova, Elena Mannova, Milan Podrimavsky, Na zaciatku storocia, 19011914 (Bratislava: Veda, 2004), 44. 34 Milan Krajcovic, "Slovaci v emancipacnom pohybe nemad'arskych narodov," in Slovensko na zaciatku storocia: Spolocnost'. stat a narod v suradniciach doby, eds. Milan Podrimavsky and Dusan Kovac (Bratislava: Hu SA V, 1999), 48-65 . 35 "By the Law of 1891 , the State has deliberately assumed the attitude of the Sultans in earlier centuries. Just as the Christian rayah was regarded as a breedingmachine to supply janissaries, so to-day non-Magyars of Hungary are breedingmachines whose children must be taught Magyar from the earliest age in the hope that they may become renegades to the traditions of their ancestors." R.W. SetonWatson, Racial Problems in Hungary , 222. 36 Ibid., 394. Seton-Watson stressed that 92 .5% of the Liptov county inhabitants were Slovaks and 90.6% understood no Magyar. Ibid. , 332. �84 SLOVAKIA ly, in 1918, it was the masses of peasants and lower strata of Slovak society that had preserved, as lsmo Nurmi suggested, a high degree of self-consciousness. 37 They were instrumental in embracing the idea of their future coexistence with the Czechs under the provisions of the Pittsburgh Agreement, but under no circumstances with the Magyars. Without this support the few intellectuals at home and abroad could hardly have reached their political goals in October and November of 1918 when the Czechoslovak Republic was born. It is equally true that significant numbers of Slovak Magyarones gave up their ethnicity for the sake of their careers while following the example of the Slovak nobility and gentry which were "easily and gladly" Magyarized in the 19th century. 38 Still, it is hard to believe that three million Slovaks at home and abroad, with the most resistant of them in North America, would have been completely Magyarzsed even if Hungary had been preserved in its prewar boundaries . A possible analogy with the Irish resistance, underscored by the role played in national emancipation by leaders such as Milan R. Stefanik and Stefan Osusky, who left Hungary and vehemently fought for the Slovak cause abroad, comes to mind. Their work, done at the highest political and diplomatic levels, was supplemented by dozens of zealous Slovak national activists in the United States. 39 37 Ismo Nurmi, Slovakia - A Playground for Nationalism and National Identity, 1918-1920: Manifestations of the National identity of Slovaks (Helsinki : Suomen Historiallinen Seura, 1999), 45. 38 C.A . Macartney, Hungary and Her Successors. The Treaty of Trianon and its Consequences 1919-1937 (London : Oxford University Press, 1937), 91. 39 The Slovak press in North America - 30 newspapers with a circulation of 150,000 in 1914 - was such a force that the Hungarian government as early as in 1890 had banned the imports of some of them and began subsidi zing pro-Hungarian publications in the United States. M. Mark Stolarik, "The Slovak-American Press," in Sally M. Miller ed. , The Ethnic Press in the United States: A Historical Analysis and Handbook (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1987), 365. Count Albert Apponyi, one of the main protagonists of Magyarization and a representative of the Hungarian government on his visit to the United States attempted to present Hungary as a ftee and democratic country. He was denounced as a tyrant and pressed by a huge mob comprising members of "Slavic nationalities and Hungarian socialists" during his lectures. In Chicago, Apponyi escaped the fury of the mob and fled to his car only with the protection provided by the police. See The New York Times, February 25, 1911 , p. 3. For the Slovak resistence against the territorial aspirations of fascist Hungary see the boastful statement by Gustav Husak on February 28, 1945: "I openly declare that Slovakia' s frontiers [with Hungary] as they had existed in the [prewar] Czechoslovak Republic are stable. Slovakia is united and non-divisible. Any �SLOVAKIA 85 After World War II, Konstantin Culen, a Slovak publicist in exile, suggested that living with the Czechs was for the Slovaks a rather negative experience. 4°Culen's arguments were based on the constant rejection of Slovak autonomy in Czechoslovakia by President Edvard Benes, who had never shown any particular affection for the Slovaks, and the post-war execution of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, President of the wartime Slovak Republic. With the situation of the Slovaks in southern Slovakia ceded to Hungary by the Vienna Award of November 1938 in mind, it is legitimate to assume that cohabitation with the Czechs, though far from being idyllic, included fewer risks for the completion of Slovak national emancipation than their hypothetical existence in Hungary after WW I. Furthermore, the Czechs in 1918 were already significantly ahead of the Slovaks as far as societal cohesion and socio-economic progress of their societies were concerned. The animosity started with the Czech disrespect toward the Catholic Church and with their disregard for the continuing socio-economic underdevelopment of Slovakia. The problem became acute in the 1930s, when the Slovak intelligentsia, which had remarkably increased by that time, as well as ordinary citizens, could not find work in Slovakia because the best jobs were filled by the Czechs. In contrast to the situation that had existed in the 1920s, Slovaks were ready to become executives, administrators, teachers, lawyers and doctors. This happened in 1939 and after. Unfortunately, after WW II Czech political leaders, both civic and communist, were not willing to admit that the Slovaks had grown up and were able to govern themselves.41 The Czech historical experience was strongly influenced by the Protestant Reformation, secularism and greater industrial advancement due to their proximity to and cohabitation with the Germans. With the creation of Czechoslovakia after WW I, the Czechs proved themselves worthy followers of their predecessors and for a moment irredentism by Magyar fascists will end in vain. Our nation, which has been able to resist the military power of Germany, will find enough strength to firmly defend its borders." See the document "Z referatu Gustava Husaka na konferencii Komunistickej strany Slovenska," February 28, 1945. Dokumenty slovenskej narodnej identi2; a statnosti II (Bratislava: Narodne literarne centrum, 1998), 400. Konstantin Culen, Po Sviitoplukovi druha nasa hlava: Politicky i ivotopis Dr. Jozefa Tisu (Cleveland: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1947). 41 Carol Skalnik Leff, National Conflict in Czechoslovakia: the Making and Remaking of a State, 1918-1987 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 89. �86 SLOVAKIA also a barrier erected by the victorious Allies against German domination over Central and Eastern Europe. After the incorporation of Slovakia into Czechoslovakia, the national self-confidence of the Czechs was on the rise. After WW II, the Czechs led by the Communist Party, and with the mighty Soviet Union backing them, returned to the concept of a unitary Czechoslovakia. To them, the push for reforms in the 1960's, which was interpreted as the "Prague" rather than the "Czecho-Slovak Spring," was also a return to their national history. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the armies of the Warsaw Pact in August of 1968, led by the Soviet Union, their former liberator, and the only Slavic Superpower, was especially traumatic for the Czechs. This trauma, imposed from outside, was complemented by a domestic one: the effects of 'normalization' and federalization, both seen as a part of the chain of Slovak "betrayals." The Slovaks rebelled from 1920 onward. First, they asked for autonomy, then they allegedly "conspired" with the Magyars and the Poles against the prewar Republic, and eventually got a taste of the forbidden fruit of political emancipation in the form of their nominally independent state.42 Meanwhile, in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1945), the Czechs were ruled over and persecuted by the Germans. 43 With this perception of national history in Czech minds, the disappearance of the communist regime in 1989, which was allegedly harsher in the Czech Lands than in Slovakia, and which treated the Slovaks in the same way as did the First Czechoslovak Republic, was a golden opportunity to rebuild the state to Czech expectations. After recognizing that Slovaks were not willing to accept what they considered to be the continuation of the imbalance in the distribution of competences in a joint state in 1990-1992, the Czechs opted for the territorially-reduced variant of Czechoslovakia while inheriting its trademark. Since then, they have fared very well. 44 It 42 Leff, National Conflict, 26 and 164. For a Slovak perspective on the history of the Slovak-Czech and Czecho-Slovak relations since 1918 as the "history of broken pacts and unfulfilled promises," see Anton Hmko, "Politicke zapasy na Slovensku v lete a na jesen 1990," Historicky zbornik 10, no. I (2000), 77. 43 Though the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia had its own administration, it was an indivisible part of the Third Reich, which saw itself as a historic successor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. 44 See the article "Slovakia's Economy ls Doing Well, Too" by Peter Burian, The New York Times, June I, 1996. The author, charge d 'ajfaires of the Embassy of the �SLOVAKIA 87 may seem that this chapter of their history was closed and sealed. The aftermath of the "Velvet Divorce" and the relationship between the two former federal nations was not always rosy. Throughout the 1990s, it was not difficult to contrast the progress made by the Czech Republic with Slovakia's problems. In the early 2000s, with the Meciar era gone and economic advancement that surprised many, the previous negative image of Slovaks as nationalists turned to the delay in democratic transformation of their society. 45 In recent books on Czech history since the early medieval era the Slovaks are hardly mentioned. With Slovakia's progress in the integration processes, substitutes for Slovak nationalism appeared instantly.46 Despite mutual sympathies as documented by surveys of public opinion and praise by Slovak and Czech politicians of their good relations, from 1993 onward free of economic quarrels,47 the clash of bitter memories continued. They have ranged from topics such as investment opportunities by renowned international compa- Slovak Republic in Washington, responded to a similar article in the NYT on the Czech Republic doing well "with luck and without Slovakia," while providing data on GDP (7.4% growth), unemployment (7.4%), doubled foreign currency reserves, a £ositive trade balance and low foreign debt per capita ($800.00). 5 According to Professor Filip Palda from E Ecole nationale d 'administration publique in Montreal, "Separation in 1992 allowed the Czechs to halt the payola on which Slovaks had come to depend. Since separation in 1992, the Slovaks have gone the way of Argentina, whereas the Czechs are now preparing to enter the European Union." See "Argentina north" by Filip Palda. The Ottawa Citizen, January 21 , 2002. Anton Hykisch, former Slovak ambassador to Canada, opined that, for Hungary and the Czech Republic, Slovakia's economic success in the early 2000s was a big surprise which was hard for them to accept. Author interview with Anton Hykisch, Bratislava, June 5, 2007. 46 For a contrasting view on the political systems and parliamentarism in the Czech and Slovak Republics as advanced and less developed see Petr Kopecky, Parliaments in the Czech and Slovak Republics: Party competition and parliamentary institutionalization (London : Ashgate, 2001). The Czech political scientist Lubomir Kopecek opines that in comparison with the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary, the evolution of the Slovak political system is unfinished and the system itself is unstable. As a result, Slovakia is a "semi-consolidated democracy." Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), 307 and 3 10. 47 See the article "Klaus: Vzt'ahy Slovenska a Ceska m6zu byt' pri.kladom pre celu Eur6pu," Pravda, June 29, 2009. It became a tradition that the first official visits of the newly-elected presidents and prime ministers of the Czech and Slovak Republics have been with their closest neighbor. �88 SLOVAKIA nies, 48 to the often derogatory comments on domestic politics and rivalry in sports, with frequent references to the "sins" in national histories of the two nations .49 Until the revolutionary years 1848-1849, Slovaks and Magyars had cohabitated peacefully. Four decades of forced Magyarization after 1867 were hard for the Slovaks, yet there was still some moral and socio-political capital left for the improvement of mutual relationships. If this failed in 1918, Slovaks could hardly have been blamed for it as their political weight and influence in Hungary was marginal. In the fall of 193 8, after two decades of the existence of Czechoslovakia, Slovakia was stripped of its southern territories by the Vienna Award.50 Almost seven years of living in Hungary (19381945) returned the Slovaks in the south to a life which resembled what had existed before 1918. After the Second World War and until 1989, the relationship between the Slovaks and Magyars might have appeared as normal, but it was not. Once the Soviet Union was gone and the fate of Czechoslovakia disputed, the old animosities resurfaced . For all Slovak governments since 1989, the status of the Magyar minority became a litmus test in measuring the state of democracy in Slovakia by western governments and scholars. During the Meciar years, Magyars in Slovakia voiced their dissatisfaction with 48 According to a poll by the Czech Private Equity and Venture Capital Association based in Prague, four out of five of its economists and financial analysts said that foreign investment would flow to the Czech rather than to the Slovak Republic. See "Investori uprednostnia Cesko pred Slovenskom," Sme, May 29, 2009. Slovak readers rejected the idea as wishful thinking on the Czech side and suggested that a poll conducted by a Slovak-based company would have shown the opposite. 49 They frequently appear on the Czech web sites www.seznam.cz., www.idnes.cz and their Slovak counterparts www.sme.sk and www.pravda.sk. On April 1 of2009 when the Slovak national football team defeated its opponent in Prague in the qualifier for the Word Cup in South Africa (2010), debates among the fans of both teams turned to their common past with references to the "betrayal" in 1938-1939 and to the Slovak inferiority complex vis-a-vis the Czechs. Slovaks pointed to Czech compliance with German rule in the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia and affirmed that they did not measure themselves against the Czechs - a fixed idea on the Czech side. 50 Julius Mesaros, "Some Deformations in the Interpretation of Censuses in Recent Slovak-Magyar Controversies," In Slovak & Magyars, ed. Pavol Stevcek (Bratislava: Ministerstvo kultury, 1995), 63-84. The census of 1910 showed the presence of 885,397 Magyars on the territory which became part of Slovakia in 1918 (30.3% of the population). Mesaros argues that even "this number was not the result of natural development, or Slovak-Magyar and Magyar-Slovak bilingualism, but a result of the purposeful Magyarization and oppression of Slovaks." Ibid. , 78 . �SLOVAKIA 89 the approaches of Slovak governments in administrative, linguistic, financial and cultural matters. Claims made by their leaders for more tolerance and understanding by the Slovaks have been in stark contrast with the ambiguous language of the representatives of the Magyar minority regarding their possible autonomy. 5 1 While the Slovaks and the Czechs after 1992 were able to reach the highest level of mutual respect and understanding, Slovaks and Magyars remained mentally anchored in the period between 1918 and 1945. The trauma of Trianon in 1920 and their expulsion from South Slovakia in 1945-194 7 is deeply engraved in the minds of Magyars, as is the forced Magyarization and the effects of the Vienna Arbitration in the minds of the Slovaks. Each side continues to interpret the causes and outcomes of those events according to its own perception and sentiments. A partial solution to the problem - history textbooks written by Slovak and Magyar historians together - is to this date still "in progress" and it is hard to predict when and if they will ever be finished and distributed to schools in both countries. 52 History is firmly tied into daily politics in East Central Europe. Its revival outside of scholarly conferences and seminars and its use as a model for the present or future by politicians may lead to the release of a genie from his bottle. 53 This refers particularly to Slovakia as being possibly identified as the weakest link within an informal Little Entente. 54 If both nations do not want to waste what has 51 The representatives of the Magyar political parties in Slovakia (before 1998), with the exception of Miklos Duray and Pal Csaky from the SMK. (the Party of the Magyar Coalition), were careful about publicly speaking of autonomy for Magyars in Slovakia, though the idea of their political and administrative autonomy has frequently appeared - sotto voce - as their ultimate goal. Most recently, Duray admitted that territorial autonomy is unrealistic, but the chance for a vaguely defined "personal'' autonomy for the Magyar minority in Slovakia still exists. See the article "Ouray o vel'kom Mad'arsku nesniva, auton6mia je vsak podl'a neho realna," Pravda, August 4, 2009. 52 Vilaro Kratochvil, "K moznostiam oslabovania predsudkov a stereotypov v tvorbe ucebnic dejepisu," in Myty a predsudky v dejincich. Historickci konferencia 7. decembra 2004, ed. Attila Simon (Samorin-Dunajska Streda: Forum Institut pre vyskum mensin, 2005). 53 See the interview with Slovak historian Ivan Kamenec. "Kamenec: Politici su najhorsi ziaci hist6rie," Sme, May 9, 2009. Kamenec refers to the diverging interpretations of the period 1944-1948. 54 Serbia, Slovakia, Romania, in which Magyar minorities live. Jan Camogursky said that the highest challenge to Slovakia's foreign policy after accession into NATO and the EU remains the country's ability to face continuing interference by �90 SLOVAKIA remained positive from the legacy of their peaceful cohabitation, and if they wish to get rid of the shadows of the past, they have to reach a mutually respectful Slovak - Magyar and Magyar - Slovak Compromise. Not by political gestures, but by the inner force of their societies. Neither of the two nations, closely bound together for centuries, can separately pass this test of national and civic maturity.55 3. The Myth of a Sudden Awakening of Slovak Society in the 1998 Parliamentary Elections. The major problem in Slovak history from an outsider's perspective - its invisibility linked to a fragmented appearance as a part of the history of Hungary and Czechoslovakia - influenced also its recent domestic interpretations. In reference to the Slovak national anthem, sociologists Martin Butora and Zora Butorova compared Slovak society in 1989 to "Sleeping Beauty." 56 They went so far as to say that" .. . in November 1989, an overwhelming majority of people in Slovakia accepted political change passively." This view is similar to those that refer to "socialism with a human face" in the second half of the 1960s as a purely Czech affair, 57 and those that see Charright-wing Magyar politicians into Slovakia's domestic affairs through issues regardi ng the status of the Magyar minority in Slovakia. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. In a poll conducted in January of 2004, 21 .3% of participants identified Hungary as a major threat to Slovak national security. See Boris Benkovic, "Vyskumna sprava," in Verejnti mienka a politika. Medzintirodne vzt'ahy a zahranicnti politika Slovenskej republiky, ed. Miroslav Peknik (Brati slava: Veda, 2005), 38 (see Graph 9). 55 For the necessity for mutual respect between the Slovak majority and minorities that would lead to their loyalty to the state based on civic principles see Milan Zemko, "Modemy politicky narod," in Slovenskti ottizka dnes, ed. Laszlo Szigeti (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2007), 192 . Zemko refers to Renan ' s idea of a "nation as a daily plebiscite" in a continuous building of a Slovak political nation : "L'existence d' une nation est. .. plebiscite de tous lesj ours, comme !'existence de l'individu est affirmation perpetuelle de vie." Ernest Renan, "Qu'est-ce qu ' une nation?" Conference faite en Sorbonne, le 11 mars 1882. Oeuvres completes d 'Ernest Renan (Paris: Calmann Levy, editor, 1882), 27. 56 Martin Butora and Zora Butorova, "S lovakia's Democratic Awakening," Journal of Democracy 10, no. I (1999), 80. 5 Ibid, 83. See Jon Elster, Claus Offe and Ulbricht K. Preuss, Institutional design in post-communist societies: rebuilding the ship at sea (Cambridge - New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998). The authors came to the conclusion that "The 1968 vision of socialism with a human face was entirely a Czech, not Slovak phenomenon." Ibid. , 264. �SLOVAKIA 91 ter 77 as the only agent of civic resistance against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia. Earlier observations by Karen Henderson point to preconceived approaches to Slovak history suffering from "dangerous analytical misconceptions that have to work backward."58 Theories on the institution-building processes in communist and post-communist Czechoslovakia view the institutions emerging during the transitory period as a result of bricolage - the innovative building of new institutions by politicians who function as bricoleurs. 59 A similar approach can be taken when examining the most important moments in the modern history of Slovakia and their contrasting interpretations seen in "bricks." Works by political scientists are often based on deductive reasoning (see the scheme's Bricolage I, at the end of the article). Thus, if Slovakia deviated from its course towards western democracies in the mid-1990s (originally Brick A), the explanation was obvious: it happened because of the country's past, bound by the immaturity of its society following the breakup of Czechoslovakia, which stemmed from pervasive Slovak nationalism. This led to ungratefulness towards the Czechs and revenge towards the Magyars (Brick B). Likewise, it has been argued that a high degree of compliance with the communist regime and its detrimental impact on Slovak society kept societal life frozen (Brick C). Moreover, the weak economic base of Slovakia inherited from Hungary, along with the controversial character and legacy of wartime Slovakia (Brick D), did not help to eliminate the socio-economic backwardness, political inexperience of Slovaks and thus their negative international image (Brick E) . Deductive reasoning has its merits. It is even more convincing when supported by direct experience and contact with the subject of the study, buttressed by familiarity with primary sources. Foreign scholars who did their research in Slovakia in the late 1990s and throughout the 2000s, helped to broaden a variety of perspectives on Slovak history, which Slovak historians themselves have been unaware of. It is interesting to observe that western, not Slovak scholars, argue in favor of the capacity of Slovak society to build new institu58 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition: What Creates the Image of Slovaki a?" 26. 59 John A. Scherpereel, Governing the Czech Republic and Slovakia: Between State Socialism and the European Union (Boulder - London : First Forum Press, 2009), 68 . �92 SLOVAKIA tions during the communist and post-communist era (Scherpereel, Haughton) . Foreign scholars have referred to the importance of a "critical mass of educated citizens" and political stability in Slovakia prior to, during and after the "change" in 1998 (Henderson), and stressed the presence of a "profound and sizeable Slovak opposition to the culture of Communism" (A. Innes), whilst sociologists and political scientists at home (S. Szomolanyi, 0 . Gyarfasova, Z. Butorova, J. Marusiak) have been more skeptical. From a long-term historical perspective based on inductive reasoning, the context and nuances of Slovakia's post-communist transformation appear significantly different from a micro perspective as applied by the social sciences. This perspective suggests that, to understand the evolution of Slovak society with all its accomplishments and failures, the key is to start from the beginning, not from the end or the middle, and not by theories and generalizations, but with facts, particularly in contested perspectives. Interpretations based on deductive reasoning may result, and they often did, in theories on and explanations of the reasons for the still continuing building of the Slovak political nation and democracy in the country as an "unfinished business," turning it into "the hare versus turtle" race. Such perspectives attribute nationalism in the 1990s exclusively to the Slovaks, while ignoring the fears of Slovak society stemming from its historical experience, linked to the years 1867-1918, 19181919, 1938-1939, 1945-1948 and after. Moreover, such perspectives suffer from inner contradictions. Despite the partly beneficial impact of Czechoslovakia on Slovakia, the latter was in 1993, similar to the years 1918, 1938-1939 as well as during communist Czechoslovakia, socio-economically a less developed part of the common state. 60 Likewise, the Slovak political experience in prewar Czechoslovakia has been seen as weak due to the detrimental impact of a different and underdeveloped political culture inherited by the Slovaks from Hungary, for which two decades of the existence of democratic Czechoslovakia ( 1918-193 8) was too a short period to improve. 61 Consequently, due to the traditional "historic deficits" in the evolution of Slovak society, its civic attitu60 Miroslav Londak, "K niektorym problemom ekonomickeho vyvoja na Slovensku na prahu roka 1968," Historicke studie 44 (2006), p.188. 61 Kopecek, 27-34 and 311. �SLOVAKIA 93 des linked to pluralism during Communism did not develop properly.62 This perspective does seem not to apply to Slovakia's neighbors, the Magyars and the Poles, with their limited experience with parliamentary democracy before and after WW II, which were similar to Spain and Italy in the West. Hungary and Poland apparently redeemed themselves in the eyes of the West by the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the activities of the Solidarity Movement in Poland from 1980 onward. The question, however, is how could those events of undisputed civic bravery substitute for democracy as a system of governance that needs time to develop? By contrast, the longlasting non-compliance of Slovak society with the communist regime, as demonstrated by repeated large-scale participation in religious pilgrimages and demonstrations, has either been downplayed or referred to as having had no impact on politics in communist Czechoslovakia.63 After the 1998 parliamentary elections, Slovak sociologists and leaders of the non-governmental sector helped to create and spread a positive image of Slovak society by contrasting the Meciar era with the progress made in integration with western organizations during the two Dzurinda governments. 64 They suggested that the electoral behavior of voters in rural and economically underdeveloped regions, who voted in favor of the Movement for a Democratic Slo62 Based on a survey conducted in May of 1968, in which 69.5% of the respondents in the Czech Lands as compared with 54.6% in Slovakia supported the existence of more political parties. At the same time, 53 % of Czech participants saw positively the role of civic associations in political life, while in Slovakia it was only 32%. Kopecek, 143. 63 Kopecek stresses the continuity in Czech dissent linked to the reform movement in the I 960s and the role of Charter 77, which was signed by 1800 Czechs in comparison with two dozen Slovaks as the flag bearer of civic resistance against Communism in Czechoslovakia. Kopecek, p.145. Jan Camogursky vigorously opposes the assumption that religious dissent in Slovakia had a limited impact on the regime. According to him, the massive pilgrimages to Velehrad and Levoca helped to soften the harassment of dissenters and citizens by communist authorities. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. On a similar stance taken by Abby Innes see her book Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001), 36-37. 64 Such delineation is, technically, an anachronism, as the third Meciar government did not oppose integration, particularly into the EU, though it eventually brought Slovakia into international isolation. �94 SLOVAKIA vakia (HZDS) led by Vladimir Meciar and the Slovak National Party (SNS),65 resembled support for the Hlinka Slovak People 's Party (the tudaks) during the wartime Slovak Republic. In contrast to their earlier suggestions, these observers view positively the ability of Magyar communities in Slovakia, which live in rural areas and cast their votes exclusively for the Magyar political parties in each election 66 while referring to it as a "higher form of civic participation and social engagement." 67 Inductive reasoning provides the reader with the opportunity to view Slovakia's post-communist transformation in a complex, evolutionary perspective (see the scheme's Bricolage II): It consists of the following "bricks:" Brick A - "Antecedents" (1848-1918). The traditional view is that during and after the Revolutions of 1848-1849, Slovaks were aware that Magyars were not willing to allow them to exist autonomously and, hence, they started to design their political programs, build institutions, schools, and political parties . Fearing Panslavism, Magyar radicals attempted to Magyarize the nationalities in Hungary, including the Slovaks, with some success (Magyarones). As a consequence, some Slovak, mostly Pro65 The SNS, which, next to the Christian-Democratic Movement (KDH) in the early 1990s and the HZDS in the mid-1 990s was also compared with the HSCS, has always been supportive of the legacy of the Slovak National Uprising in stark contrast to the perspective of the l'udaks and the neo-l'udaks. The same holds for the HZDS. 66 Next to the SMK, a new party to represent both Magyars and Slovaks named the Most-Hid (The Bridge; Slovak and Magyar), was established in July of 2009. Its chairman became Bela Bugar, the former chairman of the SMK, who lost to Pal Csaky in the party elections in April of 2007 . See "Ministerstvo vnutra zaregistrovalo Bugarovu stranu," Pravda, July 3, 2009. ln the 2010 parliamentary elections another new political party, Freedom and Solidarity [SaS] appeared, and supplied ministers to the Radicova government but also caused it to collapse in October of 20 11. Only recently established parties are: Obycajni l'udia - nezavisle osobnosti (Ordinary People - Independent Personalities), Strana slobodne slovo (The Free Word Party), and 99% - Obciansky hlas (99% - A Citizen's Voice). 67 See the article "Mad'ari su aktivnejsi nez Slovaci, tvrdi prieskum," Sme, March 28 2009. The article refers to a survey conducted by the Slovak Academy of Sciences and its interpretation by Zora Butorova from the Institute for Public Affairs (TVO), a non-governmental think-tank. Slovak Magyars defending their rights, while keeping their traditions and the cohesiveness of their society intact, is praised as a positive quality. The same was not applied to the Slovaks in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia when they tried to do the same. �SLOVAKIA 95 testant, intellectuals, opted for cultural, and possibly political, cooperation with the Czechs. A majority of Slovaks, mostly Catholics, still believed that a solution for Slovakia within Hungary could be found. The period from 1890 to 1914, which was traditionally seen as the "dark ages" of Slovak national emancipation, brought about even more resilience against Magyarization. In October of 1918, the Slovaks joined the Czechs in a common state. They rejectted the offer by the Karolyi government for autonomy within Hungary. From November of 1918 onward, a series of military clashes occurred between Magyar and Czechoslovak troops. In June of 1919 the Hungarian Red Army invaded and occupied eastern and southern Slovakia for a short time. Difference (traditional views+-+the article): Slovaks were socially and politically active, not passive in Hungary, even during the time of the harshest Magyarization in 1890-1914, which coincided with the process of the formation of the Slovaks as a political nation. During and after WW I, Slovak leaders abroad and at home decided to join the Czechs in the new state of Czechoslovakia on the assumption they would receive autonomy as promised by the Pittsburgh Agreement of 1918. At the same time, the Slovak population demonstrated its strong dissatisfaction with the Magyar government and supported secession from Hungary by protests in which social and national aspects blended. Brick B - "Betrayals" (1918-1948). In prewar Czechoslovakia, the Slovaks were divided between the autonomists and the "Czechoslovaks." In this clash the CatholicProtestant controversy played an important role. Though the autonomists were seen in the Czech Lands as the destroyers of Czechoslovakia, they did not want to secede because they were afraid of territorial revisionism by the Poles and the Magyars. After Munich, Slovak political parties congregated in Zilina and expressed their support for Slovak autonomy within the rump second Czecho-Slovak Republic. The government of the nominally independent wartime Slovak Republic discriminated against and failed to protect its Jewish and Roma citizens from deportation to death camps. In the administrative and economic spheres, however, the Slovaks demonstrated their capacity to form a state and administer it themselves. Based on this experience, Slovak Communists, who had helped to �96 SLOVAKIA organize the Slovak National Uprising in 1944, expected Slovakia to receive autonomous status within the reconstituted Czechoslovakia. This was rejected by Czech presidents Edvard Benes, Klement Gottwald and Antonin Novotny. Difference: Slovaks were stereotyped in the Czech Lands as traitors since the 1920s. The fact that they did not want to secede from Czechoslovakia and remained in the second Czecho-Slovak Republic for half a year has been frequently overlooked. The socio-economic progress made by the wartime Slovak Republic, in contrast with the disinterest in Slovak affairs by previous centralist Czechoslovak governments, was significant. In May of 1946, the Communists were defeated in parliamentary elections in Slovakia, but not in the Czech Lands. By November of 1947, the Communists gained political control over Slovakia. The three Prague Agreements were viewed by the Slovaks as a betrayal, just as the Czechs viewed the aftermath of the Munich Agreement. Brick C - "Communism" (1948-1989). The idea of Slovak autonomy and economic equalization with the Czechs was adopted by Slovak Communists. The demand for reforming Communism in Slovakia grew with the accession to power in 1963 of the Slovak Alexander Dubcek. The return to national history and the drive for economic reform resulted in the idea of the federalization of Czechoslovakia. This was interpreted by the Czech side as a continuation of Slovak nationalism, because the debate in the Czech Lands was oriented towards political pluralism and economic reform. In 1969 came the removal of Dubcek, who was caught between the need for reform at home and the mistrust in him by political leaders of other communist countries. He was replaced by Gustav Husak, another Slovak, who embodied 'normalization.' Whereas Czechs intellectuals voiced their dissatisfaction with the Husak regime, Slovaks, allegedly, were compliant with it. Difference: Slovaks were no less active than the Czechs in initiating the reform movement in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s; in fact, they had helped to start it. Economic reform as a continuation of equalization stood in the forefront of the efforts of Slovak communist political leaders as well as economists. Federalization was important in regard to both political and economic competencies, whilst it was viewed by Czech society as another from of archetypal natio- �SLOVAKIA 97 nal reassertion of the Slovaks resembling the 19th century. Slovak society lived in a paradoxical situation: next to the material benefits received during 'normalization,' the traditionally religious Slovaks reacted to ideological indoctrination by massive participation in religious pilgrimages. In addition to the religious dissenters, who were active already in the 1970s, environmentalists began to play an important role in the early 1980s in making also the secular part of Slovak society aware of the risks stemming from insensitive industrialization. In 1989, Slovak society as a whole, and on its own initiative, rejected the communist regime by massive demonstrations against it. Brick D - "Division" (1993-1997). The "Velvet Revolution," similar to the "Prague Spring," indicated, how the fall of Communism in Czechoslovakia was perceived internationally. From the beginning, there was mistrust between the newly-emerging Slovak and Czech political elites. Each had its own symbol: they were Alexander Dubcek in Slovakia and Vaclav Havel in the Czech Lands . Since the former accepted the rather symbolic post of Speaker of the Federal Assembly in Prague, new political leaders emerged instantly in Slovakia, first and foremost Vladimir Meciar. In contrast to its federal partner, Slovakia had two more tasks: 1) to gain international recognition and 2) to deal with the status of the Magyar minority. Fighting on three fronts (the third were federal competences) simultaneously, Slovak politicians were divided. Eventually, it was the HZDS, led by Meciar, which prevailed. Contrary to its portrayal as anti-federalist and nationalist, the HZDS and its leader still aspired for a looser federation with the Czechs. This was unacceptable to the "technocrats," represented by Vaclav Klaus and Czech nationalists such as Miroslav Macek (both Civic Democratic Party; ODS) and Jan Kalvoda (Civic Democratic alliance; ODA). As a result, Slovak and Czech political leaders opted for the dissolution of Czechoslovakia as of December 31, 1992. Difference: In contrast to the traditional perspectives that interpret renewed Slovak efforts for building an "authentic federation" in the early 1990s at the expense of the Czechs, it is suggested that Slovaks wanted more powers in order to avoid the continuation of debates of constitutional discrepancies and socio-economic disparities that had started in the 1930s, continued in 1960s, and resurfaced at �98 SLOVAKIA the end of the communist regime in the late 1980s. Since the Czechs had controlled Czechoslovakia for decades, regardless of its constitutional form , they interpreted their own nationalism as "civicness," in contrast to the allegedly old-fashioned ethnic Slovak nationalism. Brick E - "Europe" ("The Awakening" and the "Change," 19982004). Since Slovaks were seen as passive in communist Czechoslovakia and their religious dissent was allegedly insignificant in terms of challenging the communist regime, new institutions and political parties had to emerge in the early 1990s. During the period 19901992, Slovaks allegedly once again focused on federal and national competencies, instead of building democracy and a market economy, which were Czech priorities. According to some sociologists, Slovakia missed the chance to experience its own Velvet Revolution. After the creation of independent Slovakia, the state had to re-build its structures and to strive for international recognition. It inherited a sensitive problem with the Magyar minority, which resulted in tensions regarding the use of the official and Magyar languages on territories with a mixed population. In the spring of 1994, pro-democratic and pro-western forces ousted Vladimir Meciar from office, yet the six following months was too a short a time for catching up with the rest of reforming post-communist countries, particularly Poland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Hungary. In the parliamentary elections in the fall of 1994, Vladimir Meciar returned to power. Allied with the nationalists and the radical left, he imposed a harsh rule over the National Council, the opposition and the media. As a result of the mysterious abduction of the son of President Michal Kovac, who dared to defy the government and Meciar himself, Slovakia began to lag behind in the European integration processes. In the 1998 parliamentary elections, the opposition political parties supported, though indirectly, by non-governmental organizations and awakened Slovak society, defeated the government that torpedoed its own formally proclaimed integrationist goals. The two subsequent governments, led by Mikulas Dzurinda, succeeded in transforming the country's negative international image and attracting foreign investments. Being politically stable, the country became a member of both NATO and the EU in 2004. �SLOVAKIA 99 Difference: When attempts to reach an agreement with the Czechs on an authentic federation failed, Slovaks received, somehow unexpectedly, their own state in a way resembling March of 1939. The accusations against Meciar as an authoritarian leader collided with divergent views on how national property should be privatized. After Meciar' s return to power in the fall of 1994, Slovakia continued in its efforts to join the European Union and NATO. It failed to become a member of the OECD due to the government's unwillingness to privatize strategic branches of the Slovak economy. Despite diplomatic and political warnings regarding the infamous causes of Michal Kovac, the denial of his parliamentary seat to Frantisek Gaulieder and the assassination of Robert Remias, who had information regarding the Kovac kidnapping, negotiations with the EU and NA TO continued. The "change" in 1998 brought about an influx of former representatives of the non-governmental sector into the various ministries, while many of those who remained loyal to their original mission of being the watchdogs over a young democracy were disillusioned. The fragmentation of old political parties and the emergence of new ones in the late l 990s and the early 2000s were complemented by scandals stemming from corruption. In contrast with the third Meciar government, where there were two camps clearly separated one from another, the situation in the first and second Dzurinda governments resembled wars of all against all. The only factor that kept the coalition together was fear of Meciar. Slovak society, which was tired of the endless chain of political conflicts and scandals, with what was left of its enthusiasm and energy, helped to complete the country's integration into the EU. As a part of the community of European nations, Slovaks have not only the right, but also the duty to expect that their ability to comply with the criteria for membership should be equaled by the ability of the Union to provide fair and indiscriminate treatment, free from paternalistic approaches. This will help the Slovaks to grow and appear as a modem and self-confident nation, visible and judged according to their efforts and accomplishments. Speculations on Slovakia's cultural and civilizational proximity with either the East or the West, which bothered so many domestic and foreign politicians and intellectuals in the mid-1990s, are secondary. Of primary importance is the ability of Slovak society to maintain and strengthen its internal integration and to continue to proceed in its mental trans- �100 SLOVAKIA formation . This requires the capacity and willingness of Slovak society to reproduce itself on the basis of its historical traditions, while embracing democratic values, as well as a pluralist and consensual system of governance and politics. At the same time, the membership of Slovakia and other Central Eastern European post-communist states in the European Union provides it with an opportunity to learn from the collapse of the former Communist Bloc by evolving into a community of truly equal members. Slovakia's Postcommunist Transformation from an Historical Perspective Scheme Seeming +- As ---+ Being t Method : Deductive Begins in the present Method: Inductive Begins in the past t t Perspective: Political Science Perspective: History and PSCI t t Objective: Explaining the present by interpreting the Objective: Understanding the present by interpreting the past by reconstructing the past t Depth of historical background: Medium t Retrograde horizon: Medium t Depth of historical background: High t Retrograde horizon : Distant yet connectable With the present t t Connectivity present---+past: Retrospective Connectivity past---+present: Chronological �SLOVAKIA t t Causality: Fragmented Bricolage I 101 Causality: Complex Divergence Brick A: Result Delayed Slovak postCommunist transfor- - low mation and integration with EU and NA TO Bricolage II Brick "Europe" Slovakia's integration delayed but completed on institutional level, continues on societal level t i Brick B: Sub-condition Breakup of Czechoslovakia Reason: prevalence of - high archetypical Slovak nationalism over the solution of practical problems Brick "Division" Split with the Czechs over disparities and competences, not national identity t i Brick C: Prerequisite 1 High degree of Slovak compliance with - high communist regime. Societal life completely Hibernated Brick "Communism" Slovaks partly compliant with communist regime; Refuse interference in religious matters, form environmental movement t i Brick D : Prerequisite 2 Brick "Betrayals" Week economic base -medium- Wartime Slovak Republic Inherited from Hungary; created out of necessity, Legacy of wartime Slovak economically viable. SloRepublic as a totalitarian vak autonomy rejected in State postwar Czechoslovakia t Brick E: Historical residua Slovaks politically passive; Their extinction as a nation Imminent, if not saved By Czechs -medium/high- i Brick"Antecedents" Slovaks resilient and socially active in A-H; opt for Czechoslovakia instead of Hungary � 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 2013, Vol. 41 Description An account of the resource Vol. 41 (No. 76-77), 2013. 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 2013 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 73 SEEMING AND BEING: CONTEXTUALIZING THE HISTORY OF POST - COMMUNIST SLOVAKIA Juraj Hocman The year 1989 marked the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia and the beginning of Slovakia's road to independence. For the Slovaks this year also revealed the gap between their perception of national history and how it was viewed from the outside. In the 1990s, a new generation of western scholars contrasted the post-communist change of Czechoslovakia' s two nations. In their studies of modem Slovak society they rarely went beyond 1918. They relied very much on general accounts and traditional dichotomies between the Czechs and Slovaks, such as 'industrial' versus 'rural,' 'secular' versus 'religious,' ' progressive' versus 'backward.' 1 This was why in the 1990s the Slovaks continued to be seen as a "non-historic" nation hastily modernized during the communist era. Since it was mostly invisible in Austria-Hungary and Czechoslovakia, Slovak history automatically appeared as ruptured and fragmented. Following the downfall of the communist regime and the creation of the independent Slovak Republic in January of 1993, the country's image was primarily associated with radical nationalism, intolerance towards its minorities and an unstable domestic political scene. All of these seemed to have been sufficient to explain Slovakia' s failure to achieve a functioning democracy in the mid-1990s. In the early 2000s, a secondwave of scholarly interest in Slovakia began. Attracted by the country' s economic progress and an overall social and political stability, western scholars turned their attention to what had seemed in the 1990s as a satisfactory explanation for the peculiarities of Slovakia's evolution as a post-communist state. Some of them came to the conclusion that the existing stereotypes stemmed from preconceived methodological approaches, even unfamiliarity with the facts .2 The1 Abby Innes, Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001 ), ix-xi. 2 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition : What Creates the Image of Slovakia?" In Slovakia after Communism and Meciarism, ed. Kieran Williams (London: School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies, 2000), 26. 74 SLOVAKIA refore, a better understanding of what was happening in the country since its creation requires a broader historical approach. 1. Seeming and Being in the History of East and West. The self-challenging motto of the Andrassy family of Hungarian nobles, Non videri, sed esse (Not Seeming but Being), which inspired medieval and early modern societies, stands in direct opposition to modem approaches to social reality that tend to place image over substance.3 In this regard small nations are at greater risk of being overlooked, even misjudged by bigger nations. 4 While it is hardly imaginable that the views of a Slovak or a Czech scholar on the history of Great Britain, the United States or Canada would have the same resonance and impact on the international image of those countries, western scholars have scrutinized the history of Czechoslovakia and its two nations with significant consequences.5 This could happen since the capacity of Slovak historians to conduct independent research and publish the results during the communist era was subject to ideological indoctrination and political constraints. Moreover, Slovak historians, in contrast to their Czech colleagues, until recently did not work systematically on a conceptualization of Slovak history and the minimalization of its invisibility. Such a course would have helped to "sell" their cause abroad - the legitimacy and viability of the existence of Slovakia as a sovereign state - long after its creation. In the 1990s this gap was filled by foreign scholars and the media in a way that simplified and, in some cases, distorted the mostly unknown Slovak history waiting for its reinterpretation at home and rediscovery abroad. The Slovaks were depicted, in terms of their 3 Eva Smelkova and Julius Barczi, "Andrassyovci a Rozi\ava," Forum Historiae 2/2008, p.5. Accessed at www.forumhistoriae.sk/FH 2/smelkova. df 4 See the interview with the Norwegian publicist and writer Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom" on the parallels between the historical evolution of the Slovaks and the small Scandinavian nations in the 19th century. Literarny tyidennik, August 12, 1994, pp. I and 11. 5 Even large states are vulnerable to intrusions into their national histories that contradict domestic interpretations. See the internet article "Russia Will Never Let Anyone Falsify [the] History of [the] Second World War" which refers to the image of the soldiers of the Red Army in WW II as looters and rapists . Russia has created a special committee to counteract the "attempts at distorting history to the detriment of Russi a's interest. " Pravda (Moscow). Accessed at www.pravda.ru, May 20, 2009 . SLOVAKIA 75 missing statehood, as a non-historic nation, which, after the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993, cured its historical complexes and democratic deficiencies at the expense of their advanced neighbors with whom they shared a common history - the Czechs and the Magyars. 6 To that, some Slovak scholars and politicians reacted with fervor instead of providing a systemic and efficient alternative.7 Consequently, they created solitary and isolated interprettations of Slovak history that clashed with stereotypes and automatically brought about the risk of being viewed either as hard-core nationalists or revisionists.8 In the early 2000s, western scholars such as Karen Henderson, Abby Innes, Cas Mudde and others expressed their doubts concerning cliches linked to Slovak history. The progress in the rediscovery of Slovak history in the West since the beginning of the 2000s cannot be overlooked as the new generation of scholars did their fieldwork in the Slovak Republic and critically examined the earlier interpretations of Slovak history emerging in the 1990s. 9 Although the trend of foreign and Slovak historians coming closer in their interpretations is growing, a lot of work remains to be done by both sides.10 6 George Schopflin, Nations, Identity, Power (New York: New York University Press, 2000), 280-297 ("The Slovak case study"). 7 Looking for internationally-known personalities with Slovak origins at any cost to improve the image of Slovakia could result in quite opposite effects. See Greg Steinmetz's article, "Slovaks desperately searching for famous countrymen," The Globe and Mail, April 27, 1996. Similarly, the publishing of another variant of the multi-volume "History of Slovakia" in the Slovak language with short resumes in German, English, French and Russian, and picture books with descriptive texts designed for common readers are hardly ways to provide a conceptual and critical synthesis of Slovak history known and accepted internationally. 8 Franti~ek Vnuk, Milan Durica and other historians grouped around the Matica slovens/ca. 9 Next to Karen Henderson and Abby Innes, the best examples are the recent works by Tim Haughton and John A. Scherpereel cited in this article. The British scholar George Schopflin sees a great challenge for historians of East Central Europe to become familiar with the Anglo-Saxon, German, French, Russian, and Italian scholarly literature. For consequences regarding Slovak history see George Schopflin, "Vytvaranie eur6pskej kulturnej identity? Stredna Europa v rozfaenej Eur6pskej unii," Listy SFPA, March-April 2003 , pp.2-3. 10 " .. . it is hardly surprising that any effort to straighten the Slovak spine is seen as nationalism, the equivalent of n[N]azism, fascism and the oppression of minorities. It may be hard to believe but the greatest enemies of Slovakia are Slovaks themselves. On several occasions, I have had an opportunity to witness the way in which Slovak historians have given lectures on Slovakia to foreign audiences. Nearly all of 76 SLOVAKIA Furthermore, in the modem era the role of the media in building popular perceptions on the basis of simplified interpretations of historical developments has been increasing. A reasonable objection can be made as to why a scholarly study should be bothered by what the media say. In short, the media can popularize history more effectively than scholars who create their interpretations only after years of studying a particular problem. Thus, in creating a public image, it is the media which paints the larger picture, not scholars. 11 Paraphrasing Clausewitz, the media may be seen as the continuation of historiography and social science by other means. 12 This was evident in the case of Slovakia's image as hyper-nationalist in the early 1990s and during the country's quasi-miraculous instant awakening in 1998. Views by the media helped to reduce this phase in modem Slovak history to the Manichean conflict between 'evil' and 'good' politicians, and, implicitly, between the 'progressive' and 'backward' electorates and segments of Slovak society. 13 them have had one thing in common: they present the Slovaks as a nation without a history, without culture and traditions - and surprise - as the oppressor of minorities. Nor do they neglect to mention Slovakia's facist and Nazi past. Their spiritual kin in the West have gone so far in their blind, ignorant hatred as to blame the Slovaks for the hanging of Communists and Jews in Kosice in January of 1945. According to one German commentator, the massacres in Kosice were ' one of the last abominations of the fascist Slovak state and ally of Adolf Hitler. ' The fact that Kosice belonged to Hungary at that time and that this sad, vile act was committed by the Hungarian fascists "Wild Rose Crosses," is apparently of interest to no one, the least to our own historians." Darina Vergesova, "Dajte Duricovi pokoj," Kritika & Kon text, nos. 2-3 ( 1997), pp.59-60. 11 "A separate chapter in our [Slovak] media is that of the methodical loss of national memory," Pavo! Dinka, S/ovenske media: Met6dy manipulacie (Bratislava: PPA, 2008), 21. Due to its image inherited from the 1990s, Slovakia was depicted in three films - "Hostel" (2004), "Eurotrip" (2004) and "Hostel 2" (2007) - as a nest of danf:erous and perverted criminals and mafia. For details see www.imdb.com 2 On the shift of the media in the time of globalization from being the Fourth Power (provider of information) to the Fifth Power (manipulator of information) see the article by Ignacio Ramonet, "Le cinquieme pouvoir," Le Monde Diplomatique, Apri l-Mai (2005), pp.74-78 "Dans la nouvelle guerre ideologique qu 'impose la mondialisation, !es medias sont utilisees comme une arme de combat. L' information, en raison de son explosion, de sa multiplication, de sa surabondance, de ses partis pris, se trouve litteralement contaminee, empoisonnee par toute sorte des mensonges, pollue par !es rumeurs, !es distorsions, !es manipulations." Ibid., p.77. 13 Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), p.308. A survey conducted in Slovakia in the mid- l 990s focused on the degree of tolerance towards minorities, disrespect for the law by politi- SLOVAKIA 77 Next to the risk of perspectives based on simplified portrayals of reality stands the problem of divergent approaches towards the same phenomena in the history of the East and West. The classic saying goes "if disease is beautiful, it is generally someone else's disease." 14 Apart from its complimentary aspect, Chesterton's aphorism can be applied to nationalism and its negative characteristics associated primarily with the East. In the 1990s, the resurrected nationalism of East Central Europe gained a negative image linked to the ethnocentric nationalism of the 19th century. This resulted in the categorization of post-communist states into progressive ones and those which lagged behind. It is true that the downfall of Communism and the subsequent disintegration of the Communist Bloc resulted in an explosion of ethnic tensions. When examining the roots of nationalism and its capacity for political and social mobilezation, it should become clear that the same primordial instincts attributed to the East had existed among western literati in the 19th century. In multiethnic Britain the same elements of linguistic and ethnic tensions shaped by romantic nationalism can be found in historical novels designed with the same purpose as those by writers in East Central Europe. 15 The similarities between the nation-building processes in W estem and East Central Europe can particularly be observed in the creation of multi-ethnic Great Britain as a political nation during the period 1707-1837, where the impact of external threats helped her to overcome the historical centripetal tendencies based on ethnic diversity. 16 What worked in Great Britain did not work in Austria- cians, positive opinions on the communist regime before its fall and engagement in civic association activities. 14 Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Orthodoxy (London: The Bodley Head, 1949), p.12. 15 On the Norman-Saxon ethno-linguistic division and societal hierarchy in medieval England see Sir Walter Scott's historical novel Ivanhoe (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998). 16 Linda Colley, Britons: Forg ing the Nation 1707-/837 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992). For the major argument of the book see the introduction, pp.1-9. See also the comparison of the Magyars with the English "who have violently Anglicized ten millions of Irishmen and Scottsmen" made by a Magyar Deputy in the Hungarian Diet in 1879 in justification of the forced Magyarization . R.W. Seton-Watson, Racial Problems in Hungary (London: Archibald Constable, 1908; reprinted in New York by Howard Fertig, 1972), 217 . There is a significant difference. Whereas Great Britain made, at least formally, its Compromise in 1707, the radical part of Magyar political elites failed to do it until it was too late. 78 SLOVAKIA Hungary from 1848 to 1918 and in Czechoslovakia, where centripetal tendencies eventually prevailed. Recalling the indication by Cas Mudde of double standards in explaining ' bad' and 'good' nationalism in Slovakia during the period 1989-1992, 17 nationalism, in general, appeared as progressive when it had helped to create nation-states in the West from the 16th to the 19th centuries, whereas it became perverted in state-building processes in post-communist Eastern Europe in the 1990s. 18 Though the concerns of multi-ethnic states about the possible consequences of various forms of nationalism, past and future, to which modem historiography and political science have legitimately pointed, are understandable, the common roots of nationalism should not be forgotten. This will help us to avoid the traps of nationalism's general recrimination in post-communist East Central Europe, including Slovakia, regardless of the context within which it emerged and had been shaped. 19 In addition to the perception of the Slovaks as intolerant nationalists, the image of the country has been that of a non-historic nation due to the viewing of unexplored parts of Slovak history as myths. Robert Pynsent suggests that a myth can appear either as a "normal neutral narrative of concem," 20 or it can be a "bridge too far" in re17 Cas Mudde, "Civil society in post-communist Europe: Lessons from the ' dark side,"' In Uncivil society? Contentious politics in post-communist Europe, eds. Petr Kopecky and Cas Mudde (London and New York: Routledge, 2003), 161. 18 For the opposite view see Egil Lejon who sees the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993 as a result of Slovak historical traditions and an emancipation movement which accelerated in 1848 and later. Interview with Egil Lejon "Slovensko prikladom," Literarny tyzdennik, August 12, 1994, p.11. Lejon suggests that the Slovaks are not nationalistic enough in terms of what modem nationalism requires: cultural self-confidence, national pride, and loyalty. 19 See Kedourie on the selective use of the antonyms 'progressive ' - ' regressive ' in regard to nationalism in the Marxist interpretation of history ('progressive' during the advent of capitalism replacing fe udalism, ' progressive' in the fight of colonial and post-colonial nations against imperialism, and ' regressive' within capitalism resisting socialism). Elie Kedourie, Nationalism (London: Hutchinson & Co Ltd., 1966), 90-91. Applying Mudde 's observation, the 'bad ' case of nationalism in the early 1990s was the split of Czechoslovakia, whereas the 'good' cases were the dismemberments of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. In contrast to the two latter, Slovak nationalism did not involve violence. 20 Robert Pynsent, Questions of Identity: Czech and Slovak Ideas of Nationality and Personality (Budapest-London-New York: Central European University Press, 1994), 87. SLOVAKIA 79 gard to its practical implications in nation and state-building processes in Slovak history as implicated by G. Eyal, S.J. Cohen and T. Haughton. 2 1 While applying the first flexible definition, it may be postulated that myths are constantly emerging. An effective way to understand the essence of a myth in terms of its value as a possible source of historical facts is to compare both of its forms. The official mythology of the European Union is that it was born out of a sudden inspiration that had fallen upon Jean Monnet - a Romulus to the European Community - during his trip to the Alps. The idea was apparently instrumental in reconciling France and Germany during the meeting of Robert Schumann and Konrad Adenauer in May of 1950, which gave birth to the European Coal and Steel Community. 22 Others see this process in an all-European myth-deconstructing perspective as the outcome of the decisive involvement of the United States, tired of the French-German reluctance to reach an agreement. 23 Concurrently, some scholars have viewed the creation of the European Union in the early 1990s as the culmination of the tireless work of lobbyists, who had effectively executed the wishes of great corporations to create a common market which was about to grant the architects of the EU even greater eco- 21 See Gil Eyal, The Origins of Post-Communist Elites: from the Prague Spring to the Breakup of Czechoslovakia (Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 131 , and Tim Haughton, Constraints and Opportunities of Leadership in Post-Communist Europe (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 4-5. This is also the leitmotif of Shari J. Cohen's book Politics Without A Past: The Absence Of History In Postcommunist Nationalism (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1999). 22 "Chaque annee, si je le peux, je vais faire de grandes courses dans les Alpes .. .J'y retrouve l'expression de l'inquietude qui opressait l'Europe cinq ans apres la guerre: une autre guerre est proche devant nous si nous ne faisons rien. L' Allemagne n' en sera pas la cause, mais elle en sera l'enjeu. II faut qu'elle cesse d'etre un enjeu, qu 'elle devienne au contraire un lien. Seule la France peut actuellement prendre une initiative." Jean Monnet, Memoires (Paris: Fayard, 1997), 342. 23 John Gillingham, Coal, Steel and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge University Press, 1991 ). Particularly explicative is the role of the U.S. High Commissioner for Germany John McCloy in bringing the French and Germans together to the signing of the Treaty of Paris (April 18, 1951 ), which instituted the European Coal and Steel Community. Gillingham stressed the fact that McCloy "summoned" the German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer to his office for a "dressing down" for his unwillingness to sign the document. Ibid, 280. 80 SLOVAKIA nomic profits. 24 A different group of authors opposed such ignoble motives with their hagiographic vision of the institutional emergence of the European Community and the later European Union as the outcome of exceptional negotiating and diplomatic skills of supranational executives who were serving the citizens of Europe.25 It is clear that each perspective has its merits and this adds to the perplexing complexity of the issue and resulting interpretations. This variety of opinions points to the core of the problem linked to the non-historicity of Slovaks and their questionable ability to cope with more recent problems in the transformation of their society. The skeptically insinuated ' mythical' legacy of 9th century Great Moravia and the invisible link from it to modem Slovak politics, apart from its distance from the present, which partially legitimizes its appearance as a myth, disregards the simple fact that to the Slovaks it was a lighthouse, not a matrix blindly to follow in the creation of a sovereign modem Slovakia. There is no difference in this regard between small and big nations who honor their historical traditions that often blend with myths. Most importantly, it is not Great Moravia itself, but the connection between it and the 19th and 20th centuries that matters in the discourse on the historicity of Slovaks. This link was hardly reflected, let alone examined, by western scholars in the 1990s in contrast to their predecessors - the historians R.W. Seton-Watson, Robert A. Kann, Oscar Halecki, and C.A. Macartney.26 After the extinction of the Arpad dynasty (1301 ), which had represented the ethnic Magyars, the foreign rulers of the Kingdom of 24 Belen Balanya, Ann Doherty, Olivier Hoedeman, Adam Ma' anit and Erik Wesselius, Europe Inc.: Regional and Global Restructuring and the Rise of Corporate Power (London-Sterling, Virginia: Pluto Press, 2000). The authors stress their perception of the creation of the European Union as the result of a plan made by the European Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT) composed of 45 captains of the largest European transnational corporations. See Preface of the book, xi-xv. 25 Ken Endo, The Presidency of the Europ ean Commission under Jacques De/ors. The Politics of Shared Leadership (London : Macmillan, 1999). Helen Drake, Jacques De/ors. Perspectives on a European Leader (London-New York: Routledge, 2000). 26 For an attempt to see Slovak history in historical continuity by a foreign scholar see the chapter by the Austrian historian Arnold Suppan, "Die Slowakei zwischen Grossmahrischen Reich und Europaischer Union: Kontinuitaten und Diskontinui taten," in Plus Ultra. Die Welt Der Neuzeit. Festschrift far Alfred Kohler zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. F. Edelmayer, M. Fuchs, G. Heilingsetler, P. Rauscher (Munster: Aschendorf, 2008), 331-68. SLOVAKIA 81 Hungary - the Anjous, the Luxembourgs, the Jagiellons, the Hahsburgs - were wisely and clairvoyantly tolerant towards the ethnic groups of Hungary as the state otherwise would have not survived for the next seven centuries.27 Once the glory of the Kingdom of Hungary and the privileges of a political nation were attributed to one nationality (the Magyars) in the 18th and 19th centuries, there was no choice for others, who felt degraded to second-class citizens, than to nourish and strengthen their own identities - linguistic, cultural, social, and political. Paradoxically, a tendency to be suspicious of the interpretations of Slovak history as an indivisible part of the history of the Kingdom of Hungary still prevails. Until a shift in this perception happens, Slovaks may be further viewed as a non-historic entity despite empirical and heuristic evidence that testifies to their genuine participation in the societal and institutional life of the kingdom they shared with others in times when language and ethnicity meant less than social status and class affiliation. 28 The myth versus 'myth' ambiguity in the interpretations of the history of East and West testifies to the existence of a wide range of applicable perspectives and alternative interpretations. A better awareness of this ambiguity, which exists in both East and West, may help us to also understand the reasons for the ruptures in Slovak history, fractured into its being and seeming. The most visible anoma- 27 Disregarding the multi-ethnic aspects and dynastic ruptures in the medieval and modern history of Hungary would be the same as excluding the early Plantagenets from the history of England due to their appearance as non-Anglo-Saxon, FrancoNorman, elements. The history of England would have to begin anew with the Tudors . The rupture progressive versus regressive (see Kedourie) in the history of the United States is observable in the interpretations of the reasons for the Civil War and its aftermath. A similar rupture (totalitarian+-+democratic) exists in the history of Germany before it became a democratic state. 28 "The Slovaks on their side lost their national existence [after the defeat of Great Moravia] in that of their Asiatic conquerors, entered into their ranks as soldiers, and participated thence-forward in all their fortunes .. .Their language however is the only remnant of their national existence which the Slovaks have preserved; in every other respect they belong to the Hungarian nation, of which they form an ingredient part, as the Magyars form another; and on the glory of whose valiant deeds they have an equal claim." Therese Albertine Louise von Jacob Robinson, Historical View of the Language and Literature of the Slavic Nation (New York: BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2006) (Reprint of the original version published by George P. Putnam in New York in 1851), 186-7. 82 SLOVAKIA lies of this split consequently appeared either as 'betrayals' or 'awakenings.' 2. Seeming and Being in Slovak History as a Part of the History of Czechoslovakia and Hungary. In 1991 Slovak historian Anton Hmko pointed out that the book by Slovak politician Ivan Derer on the rulings of the National Court in the First Czechoslovak Republic,29 written from the perspective of an ardent unitarist and "Czechoslovak," was conveniently accepted by Marxist historiography. The reason was obvious as the adversary was the same - the Slovak autonomist movement and the legacy of the wartime Slovak Republic (1939-1945). Having provided statistical data on the topics of the studies published by Slovak historians, Hrnko argued that the history of interwar Czechoslovakia ( 19181938) belonged to one of its most ideologically distorted segments. 30 This vacuum was filled by the works of court historians who helped to create myths as the politically and ideologically "subjective projection of desirable horizons." 31 If a 'myth' could emerge relatively recently with plenty of primary documents, one can ask the question - are there more of them? To respond to it at least in part, it is necessary to return to the early 1990s, when ideological constraints were removed from scholarship and academia and the attention of scholars and media turned towards nationalism. Miroslav Hroch's classification of nationalities in East Central Europe on their advancement in the national reawakening, which was published in the year when Czechoslovakia broke up, put the Slovaks a step behind the Czechs and the Magyars, without providing details, except for a very general reference. 32 This article suggests that, until the revolution of 1848, Slovaks did not lag behind 29 Ivan Derer, Slovensky vyvin a l'udacka zrada (Praha: Kvasnicka a Hamp!, I 946). Anton Hmko, "Zatemnene dejiny: Obraz medzivojnovej slovenskej spolocnosti v fracach slovenskych historikov," Literarny tyidennik, June 28, 1991 , p.10. 1 Marianna Oravcova, "The Ethnic and Cultural Dimension of National Emancipation: The Evocation of the Slovak Nation," in Language, Values and the Slovak Nation, eds. Tibor Pichler and Jana Gasparikova (Washington: Paideia Press, 1994), 11 . In the last sentence Oravcova refers to the article by Pavo! Horvath, "K niektorym otazkam historickych tradicii na Slovensku," Slovensky narodopis 1-2 (1986), 60-65 . 32 Miloslav Hroch, "From National Movement to the Fully-Formed Nation: The Nation-Building Process in Europe," New Left Review, 1/198 (March-April 1993), 64. 30 SLOVAKIA 83 the Czechs in terms of the press, programs, the creation of a literary language and the petition movements. Hroch was more accurate when pointing to the forced Magyarization that started after 1867 as a major hindrance to Slovak national progress, including its social and economic aspects. Yet even that historical period has to be reexamined as it had not been a time of complete silence, although it would be convenient to see it in that way. Communist historiography in the 1950s gladly embraced the earlier idea that Slovaks had been saved by the Czechs from extinction as a nation, a concept which slipped into western scholarship. This hypothesis was based on censuses which showed the decreasing number of Slovak intelligentsia and schools as the 19th century progressed. These scholars concluded that the Slovaks would have been assimilated by the Magyars in one or two generations. 33 There had previously been two generations of Slovaks living under Magyarization from 1875 to 1914, yet the Slovak press, though under censorship and constant pressure, was full of political articles and calls for national, social and cultural progress. 34 Magyar elites knew very well that Slovak identity did not depend solely on schooling in their native language, but also on the family environment. Therefore, they forcibly took Slovak children from poor families and transported them to regions where Magyar was spoken. 35 The unrest in Turiec and Zvolen County in Central Slovakia that led to attacks on local Magyar authorities was a mixture of social and national elements. They testified to the continuing, even increasing Slovak resilience against Magyarization as observed by R. W. Seton-Watson. 36 Final33 For an argument against the traditional view that the Slovaks could not create their intelligentsia because of harsh Magyarization see Dusan Kovac, Roman Holec, Elena Jakesova, Elena Mannova, Milan Podrimavsky, Na zaciatku storocia, 19011914 (Bratislava: Veda, 2004), 44. 34 Milan Krajcovic, "Slovaci v emancipacnom pohybe nemad'arskych narodov," in Slovensko na zaciatku storocia: Spolocnost'. stat a narod v suradniciach doby, eds. Milan Podrimavsky and Dusan Kovac (Bratislava: Hu SA V, 1999), 48-65 . 35 "By the Law of 1891 , the State has deliberately assumed the attitude of the Sultans in earlier centuries. Just as the Christian rayah was regarded as a breedingmachine to supply janissaries, so to-day non-Magyars of Hungary are breedingmachines whose children must be taught Magyar from the earliest age in the hope that they may become renegades to the traditions of their ancestors." R.W. SetonWatson, Racial Problems in Hungary , 222. 36 Ibid., 394. Seton-Watson stressed that 92 .5% of the Liptov county inhabitants were Slovaks and 90.6% understood no Magyar. Ibid. , 332. 84 SLOVAKIA ly, in 1918, it was the masses of peasants and lower strata of Slovak society that had preserved, as lsmo Nurmi suggested, a high degree of self-consciousness. 37 They were instrumental in embracing the idea of their future coexistence with the Czechs under the provisions of the Pittsburgh Agreement, but under no circumstances with the Magyars. Without this support the few intellectuals at home and abroad could hardly have reached their political goals in October and November of 1918 when the Czechoslovak Republic was born. It is equally true that significant numbers of Slovak Magyarones gave up their ethnicity for the sake of their careers while following the example of the Slovak nobility and gentry which were "easily and gladly" Magyarized in the 19th century. 38 Still, it is hard to believe that three million Slovaks at home and abroad, with the most resistant of them in North America, would have been completely Magyarzsed even if Hungary had been preserved in its prewar boundaries . A possible analogy with the Irish resistance, underscored by the role played in national emancipation by leaders such as Milan R. Stefanik and Stefan Osusky, who left Hungary and vehemently fought for the Slovak cause abroad, comes to mind. Their work, done at the highest political and diplomatic levels, was supplemented by dozens of zealous Slovak national activists in the United States. 39 37 Ismo Nurmi, Slovakia - A Playground for Nationalism and National Identity, 1918-1920: Manifestations of the National identity of Slovaks (Helsinki : Suomen Historiallinen Seura, 1999), 45. 38 C.A . Macartney, Hungary and Her Successors. The Treaty of Trianon and its Consequences 1919-1937 (London : Oxford University Press, 1937), 91. 39 The Slovak press in North America - 30 newspapers with a circulation of 150,000 in 1914 - was such a force that the Hungarian government as early as in 1890 had banned the imports of some of them and began subsidi zing pro-Hungarian publications in the United States. M. Mark Stolarik, "The Slovak-American Press," in Sally M. Miller ed. , The Ethnic Press in the United States: A Historical Analysis and Handbook (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1987), 365. Count Albert Apponyi, one of the main protagonists of Magyarization and a representative of the Hungarian government on his visit to the United States attempted to present Hungary as a ftee and democratic country. He was denounced as a tyrant and pressed by a huge mob comprising members of "Slavic nationalities and Hungarian socialists" during his lectures. In Chicago, Apponyi escaped the fury of the mob and fled to his car only with the protection provided by the police. See The New York Times, February 25, 1911 , p. 3. For the Slovak resistence against the territorial aspirations of fascist Hungary see the boastful statement by Gustav Husak on February 28, 1945: "I openly declare that Slovakia' s frontiers [with Hungary] as they had existed in the [prewar] Czechoslovak Republic are stable. Slovakia is united and non-divisible. Any SLOVAKIA 85 After World War II, Konstantin Culen, a Slovak publicist in exile, suggested that living with the Czechs was for the Slovaks a rather negative experience. 4°Culen's arguments were based on the constant rejection of Slovak autonomy in Czechoslovakia by President Edvard Benes, who had never shown any particular affection for the Slovaks, and the post-war execution of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, President of the wartime Slovak Republic. With the situation of the Slovaks in southern Slovakia ceded to Hungary by the Vienna Award of November 1938 in mind, it is legitimate to assume that cohabitation with the Czechs, though far from being idyllic, included fewer risks for the completion of Slovak national emancipation than their hypothetical existence in Hungary after WW I. Furthermore, the Czechs in 1918 were already significantly ahead of the Slovaks as far as societal cohesion and socio-economic progress of their societies were concerned. The animosity started with the Czech disrespect toward the Catholic Church and with their disregard for the continuing socio-economic underdevelopment of Slovakia. The problem became acute in the 1930s, when the Slovak intelligentsia, which had remarkably increased by that time, as well as ordinary citizens, could not find work in Slovakia because the best jobs were filled by the Czechs. In contrast to the situation that had existed in the 1920s, Slovaks were ready to become executives, administrators, teachers, lawyers and doctors. This happened in 1939 and after. Unfortunately, after WW II Czech political leaders, both civic and communist, were not willing to admit that the Slovaks had grown up and were able to govern themselves.41 The Czech historical experience was strongly influenced by the Protestant Reformation, secularism and greater industrial advancement due to their proximity to and cohabitation with the Germans. With the creation of Czechoslovakia after WW I, the Czechs proved themselves worthy followers of their predecessors and for a moment irredentism by Magyar fascists will end in vain. Our nation, which has been able to resist the military power of Germany, will find enough strength to firmly defend its borders." See the document "Z referatu Gustava Husaka na konferencii Komunistickej strany Slovenska," February 28, 1945. Dokumenty slovenskej narodnej identi2; a statnosti II (Bratislava: Narodne literarne centrum, 1998), 400. Konstantin Culen, Po Sviitoplukovi druha nasa hlava: Politicky i ivotopis Dr. Jozefa Tisu (Cleveland: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1947). 41 Carol Skalnik Leff, National Conflict in Czechoslovakia: the Making and Remaking of a State, 1918-1987 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 89. 86 SLOVAKIA also a barrier erected by the victorious Allies against German domination over Central and Eastern Europe. After the incorporation of Slovakia into Czechoslovakia, the national self-confidence of the Czechs was on the rise. After WW II, the Czechs led by the Communist Party, and with the mighty Soviet Union backing them, returned to the concept of a unitary Czechoslovakia. To them, the push for reforms in the 1960's, which was interpreted as the "Prague" rather than the "Czecho-Slovak Spring," was also a return to their national history. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the armies of the Warsaw Pact in August of 1968, led by the Soviet Union, their former liberator, and the only Slavic Superpower, was especially traumatic for the Czechs. This trauma, imposed from outside, was complemented by a domestic one: the effects of 'normalization' and federalization, both seen as a part of the chain of Slovak "betrayals." The Slovaks rebelled from 1920 onward. First, they asked for autonomy, then they allegedly "conspired" with the Magyars and the Poles against the prewar Republic, and eventually got a taste of the forbidden fruit of political emancipation in the form of their nominally independent state.42 Meanwhile, in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1945), the Czechs were ruled over and persecuted by the Germans. 43 With this perception of national history in Czech minds, the disappearance of the communist regime in 1989, which was allegedly harsher in the Czech Lands than in Slovakia, and which treated the Slovaks in the same way as did the First Czechoslovak Republic, was a golden opportunity to rebuild the state to Czech expectations. After recognizing that Slovaks were not willing to accept what they considered to be the continuation of the imbalance in the distribution of competences in a joint state in 1990-1992, the Czechs opted for the territorially-reduced variant of Czechoslovakia while inheriting its trademark. Since then, they have fared very well. 44 It 42 Leff, National Conflict, 26 and 164. For a Slovak perspective on the history of the Slovak-Czech and Czecho-Slovak relations since 1918 as the "history of broken pacts and unfulfilled promises," see Anton Hmko, "Politicke zapasy na Slovensku v lete a na jesen 1990," Historicky zbornik 10, no. I (2000), 77. 43 Though the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia had its own administration, it was an indivisible part of the Third Reich, which saw itself as a historic successor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. 44 See the article "Slovakia's Economy ls Doing Well, Too" by Peter Burian, The New York Times, June I, 1996. The author, charge d 'ajfaires of the Embassy of the SLOVAKIA 87 may seem that this chapter of their history was closed and sealed. The aftermath of the "Velvet Divorce" and the relationship between the two former federal nations was not always rosy. Throughout the 1990s, it was not difficult to contrast the progress made by the Czech Republic with Slovakia's problems. In the early 2000s, with the Meciar era gone and economic advancement that surprised many, the previous negative image of Slovaks as nationalists turned to the delay in democratic transformation of their society. 45 In recent books on Czech history since the early medieval era the Slovaks are hardly mentioned. With Slovakia's progress in the integration processes, substitutes for Slovak nationalism appeared instantly.46 Despite mutual sympathies as documented by surveys of public opinion and praise by Slovak and Czech politicians of their good relations, from 1993 onward free of economic quarrels,47 the clash of bitter memories continued. They have ranged from topics such as investment opportunities by renowned international compa- Slovak Republic in Washington, responded to a similar article in the NYT on the Czech Republic doing well "with luck and without Slovakia," while providing data on GDP (7.4% growth), unemployment (7.4%), doubled foreign currency reserves, a £ositive trade balance and low foreign debt per capita ($800.00). 5 According to Professor Filip Palda from E Ecole nationale d 'administration publique in Montreal, "Separation in 1992 allowed the Czechs to halt the payola on which Slovaks had come to depend. Since separation in 1992, the Slovaks have gone the way of Argentina, whereas the Czechs are now preparing to enter the European Union." See "Argentina north" by Filip Palda. The Ottawa Citizen, January 21 , 2002. Anton Hykisch, former Slovak ambassador to Canada, opined that, for Hungary and the Czech Republic, Slovakia's economic success in the early 2000s was a big surprise which was hard for them to accept. Author interview with Anton Hykisch, Bratislava, June 5, 2007. 46 For a contrasting view on the political systems and parliamentarism in the Czech and Slovak Republics as advanced and less developed see Petr Kopecky, Parliaments in the Czech and Slovak Republics: Party competition and parliamentary institutionalization (London : Ashgate, 2001). The Czech political scientist Lubomir Kopecek opines that in comparison with the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary, the evolution of the Slovak political system is unfinished and the system itself is unstable. As a result, Slovakia is a "semi-consolidated democracy." Lubomir Kopecek, Demokracie, diktatury a politicke stranictvi stranictvi na Slovensku (Brno: CDK, 2006), 307 and 3 10. 47 See the article "Klaus: Vzt'ahy Slovenska a Ceska m6zu byt' pri.kladom pre celu Eur6pu," Pravda, June 29, 2009. It became a tradition that the first official visits of the newly-elected presidents and prime ministers of the Czech and Slovak Republics have been with their closest neighbor. 88 SLOVAKIA nies, 48 to the often derogatory comments on domestic politics and rivalry in sports, with frequent references to the "sins" in national histories of the two nations .49 Until the revolutionary years 1848-1849, Slovaks and Magyars had cohabitated peacefully. Four decades of forced Magyarization after 1867 were hard for the Slovaks, yet there was still some moral and socio-political capital left for the improvement of mutual relationships. If this failed in 1918, Slovaks could hardly have been blamed for it as their political weight and influence in Hungary was marginal. In the fall of 193 8, after two decades of the existence of Czechoslovakia, Slovakia was stripped of its southern territories by the Vienna Award.50 Almost seven years of living in Hungary (19381945) returned the Slovaks in the south to a life which resembled what had existed before 1918. After the Second World War and until 1989, the relationship between the Slovaks and Magyars might have appeared as normal, but it was not. Once the Soviet Union was gone and the fate of Czechoslovakia disputed, the old animosities resurfaced . For all Slovak governments since 1989, the status of the Magyar minority became a litmus test in measuring the state of democracy in Slovakia by western governments and scholars. During the Meciar years, Magyars in Slovakia voiced their dissatisfaction with 48 According to a poll by the Czech Private Equity and Venture Capital Association based in Prague, four out of five of its economists and financial analysts said that foreign investment would flow to the Czech rather than to the Slovak Republic. See "Investori uprednostnia Cesko pred Slovenskom," Sme, May 29, 2009. Slovak readers rejected the idea as wishful thinking on the Czech side and suggested that a poll conducted by a Slovak-based company would have shown the opposite. 49 They frequently appear on the Czech web sites www.seznam.cz., www.idnes.cz and their Slovak counterparts www.sme.sk and www.pravda.sk. On April 1 of2009 when the Slovak national football team defeated its opponent in Prague in the qualifier for the Word Cup in South Africa (2010), debates among the fans of both teams turned to their common past with references to the "betrayal" in 1938-1939 and to the Slovak inferiority complex vis-a-vis the Czechs. Slovaks pointed to Czech compliance with German rule in the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia and affirmed that they did not measure themselves against the Czechs - a fixed idea on the Czech side. 50 Julius Mesaros, "Some Deformations in the Interpretation of Censuses in Recent Slovak-Magyar Controversies," In Slovak & Magyars, ed. Pavol Stevcek (Bratislava: Ministerstvo kultury, 1995), 63-84. The census of 1910 showed the presence of 885,397 Magyars on the territory which became part of Slovakia in 1918 (30.3% of the population). Mesaros argues that even "this number was not the result of natural development, or Slovak-Magyar and Magyar-Slovak bilingualism, but a result of the purposeful Magyarization and oppression of Slovaks." Ibid. , 78 . SLOVAKIA 89 the approaches of Slovak governments in administrative, linguistic, financial and cultural matters. Claims made by their leaders for more tolerance and understanding by the Slovaks have been in stark contrast with the ambiguous language of the representatives of the Magyar minority regarding their possible autonomy. 5 1 While the Slovaks and the Czechs after 1992 were able to reach the highest level of mutual respect and understanding, Slovaks and Magyars remained mentally anchored in the period between 1918 and 1945. The trauma of Trianon in 1920 and their expulsion from South Slovakia in 1945-194 7 is deeply engraved in the minds of Magyars, as is the forced Magyarization and the effects of the Vienna Arbitration in the minds of the Slovaks. Each side continues to interpret the causes and outcomes of those events according to its own perception and sentiments. A partial solution to the problem - history textbooks written by Slovak and Magyar historians together - is to this date still "in progress" and it is hard to predict when and if they will ever be finished and distributed to schools in both countries. 52 History is firmly tied into daily politics in East Central Europe. Its revival outside of scholarly conferences and seminars and its use as a model for the present or future by politicians may lead to the release of a genie from his bottle. 53 This refers particularly to Slovakia as being possibly identified as the weakest link within an informal Little Entente. 54 If both nations do not want to waste what has 51 The representatives of the Magyar political parties in Slovakia (before 1998), with the exception of Miklos Duray and Pal Csaky from the SMK. (the Party of the Magyar Coalition), were careful about publicly speaking of autonomy for Magyars in Slovakia, though the idea of their political and administrative autonomy has frequently appeared - sotto voce - as their ultimate goal. Most recently, Duray admitted that territorial autonomy is unrealistic, but the chance for a vaguely defined "personal'' autonomy for the Magyar minority in Slovakia still exists. See the article "Ouray o vel'kom Mad'arsku nesniva, auton6mia je vsak podl'a neho realna," Pravda, August 4, 2009. 52 Vilaro Kratochvil, "K moznostiam oslabovania predsudkov a stereotypov v tvorbe ucebnic dejepisu," in Myty a predsudky v dejincich. Historickci konferencia 7. decembra 2004, ed. Attila Simon (Samorin-Dunajska Streda: Forum Institut pre vyskum mensin, 2005). 53 See the interview with Slovak historian Ivan Kamenec. "Kamenec: Politici su najhorsi ziaci hist6rie," Sme, May 9, 2009. Kamenec refers to the diverging interpretations of the period 1944-1948. 54 Serbia, Slovakia, Romania, in which Magyar minorities live. Jan Camogursky said that the highest challenge to Slovakia's foreign policy after accession into NATO and the EU remains the country's ability to face continuing interference by 90 SLOVAKIA remained positive from the legacy of their peaceful cohabitation, and if they wish to get rid of the shadows of the past, they have to reach a mutually respectful Slovak - Magyar and Magyar - Slovak Compromise. Not by political gestures, but by the inner force of their societies. Neither of the two nations, closely bound together for centuries, can separately pass this test of national and civic maturity.55 3. The Myth of a Sudden Awakening of Slovak Society in the 1998 Parliamentary Elections. The major problem in Slovak history from an outsider's perspective - its invisibility linked to a fragmented appearance as a part of the history of Hungary and Czechoslovakia - influenced also its recent domestic interpretations. In reference to the Slovak national anthem, sociologists Martin Butora and Zora Butorova compared Slovak society in 1989 to "Sleeping Beauty." 56 They went so far as to say that" .. . in November 1989, an overwhelming majority of people in Slovakia accepted political change passively." This view is similar to those that refer to "socialism with a human face" in the second half of the 1960s as a purely Czech affair, 57 and those that see Charright-wing Magyar politicians into Slovakia's domestic affairs through issues regardi ng the status of the Magyar minority in Slovakia. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. In a poll conducted in January of 2004, 21 .3% of participants identified Hungary as a major threat to Slovak national security. See Boris Benkovic, "Vyskumna sprava," in Verejnti mienka a politika. Medzintirodne vzt'ahy a zahranicnti politika Slovenskej republiky, ed. Miroslav Peknik (Brati slava: Veda, 2005), 38 (see Graph 9). 55 For the necessity for mutual respect between the Slovak majority and minorities that would lead to their loyalty to the state based on civic principles see Milan Zemko, "Modemy politicky narod," in Slovenskti ottizka dnes, ed. Laszlo Szigeti (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2007), 192 . Zemko refers to Renan ' s idea of a "nation as a daily plebiscite" in a continuous building of a Slovak political nation : "L'existence d' une nation est. .. plebiscite de tous lesj ours, comme !'existence de l'individu est affirmation perpetuelle de vie." Ernest Renan, "Qu'est-ce qu ' une nation?" Conference faite en Sorbonne, le 11 mars 1882. Oeuvres completes d 'Ernest Renan (Paris: Calmann Levy, editor, 1882), 27. 56 Martin Butora and Zora Butorova, "S lovakia's Democratic Awakening," Journal of Democracy 10, no. I (1999), 80. 5 Ibid, 83. See Jon Elster, Claus Offe and Ulbricht K. Preuss, Institutional design in post-communist societies: rebuilding the ship at sea (Cambridge - New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998). The authors came to the conclusion that "The 1968 vision of socialism with a human face was entirely a Czech, not Slovak phenomenon." Ibid. , 264. SLOVAKIA 91 ter 77 as the only agent of civic resistance against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia. Earlier observations by Karen Henderson point to preconceived approaches to Slovak history suffering from "dangerous analytical misconceptions that have to work backward."58 Theories on the institution-building processes in communist and post-communist Czechoslovakia view the institutions emerging during the transitory period as a result of bricolage - the innovative building of new institutions by politicians who function as bricoleurs. 59 A similar approach can be taken when examining the most important moments in the modern history of Slovakia and their contrasting interpretations seen in "bricks." Works by political scientists are often based on deductive reasoning (see the scheme's Bricolage I, at the end of the article). Thus, if Slovakia deviated from its course towards western democracies in the mid-1990s (originally Brick A), the explanation was obvious: it happened because of the country's past, bound by the immaturity of its society following the breakup of Czechoslovakia, which stemmed from pervasive Slovak nationalism. This led to ungratefulness towards the Czechs and revenge towards the Magyars (Brick B). Likewise, it has been argued that a high degree of compliance with the communist regime and its detrimental impact on Slovak society kept societal life frozen (Brick C). Moreover, the weak economic base of Slovakia inherited from Hungary, along with the controversial character and legacy of wartime Slovakia (Brick D), did not help to eliminate the socio-economic backwardness, political inexperience of Slovaks and thus their negative international image (Brick E) . Deductive reasoning has its merits. It is even more convincing when supported by direct experience and contact with the subject of the study, buttressed by familiarity with primary sources. Foreign scholars who did their research in Slovakia in the late 1990s and throughout the 2000s, helped to broaden a variety of perspectives on Slovak history, which Slovak historians themselves have been unaware of. It is interesting to observe that western, not Slovak scholars, argue in favor of the capacity of Slovak society to build new institu58 Karen Henderson, "Evaluating the Slovak Transition: What Creates the Image of Slovaki a?" 26. 59 John A. Scherpereel, Governing the Czech Republic and Slovakia: Between State Socialism and the European Union (Boulder - London : First Forum Press, 2009), 68 . 92 SLOVAKIA tions during the communist and post-communist era (Scherpereel, Haughton) . Foreign scholars have referred to the importance of a "critical mass of educated citizens" and political stability in Slovakia prior to, during and after the "change" in 1998 (Henderson), and stressed the presence of a "profound and sizeable Slovak opposition to the culture of Communism" (A. Innes), whilst sociologists and political scientists at home (S. Szomolanyi, 0 . Gyarfasova, Z. Butorova, J. Marusiak) have been more skeptical. From a long-term historical perspective based on inductive reasoning, the context and nuances of Slovakia's post-communist transformation appear significantly different from a micro perspective as applied by the social sciences. This perspective suggests that, to understand the evolution of Slovak society with all its accomplishments and failures, the key is to start from the beginning, not from the end or the middle, and not by theories and generalizations, but with facts, particularly in contested perspectives. Interpretations based on deductive reasoning may result, and they often did, in theories on and explanations of the reasons for the still continuing building of the Slovak political nation and democracy in the country as an "unfinished business," turning it into "the hare versus turtle" race. Such perspectives attribute nationalism in the 1990s exclusively to the Slovaks, while ignoring the fears of Slovak society stemming from its historical experience, linked to the years 1867-1918, 19181919, 1938-1939, 1945-1948 and after. Moreover, such perspectives suffer from inner contradictions. Despite the partly beneficial impact of Czechoslovakia on Slovakia, the latter was in 1993, similar to the years 1918, 1938-1939 as well as during communist Czechoslovakia, socio-economically a less developed part of the common state. 60 Likewise, the Slovak political experience in prewar Czechoslovakia has been seen as weak due to the detrimental impact of a different and underdeveloped political culture inherited by the Slovaks from Hungary, for which two decades of the existence of democratic Czechoslovakia ( 1918-193 8) was too a short period to improve. 61 Consequently, due to the traditional "historic deficits" in the evolution of Slovak society, its civic attitu60 Miroslav Londak, "K niektorym problemom ekonomickeho vyvoja na Slovensku na prahu roka 1968," Historicke studie 44 (2006), p.188. 61 Kopecek, 27-34 and 311. SLOVAKIA 93 des linked to pluralism during Communism did not develop properly.62 This perspective does seem not to apply to Slovakia's neighbors, the Magyars and the Poles, with their limited experience with parliamentary democracy before and after WW II, which were similar to Spain and Italy in the West. Hungary and Poland apparently redeemed themselves in the eyes of the West by the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the activities of the Solidarity Movement in Poland from 1980 onward. The question, however, is how could those events of undisputed civic bravery substitute for democracy as a system of governance that needs time to develop? By contrast, the longlasting non-compliance of Slovak society with the communist regime, as demonstrated by repeated large-scale participation in religious pilgrimages and demonstrations, has either been downplayed or referred to as having had no impact on politics in communist Czechoslovakia.63 After the 1998 parliamentary elections, Slovak sociologists and leaders of the non-governmental sector helped to create and spread a positive image of Slovak society by contrasting the Meciar era with the progress made in integration with western organizations during the two Dzurinda governments. 64 They suggested that the electoral behavior of voters in rural and economically underdeveloped regions, who voted in favor of the Movement for a Democratic Slo62 Based on a survey conducted in May of 1968, in which 69.5% of the respondents in the Czech Lands as compared with 54.6% in Slovakia supported the existence of more political parties. At the same time, 53 % of Czech participants saw positively the role of civic associations in political life, while in Slovakia it was only 32%. Kopecek, 143. 63 Kopecek stresses the continuity in Czech dissent linked to the reform movement in the I 960s and the role of Charter 77, which was signed by 1800 Czechs in comparison with two dozen Slovaks as the flag bearer of civic resistance against Communism in Czechoslovakia. Kopecek, p.145. Jan Camogursky vigorously opposes the assumption that religious dissent in Slovakia had a limited impact on the regime. According to him, the massive pilgrimages to Velehrad and Levoca helped to soften the harassment of dissenters and citizens by communist authorities. Author interview with Jan Camogursky, Bratislava, May 24, 2007. On a similar stance taken by Abby Innes see her book Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001), 36-37. 64 Such delineation is, technically, an anachronism, as the third Meciar government did not oppose integration, particularly into the EU, though it eventually brought Slovakia into international isolation. 94 SLOVAKIA vakia (HZDS) led by Vladimir Meciar and the Slovak National Party (SNS),65 resembled support for the Hlinka Slovak People 's Party (the tudaks) during the wartime Slovak Republic. In contrast to their earlier suggestions, these observers view positively the ability of Magyar communities in Slovakia, which live in rural areas and cast their votes exclusively for the Magyar political parties in each election 66 while referring to it as a "higher form of civic participation and social engagement." 67 Inductive reasoning provides the reader with the opportunity to view Slovakia's post-communist transformation in a complex, evolutionary perspective (see the scheme's Bricolage II): It consists of the following "bricks:" Brick A - "Antecedents" (1848-1918). The traditional view is that during and after the Revolutions of 1848-1849, Slovaks were aware that Magyars were not willing to allow them to exist autonomously and, hence, they started to design their political programs, build institutions, schools, and political parties . Fearing Panslavism, Magyar radicals attempted to Magyarize the nationalities in Hungary, including the Slovaks, with some success (Magyarones). As a consequence, some Slovak, mostly Pro65 The SNS, which, next to the Christian-Democratic Movement (KDH) in the early 1990s and the HZDS in the mid-1 990s was also compared with the HSCS, has always been supportive of the legacy of the Slovak National Uprising in stark contrast to the perspective of the l'udaks and the neo-l'udaks. The same holds for the HZDS. 66 Next to the SMK, a new party to represent both Magyars and Slovaks named the Most-Hid (The Bridge; Slovak and Magyar), was established in July of 2009. Its chairman became Bela Bugar, the former chairman of the SMK, who lost to Pal Csaky in the party elections in April of 2007 . See "Ministerstvo vnutra zaregistrovalo Bugarovu stranu," Pravda, July 3, 2009. ln the 2010 parliamentary elections another new political party, Freedom and Solidarity [SaS] appeared, and supplied ministers to the Radicova government but also caused it to collapse in October of 20 11. Only recently established parties are: Obycajni l'udia - nezavisle osobnosti (Ordinary People - Independent Personalities), Strana slobodne slovo (The Free Word Party), and 99% - Obciansky hlas (99% - A Citizen's Voice). 67 See the article "Mad'ari su aktivnejsi nez Slovaci, tvrdi prieskum," Sme, March 28 2009. The article refers to a survey conducted by the Slovak Academy of Sciences and its interpretation by Zora Butorova from the Institute for Public Affairs (TVO), a non-governmental think-tank. Slovak Magyars defending their rights, while keeping their traditions and the cohesiveness of their society intact, is praised as a positive quality. The same was not applied to the Slovaks in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia when they tried to do the same. SLOVAKIA 95 testant, intellectuals, opted for cultural, and possibly political, cooperation with the Czechs. A majority of Slovaks, mostly Catholics, still believed that a solution for Slovakia within Hungary could be found. The period from 1890 to 1914, which was traditionally seen as the "dark ages" of Slovak national emancipation, brought about even more resilience against Magyarization. In October of 1918, the Slovaks joined the Czechs in a common state. They rejectted the offer by the Karolyi government for autonomy within Hungary. From November of 1918 onward, a series of military clashes occurred between Magyar and Czechoslovak troops. In June of 1919 the Hungarian Red Army invaded and occupied eastern and southern Slovakia for a short time. Difference (traditional views+-+the article): Slovaks were socially and politically active, not passive in Hungary, even during the time of the harshest Magyarization in 1890-1914, which coincided with the process of the formation of the Slovaks as a political nation. During and after WW I, Slovak leaders abroad and at home decided to join the Czechs in the new state of Czechoslovakia on the assumption they would receive autonomy as promised by the Pittsburgh Agreement of 1918. At the same time, the Slovak population demonstrated its strong dissatisfaction with the Magyar government and supported secession from Hungary by protests in which social and national aspects blended. Brick B - "Betrayals" (1918-1948). In prewar Czechoslovakia, the Slovaks were divided between the autonomists and the "Czechoslovaks." In this clash the CatholicProtestant controversy played an important role. Though the autonomists were seen in the Czech Lands as the destroyers of Czechoslovakia, they did not want to secede because they were afraid of territorial revisionism by the Poles and the Magyars. After Munich, Slovak political parties congregated in Zilina and expressed their support for Slovak autonomy within the rump second Czecho-Slovak Republic. The government of the nominally independent wartime Slovak Republic discriminated against and failed to protect its Jewish and Roma citizens from deportation to death camps. In the administrative and economic spheres, however, the Slovaks demonstrated their capacity to form a state and administer it themselves. Based on this experience, Slovak Communists, who had helped to 96 SLOVAKIA organize the Slovak National Uprising in 1944, expected Slovakia to receive autonomous status within the reconstituted Czechoslovakia. This was rejected by Czech presidents Edvard Benes, Klement Gottwald and Antonin Novotny. Difference: Slovaks were stereotyped in the Czech Lands as traitors since the 1920s. The fact that they did not want to secede from Czechoslovakia and remained in the second Czecho-Slovak Republic for half a year has been frequently overlooked. The socio-economic progress made by the wartime Slovak Republic, in contrast with the disinterest in Slovak affairs by previous centralist Czechoslovak governments, was significant. In May of 1946, the Communists were defeated in parliamentary elections in Slovakia, but not in the Czech Lands. By November of 1947, the Communists gained political control over Slovakia. The three Prague Agreements were viewed by the Slovaks as a betrayal, just as the Czechs viewed the aftermath of the Munich Agreement. Brick C - "Communism" (1948-1989). The idea of Slovak autonomy and economic equalization with the Czechs was adopted by Slovak Communists. The demand for reforming Communism in Slovakia grew with the accession to power in 1963 of the Slovak Alexander Dubcek. The return to national history and the drive for economic reform resulted in the idea of the federalization of Czechoslovakia. This was interpreted by the Czech side as a continuation of Slovak nationalism, because the debate in the Czech Lands was oriented towards political pluralism and economic reform. In 1969 came the removal of Dubcek, who was caught between the need for reform at home and the mistrust in him by political leaders of other communist countries. He was replaced by Gustav Husak, another Slovak, who embodied 'normalization.' Whereas Czechs intellectuals voiced their dissatisfaction with the Husak regime, Slovaks, allegedly, were compliant with it. Difference: Slovaks were no less active than the Czechs in initiating the reform movement in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s; in fact, they had helped to start it. Economic reform as a continuation of equalization stood in the forefront of the efforts of Slovak communist political leaders as well as economists. Federalization was important in regard to both political and economic competencies, whilst it was viewed by Czech society as another from of archetypal natio- SLOVAKIA 97 nal reassertion of the Slovaks resembling the 19th century. Slovak society lived in a paradoxical situation: next to the material benefits received during 'normalization,' the traditionally religious Slovaks reacted to ideological indoctrination by massive participation in religious pilgrimages. In addition to the religious dissenters, who were active already in the 1970s, environmentalists began to play an important role in the early 1980s in making also the secular part of Slovak society aware of the risks stemming from insensitive industrialization. In 1989, Slovak society as a whole, and on its own initiative, rejected the communist regime by massive demonstrations against it. Brick D - "Division" (1993-1997). The "Velvet Revolution," similar to the "Prague Spring," indicated, how the fall of Communism in Czechoslovakia was perceived internationally. From the beginning, there was mistrust between the newly-emerging Slovak and Czech political elites. Each had its own symbol: they were Alexander Dubcek in Slovakia and Vaclav Havel in the Czech Lands . Since the former accepted the rather symbolic post of Speaker of the Federal Assembly in Prague, new political leaders emerged instantly in Slovakia, first and foremost Vladimir Meciar. In contrast to its federal partner, Slovakia had two more tasks: 1) to gain international recognition and 2) to deal with the status of the Magyar minority. Fighting on three fronts (the third were federal competences) simultaneously, Slovak politicians were divided. Eventually, it was the HZDS, led by Meciar, which prevailed. Contrary to its portrayal as anti-federalist and nationalist, the HZDS and its leader still aspired for a looser federation with the Czechs. This was unacceptable to the "technocrats," represented by Vaclav Klaus and Czech nationalists such as Miroslav Macek (both Civic Democratic Party; ODS) and Jan Kalvoda (Civic Democratic alliance; ODA). As a result, Slovak and Czech political leaders opted for the dissolution of Czechoslovakia as of December 31, 1992. Difference: In contrast to the traditional perspectives that interpret renewed Slovak efforts for building an "authentic federation" in the early 1990s at the expense of the Czechs, it is suggested that Slovaks wanted more powers in order to avoid the continuation of debates of constitutional discrepancies and socio-economic disparities that had started in the 1930s, continued in 1960s, and resurfaced at 98 SLOVAKIA the end of the communist regime in the late 1980s. Since the Czechs had controlled Czechoslovakia for decades, regardless of its constitutional form , they interpreted their own nationalism as "civicness," in contrast to the allegedly old-fashioned ethnic Slovak nationalism. Brick E - "Europe" ("The Awakening" and the "Change," 19982004). Since Slovaks were seen as passive in communist Czechoslovakia and their religious dissent was allegedly insignificant in terms of challenging the communist regime, new institutions and political parties had to emerge in the early 1990s. During the period 19901992, Slovaks allegedly once again focused on federal and national competencies, instead of building democracy and a market economy, which were Czech priorities. According to some sociologists, Slovakia missed the chance to experience its own Velvet Revolution. After the creation of independent Slovakia, the state had to re-build its structures and to strive for international recognition. It inherited a sensitive problem with the Magyar minority, which resulted in tensions regarding the use of the official and Magyar languages on territories with a mixed population. In the spring of 1994, pro-democratic and pro-western forces ousted Vladimir Meciar from office, yet the six following months was too a short a time for catching up with the rest of reforming post-communist countries, particularly Poland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Hungary. In the parliamentary elections in the fall of 1994, Vladimir Meciar returned to power. Allied with the nationalists and the radical left, he imposed a harsh rule over the National Council, the opposition and the media. As a result of the mysterious abduction of the son of President Michal Kovac, who dared to defy the government and Meciar himself, Slovakia began to lag behind in the European integration processes. In the 1998 parliamentary elections, the opposition political parties supported, though indirectly, by non-governmental organizations and awakened Slovak society, defeated the government that torpedoed its own formally proclaimed integrationist goals. The two subsequent governments, led by Mikulas Dzurinda, succeeded in transforming the country's negative international image and attracting foreign investments. Being politically stable, the country became a member of both NATO and the EU in 2004. SLOVAKIA 99 Difference: When attempts to reach an agreement with the Czechs on an authentic federation failed, Slovaks received, somehow unexpectedly, their own state in a way resembling March of 1939. The accusations against Meciar as an authoritarian leader collided with divergent views on how national property should be privatized. After Meciar' s return to power in the fall of 1994, Slovakia continued in its efforts to join the European Union and NATO. It failed to become a member of the OECD due to the government's unwillingness to privatize strategic branches of the Slovak economy. Despite diplomatic and political warnings regarding the infamous causes of Michal Kovac, the denial of his parliamentary seat to Frantisek Gaulieder and the assassination of Robert Remias, who had information regarding the Kovac kidnapping, negotiations with the EU and NA TO continued. The "change" in 1998 brought about an influx of former representatives of the non-governmental sector into the various ministries, while many of those who remained loyal to their original mission of being the watchdogs over a young democracy were disillusioned. The fragmentation of old political parties and the emergence of new ones in the late l 990s and the early 2000s were complemented by scandals stemming from corruption. In contrast with the third Meciar government, where there were two camps clearly separated one from another, the situation in the first and second Dzurinda governments resembled wars of all against all. The only factor that kept the coalition together was fear of Meciar. Slovak society, which was tired of the endless chain of political conflicts and scandals, with what was left of its enthusiasm and energy, helped to complete the country's integration into the EU. As a part of the community of European nations, Slovaks have not only the right, but also the duty to expect that their ability to comply with the criteria for membership should be equaled by the ability of the Union to provide fair and indiscriminate treatment, free from paternalistic approaches. This will help the Slovaks to grow and appear as a modem and self-confident nation, visible and judged according to their efforts and accomplishments. Speculations on Slovakia's cultural and civilizational proximity with either the East or the West, which bothered so many domestic and foreign politicians and intellectuals in the mid-1990s, are secondary. Of primary importance is the ability of Slovak society to maintain and strengthen its internal integration and to continue to proceed in its mental trans- 100 SLOVAKIA formation . This requires the capacity and willingness of Slovak society to reproduce itself on the basis of its historical traditions, while embracing democratic values, as well as a pluralist and consensual system of governance and politics. At the same time, the membership of Slovakia and other Central Eastern European post-communist states in the European Union provides it with an opportunity to learn from the collapse of the former Communist Bloc by evolving into a community of truly equal members. Slovakia's Postcommunist Transformation from an Historical Perspective Scheme Seeming +- As ---+ Being t Method : Deductive Begins in the present Method: Inductive Begins in the past t t Perspective: Political Science Perspective: History and PSCI t t Objective: Explaining the present by interpreting the Objective: Understanding the present by interpreting the past by reconstructing the past t Depth of historical background: Medium t Retrograde horizon: Medium t Depth of historical background: High t Retrograde horizon : Distant yet connectable With the present t t Connectivity present---+past: Retrospective Connectivity past---+present: Chronological SLOVAKIA t t Causality: Fragmented Bricolage I 101 Causality: Complex Divergence Brick A: Result Delayed Slovak postCommunist transfor- - low mation and integration with EU and NA TO Bricolage II Brick "Europe" Slovakia's integration delayed but completed on institutional level, continues on societal level t i Brick B: Sub-condition Breakup of Czechoslovakia Reason: prevalence of - high archetypical Slovak nationalism over the solution of practical problems Brick "Division" Split with the Czechs over disparities and competences, not national identity t i Brick C: Prerequisite 1 High degree of Slovak compliance with - high communist regime. Societal life completely Hibernated Brick "Communism" Slovaks partly compliant with communist regime; Refuse interference in religious matters, form environmental movement t i Brick D : Prerequisite 2 Brick "Betrayals" Week economic base -medium- Wartime Slovak Republic Inherited from Hungary; created out of necessity, Legacy of wartime Slovak economically viable. SloRepublic as a totalitarian vak autonomy rejected in State postwar Czechoslovakia t Brick E: Historical residua Slovaks politically passive; Their extinction as a nation Imminent, if not saved By Czechs -medium/high- i Brick"Antecedents" Slovaks resilient and socially active in A-H; opt for Czechoslovakia instead of Hungary  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 Seeming and Being: Contextualizing the History of Post-Communist Slovakia Description An account of the resource Juraj Hocman Slovakia, Vol. 41 (No. 76-77), 2013 pp. 73-101 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hocman, Juraj Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2013 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/97cece137011a186a8e52a1bab6f0d09.pdf e33a180073fe710a002e3637130be3e9 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 1980-81 Published By THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA ����SLOVAKIA VOLUMEXXIX 1980-1981 NUMBERS 53-64 An annual devoted to the history and culture of Slovaks the world over Editor MICHAEL NOVAK American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Managing Editor M. MARK STOLARIK The Balch Institute for Ethnic Studies Editorial Board DAVID P. DANIEL Concordia Theological Seminary OWEN V. JOHNSON Indiana University THOMAS D. MARZIK Saint Joseph's University STANLEY Z. PECH University of British Columbia Slovak League Advisory Board EDWARD J . BEHUNCIK DRAGA DIVINSKA JOHN A. HOLY JOSEPH C. KRAJSA DANIEL F. TANZONE Publisher Slovak League of America c I o John A. Holy, Secretary 870 Rifle Camp Road West Paterson, N.J. 07424 Inquiries regarding subscriptions should be addressed to John Holy. Manuscripts for possible publication and books for review should be addressed to M. Mark Stolarik, 700 Penfield Ave., Havertown, Pa. 19083. ��Table of Contents A Letter from the Publisher John A . Holy . .. . _"\" . ...... ..... ............... . . . 7 HISTORY The Slovak Republic and the Slovaks Stanislav J . Kirschbaum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Rusyns and the Slovak State PaulR. Magocsi ...... . ..... . . . . . . .. . . .. ... .. . . . . . .. .. . . 39 Music Schools: A Chapter in the Cultural History of Interwar Slovakia Owen V. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 An Ethnohistory of Slovak-American Religious and Fraternal Associations: A Study in Cultural Meaning, Group Identity, and Social Institutions Howard F. Stein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 LITERATURE Exerpt from Michal: Biography of a Galician Coal Miner , 1906-1933 Vasil S. Koban .............. . . . .. . ..................... 105 Babushka Sonya Jason . . . . . . ................. . .... . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. 126 REVIEWS Peter Brock - The Slovak National Awakening (Andrej Cincura) . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . 135 Josef Kalvoda - Czechoslovakia 's Role in Soviet Strategy (Stanislav J. Kirschbaum) . . .............................. 138 �Dorothea El Mallakh - The Slovak Autonomy Movement, 1935-1939 (Yeshayahu Jelinek) . . . . . ... . .... .. ............... . .... .. 141 Anthony X. Sutherland - Dr. Jozef Tiso and Modern Slovakia (Josef Kalvoda) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 145 Yeshayahu Jelinek - The Parish Republic (Anthony X. Sutherland) ....... . . .. . . . . .... . . . . . .. . . . .... 147 Andrea Rebichini - Chiesa, societa e stato in Cecoslovachia (Teodorik J. Zubek) . . . . . . . . ....... . . .. . .... . . . .. . . . .. .. . 149 Vsevlad J. Gajdos - Frantiskani v slovenskej literature and Teodorik J. Zubek - Slovenski frantiskani v Amerike (Gerald J. Sabo) ....... . . . . . . . . .. . . .... .. . .. . . . .. . . . ... . 151 Frantisek Bielik & Elo Rakos, comps . Slovenske vyst'ahovalectvo. Dokumenty: I, II, m (JuneGranatirAlexander) . ....... . .. . . . ...... .. . . . . ... . . 153 Vasil S. Kohan - The Sorrows of Marienka (Paul Wilkes) ............ . . . .... .. . . .. ...... . . . 157 Megles, Stolarik & Tybor - Slovak Americans and Their Communities of Cleveland (Thomas D. Marzik) .......... .. ... ... . . . . . . . . ....... . .. . 160 Contributors .. .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . ....... . ........ .. . . . . . .. .. . . 163 Guidelines for Manuscripts ......... . . . ... \ . . . . . . . . .... . . ..... 165 �SLOVAKIA 7 A Letter ·From The Publisher With this issue Slovakia marks its thirtieth anniversary. The first volume was published by the Slovak League of America in 1951, with the then President of the League, Philip A. Hrobak, serving as editor. Hrobak was a staunch defender of the rights of the Slovak nation, and issues of Slovakia testified to his beliefs during the twelve years of his editorship. Shortly before his death, Hrobak asked Dr. Joseph Pauco, then Secretary of the Slovak League, to serve as editor. Pauco's strong belief in the right of the Slovak nation to its independence continued to be the philosophy of Slovakia. Under his leadership the journal expanded its scope and attracted a number of scholars who contributed timely articles which mirrored his philosophy. With the untimely death of Dr. Pauco in 1975, the Executive Committee of the Slovak League of America asked Michael Novak, noted American scholar, educator, and political analyst of Slovak ancestry, to serv~ as editor of Slovakia. With his vast scholarly resources Novak expanded the scope of the journal and named Dr. M. Mark Stolarik, historian and director of the prestigious Balch Institute of Philadelphia, as managing editor. Over the years several noted American and Canadian scholars of Slovak ancestry have served on the editorial board and, more recently, other scholars who specialize in Slavic and East European studies have been asked to serve on the editorial board. During its thirty years of existence Slovakia has served as a forum for the study of Slovak history, culture, and political science. It has provided the American public with much information in English on Slovakia, a nation that is little known in the West. For all these years Slovakia has been published by the Slovak League of America, a civic and cultural federation of Americans of Slovak ancestry. Through the generosity of an array of dedicated individuals and organizations, the League continues to espouse its basic philosophy - to bring Slovakia, with its rich history, culture, and heritage, to the American public. JOHN A. HOLY Secretary-Treasurer Slovak League of America �� SLOVAKIA 1980-81 Published By THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA ����SLOVAKIA VOLUMEXXIX 1980-1981 NUMBERS 53-64 An annual devoted to the history and culture of Slovaks the world over Editor MICHAEL NOVAK American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Managing Editor M. MARK STOLARIK The Balch Institute for Ethnic Studies Editorial Board DAVID P. DANIEL Concordia Theological Seminary OWEN V. JOHNSON Indiana University THOMAS D. MARZIK Saint Joseph's University STANLEY Z. PECH University of British Columbia Slovak League Advisory Board EDWARD J . BEHUNCIK DRAGA DIVINSKA JOHN A. HOLY JOSEPH C. KRAJSA DANIEL F. TANZONE Publisher Slovak League of America c I o John A. Holy, Secretary 870 Rifle Camp Road West Paterson, N.J. 07424 Inquiries regarding subscriptions should be addressed to John Holy. Manuscripts for possible publication and books for review should be addressed to M. Mark Stolarik, 700 Penfield Ave., Havertown, Pa. 19083. ��Table of Contents A Letter from the Publisher John A . Holy . .. . _"\" . ...... ..... ............... . . . 7 HISTORY The Slovak Republic and the Slovaks Stanislav J . Kirschbaum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Rusyns and the Slovak State PaulR. Magocsi ...... . ..... . . . . . . .. . . .. ... .. . . . . . .. .. . . 39 Music Schools: A Chapter in the Cultural History of Interwar Slovakia Owen V. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 An Ethnohistory of Slovak-American Religious and Fraternal Associations: A Study in Cultural Meaning, Group Identity, and Social Institutions Howard F. Stein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 LITERATURE Exerpt from Michal: Biography of a Galician Coal Miner , 1906-1933 Vasil S. Koban .............. . . . .. . ..................... 105 Babushka Sonya Jason . . . . . . ................. . .... . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. 126 REVIEWS Peter Brock - The Slovak National Awakening (Andrej Cincura) . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . 135 Josef Kalvoda - Czechoslovakia 's Role in Soviet Strategy (Stanislav J. Kirschbaum) . . .............................. 138 �Dorothea El Mallakh - The Slovak Autonomy Movement, 1935-1939 (Yeshayahu Jelinek) . . . . . ... . .... .. ............... . .... .. 141 Anthony X. Sutherland - Dr. Jozef Tiso and Modern Slovakia (Josef Kalvoda) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 145 Yeshayahu Jelinek - The Parish Republic (Anthony X. Sutherland) ....... . . .. . . . . .... . . . . . .. . . . .... 147 Andrea Rebichini - Chiesa, societa e stato in Cecoslovachia (Teodorik J. Zubek) . . . . . . . . ....... . . .. . .... . . . .. . . . .. .. . 149 Vsevlad J. Gajdos - Frantiskani v slovenskej literature and Teodorik J. Zubek - Slovenski frantiskani v Amerike (Gerald J. Sabo) ....... . . . . . . . . .. . . .... .. . .. . . . .. . . . ... . 151 Frantisek Bielik & Elo Rakos, comps . Slovenske vyst'ahovalectvo. Dokumenty: I, II, m (JuneGranatirAlexander) . ....... . .. . . . ...... .. . . . . ... . . 153 Vasil S. Kohan - The Sorrows of Marienka (Paul Wilkes) ............ . . . .... .. . . .. ...... . . . 157 Megles, Stolarik & Tybor - Slovak Americans and Their Communities of Cleveland (Thomas D. Marzik) .......... .. ... ... . . . . . . . . ....... . .. . 160 Contributors .. .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . ....... . ........ .. . . . . . .. .. . . 163 Guidelines for Manuscripts ......... . . . ... \ . . . . . . . . .... . . ..... 165 �SLOVAKIA 7 A Letter ·From The Publisher With this issue Slovakia marks its thirtieth anniversary. The first volume was published by the Slovak League of America in 1951, with the then President of the League, Philip A. Hrobak, serving as editor. Hrobak was a staunch defender of the rights of the Slovak nation, and issues of Slovakia testified to his beliefs during the twelve years of his editorship. Shortly before his death, Hrobak asked Dr. Joseph Pauco, then Secretary of the Slovak League, to serve as editor. Pauco's strong belief in the right of the Slovak nation to its independence continued to be the philosophy of Slovakia. Under his leadership the journal expanded its scope and attracted a number of scholars who contributed timely articles which mirrored his philosophy. With the untimely death of Dr. Pauco in 1975, the Executive Committee of the Slovak League of America asked Michael Novak, noted American scholar, educator, and political analyst of Slovak ancestry, to serv~ as editor of Slovakia. With his vast scholarly resources Novak expanded the scope of the journal and named Dr. M. Mark Stolarik, historian and director of the prestigious Balch Institute of Philadelphia, as managing editor. Over the years several noted American and Canadian scholars of Slovak ancestry have served on the editorial board and, more recently, other scholars who specialize in Slavic and East European studies have been asked to serve on the editorial board. During its thirty years of existence Slovakia has served as a forum for the study of Slovak history, culture, and political science. It has provided the American public with much information in English on Slovakia, a nation that is little known in the West. For all these years Slovakia has been published by the Slovak League of America, a civic and cultural federation of Americans of Slovak ancestry. Through the generosity of an array of dedicated individuals and organizations, the League continues to espouse its basic philosophy - to bring Slovakia, with its rich history, culture, and heritage, to the American public. JOHN A. HOLY Secretary-Treasurer Slovak League of America �� 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 1980-81, Vol. 29 Description An account of the resource Vol. 29 (No. 53-54), 1980-81. 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 1980-81 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 1980-81 Published By THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA SLOVAKIA VOLUMEXXIX 1980-1981 NUMBERS 53-64 An annual devoted to the history and culture of Slovaks the world over Editor MICHAEL NOVAK American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Managing Editor M. MARK STOLARIK The Balch Institute for Ethnic Studies Editorial Board DAVID P. DANIEL Concordia Theological Seminary OWEN V. JOHNSON Indiana University THOMAS D. MARZIK Saint Joseph's University STANLEY Z. PECH University of British Columbia Slovak League Advisory Board EDWARD J . BEHUNCIK DRAGA DIVINSKA JOHN A. HOLY JOSEPH C. KRAJSA DANIEL F. TANZONE Publisher Slovak League of America c I o John A. Holy, Secretary 870 Rifle Camp Road West Paterson, N.J. 07424 Inquiries regarding subscriptions should be addressed to John Holy. Manuscripts for possible publication and books for review should be addressed to M. Mark Stolarik, 700 Penfield Ave., Havertown, Pa. 19083. Table of Contents A Letter from the Publisher John A . Holy . .. . _"\" . ...... ..... ............... . . . 7 HISTORY The Slovak Republic and the Slovaks Stanislav J . Kirschbaum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Rusyns and the Slovak State PaulR. Magocsi ...... . ..... . . . . . . .. . . .. ... .. . . . . . .. .. . . 39 Music Schools: A Chapter in the Cultural History of Interwar Slovakia Owen V. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 An Ethnohistory of Slovak-American Religious and Fraternal Associations: A Study in Cultural Meaning, Group Identity, and Social Institutions Howard F. Stein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 LITERATURE Exerpt from Michal: Biography of a Galician Coal Miner , 1906-1933 Vasil S. Koban .............. . . . .. . ..................... 105 Babushka Sonya Jason . . . . . . ................. . .... . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. 126 REVIEWS Peter Brock - The Slovak National Awakening (Andrej Cincura) . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . 135 Josef Kalvoda - Czechoslovakia 's Role in Soviet Strategy (Stanislav J. Kirschbaum) . . .............................. 138 Dorothea El Mallakh - The Slovak Autonomy Movement, 1935-1939 (Yeshayahu Jelinek) . . . . . ... . .... .. ............... . .... .. 141 Anthony X. Sutherland - Dr. Jozef Tiso and Modern Slovakia (Josef Kalvoda) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 145 Yeshayahu Jelinek - The Parish Republic (Anthony X. Sutherland) ....... . . .. . . . . .... . . . . . .. . . . .... 147 Andrea Rebichini - Chiesa, societa e stato in Cecoslovachia (Teodorik J. Zubek) . . . . . . . . ....... . . .. . .... . . . .. . . . .. .. . 149 Vsevlad J. Gajdos - Frantiskani v slovenskej literature and Teodorik J. Zubek - Slovenski frantiskani v Amerike (Gerald J. Sabo) ....... . . . . . . . . .. . . .... .. . .. . . . .. . . . ... . 151 Frantisek Bielik & Elo Rakos, comps . Slovenske vyst'ahovalectvo. Dokumenty: I, II, m (JuneGranatirAlexander) . ....... . .. . . . ...... .. . . . . ... . . 153 Vasil S. Kohan - The Sorrows of Marienka (Paul Wilkes) ............ . . . .... .. . . .. ...... . . . 157 Megles, Stolarik & Tybor - Slovak Americans and Their Communities of Cleveland (Thomas D. Marzik) .......... .. ... ... . . . . . . . . ....... . .. . 160 Contributors .. .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . ....... . ........ .. . . . . . .. .. . . 163 Guidelines for Manuscripts ......... . . . ... \ . . . . . . . . .... . . ..... 165 SLOVAKIA 7 A Letter ·From The Publisher With this issue Slovakia marks its thirtieth anniversary. The first volume was published by the Slovak League of America in 1951, with the then President of the League, Philip A. Hrobak, serving as editor. Hrobak was a staunch defender of the rights of the Slovak nation, and issues of Slovakia testified to his beliefs during the twelve years of his editorship. Shortly before his death, Hrobak asked Dr. Joseph Pauco, then Secretary of the Slovak League, to serve as editor. Pauco's strong belief in the right of the Slovak nation to its independence continued to be the philosophy of Slovakia. Under his leadership the journal expanded its scope and attracted a number of scholars who contributed timely articles which mirrored his philosophy. With the untimely death of Dr. Pauco in 1975, the Executive Committee of the Slovak League of America asked Michael Novak, noted American scholar, educator, and political analyst of Slovak ancestry, to serv~ as editor of Slovakia. With his vast scholarly resources Novak expanded the scope of the journal and named Dr. M. Mark Stolarik, historian and director of the prestigious Balch Institute of Philadelphia, as managing editor. Over the years several noted American and Canadian scholars of Slovak ancestry have served on the editorial board and, more recently, other scholars who specialize in Slavic and East European studies have been asked to serve on the editorial board. During its thirty years of existence Slovakia has served as a forum for the study of Slovak history, culture, and political science. It has provided the American public with much information in English on Slovakia, a nation that is little known in the West. For all these years Slovakia has been published by the Slovak League of America, a civic and cultural federation of Americans of Slovak ancestry. Through the generosity of an array of dedicated individuals and organizations, the League continues to espouse its basic philosophy - to bring Slovakia, with its rich history, culture, and heritage, to the American public. JOHN A. HOLY Secretary-Treasurer Slovak League of America  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. 29 (No. 53-54) Description An account of the resource includes A Letter from the Publisher (John A. Holy) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Holý, Ján A., 1922-2020 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1980-81 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/73ed61a7432b837fbbfd88aed839943e.pdf a139e2a752f4a4675e186a5ee6b6a376 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA ~2 ----------------------------JANO.ŠIK - THE SWVAK ROBIN HOOD IVAN HOUDEK Much has been written about Juro (George) Jánošik, the les.der of the Slovak mountaln boys, w,bo has b&come the greatest Jegendary hero in Slovakia country, and undouMedly much more wtll still be written about hlm In hls natlve !and where hls name ls an insplration to both the old and the young. lt ls rather approprlate <to recall, at thls tlme, the &Xploits of bis so-called rebel against society in his day, for Jánošík ls the symbol ot a people's just indignatlon agadnst lnjustlce and oppresslon, as well as a symbol of hope of ultimate vlctory of jusit.lce and ot truth. The sources from which we were able to draw a reillable character sketch of thls remarkable man are twofold: the offlcial r&cords of his tria!, and the numerous folk songs, storles, and lege,ndary accounts of his explolt.s. The forwer are ne,cess,ar!ly dry, the latter rich and varled. Th ese sources represent people, of confllctlng vlews: the one class feared and hated the hold youth as its enemy; the other loved and immol'tallz&d hlm as a natlonal hero. lt is a dlfficult task to reconclle these wldely dlvergent points of vlew and, yet, these sources, whlch glve us two dlfferent plctures of hlm, are not re,ally contradlctory, but rather complement each other. The orlglnal Lartln,Slovak judlclal documents were kept In a ~peclall file In the coun,ty archlve,s of the Liptov Dis.trlct records, in St. Mlkulal'i, the county seait. Unfortunately, these disappeared rather mysterlously In the second half of the last century. Duplicates of these documents, howe,ver, have been preserved and thelr contents were flrst publlclzed by Gaspar Fejerpataky in tb.e Vlastenský Kalendár (1831-1832). These are a faithful copy of the authentlc record known as F assio Janossikiana, dated 1713. In 1880, Paul Dobšinský publ!shed hls vlews in the Prostonarodné Obyčaje (National Customs) In tbe Slovak Museum's publlcatlon ot <that year Muf. sl. spol.; VIIl,Podtatranský Juro J ánoiik). Paul Sochaň's Zbojnik Juro J ánoifk, published Jn 1924, 1s a good source ot inform-atlon and from lt and the other contemporary records and Jegendary accounts whlch have been handed down for gene,rablons, we are able to reconstruct most of the scenes of the Ume and re-enact the events In the Ufe of thls popular hero, so that they may be consldered to be truly hl.storlcal, not merely legendary. Both sources glve Ťarchová In Trenčfn County as hls blrthplace, where he wa,s born about 1688. But research has lndlcated tbat Jánoillk was actually born on a small farm In the bighlands In tbe vlclnlty of that hamlet, and the, spot today ls marked by a small, dllapldated hut wlth the number "676" on lt. It stands between two llnden trees In a place caaled Janošov, whlch boasts of a populatlon of 17 persona, most ot wbom bea.r the name Jánošlk. Jánošfk was s tm a chlld when the revolutlon under Rakoczy II (1703-1711) took place,, but he jolned the lnsurgents, whose motto, "Pro Llberate," was emblazoned on thelr banner. Later, he jolned the lmperlal army and was sent to Bytča Castle as a guard, where he met �SLOVAKIA 43 one of the Emperor's prisoners, an adventurous brigand and soldler of fortune, Thom-as Uhorčik. Thls fateful acqualntance proved to be the turning-point of bis life. Rakoczy's iJHaited rebellion was purt down In 1711, and the youthful Jánošlk returned horne after belng ransomed out of the army by his paren,t s. Tradltion has it that he bocame an outlaw and a highiw,ayman because his father was flogged to death by the lord of the manor when he refused to leave the deathbed of bis wlfe in order to work in the fields of hls master. This fatal flogg·i ng took place in Ťarohová, at the vlllage bridge, aocording to one account, and at the castle In Teplice in Žilina, according to another report. The judic-lal documents, however, merely record ,the fact that Uhorčlk, who had escaped from prlsón, had come to Ťarchová and had persuaded J ánošlk to join his robber b and in the forest. As a background to the future of Jänošlk, lt may be well t o r&call that social conditions in Slovakla at the tlme were, perhaps, at their worst. The Revdlution had falled, but many a peasanťs son was unw!Hlng to bow down under the yoke of a feudal system after tastlng freedom as a sold,ier of fortune. Conditions among the peasants in the klngdoon of Rungary after t,he death of the liberal monarch, "Mathias th e J ust," became steadily worse until they became unbearable. The peasants' revolt under George Doža in Tran.sylv ania and in the Dolná. valley was cruelly stamped out by lihe nobffllty, and the lot of the peasants was vlrtual ~lavery. Although t!he rlght to emigrate was restored to the peasantry, In view of the fact that the people were subject to burdensome taxatlon and many restrlctlons, their status by the end of the seventeenth century had grown worse, so that In reality the nobility had assumed the .rlght of life and death over its subjects. The Slovaks, especially, beoame the vlctims of a cunnlng and unscrupulous no)>llirty whtc'h en.;;Javed them. Frequent cla.ss struggles, wars. and plagues added to the mlsfortunes of the Slovak people. Many areas were reduced to poverty-stI'icken regfons where extreme mlsery and want prevalled. Northern Slovakia which had, perhaps, suffered the most in these trying <limes, became the horne of the discontented, the dise ouraged, and the desperate. These men organized rob'ber banda and preyed on t!he surroundlng countryside from th eir mountain hideouts. Tbomas Uborčik was a member of one of these bands as early as 1704. J ánošfk became a member in 1711, after taking tbe briganďs pledge and sealing bis oath w.! th bis blood. Hls explolts soon won hlm far-reaching fame not only In hls own country, but also in Moravla, P dland, Hungary and Silesla. After belng elected chleftiain, the youthful bandlt extended the zone of bis operatlons from tbe eastern count!es of Liptov, Spiš, Orava, Turiec Tekov, Malohont, and Šariš to Zvolen, Trenčln, and Nitra, and even crossed lnto Mora.vla, SHesla, Poland and Hungary. Hls comrades were, accord!ng to bis own ·a dmlsslon: Tihomas lJhorčlk (•Uhrlk); Paul Gašparec-Mlynarčlk from Rakov; Barte, the sbepherd from Predmier; "Red" Ondraš from D1há; Plavčlk from Dunajov; Gábor trom Valkov; Juro Turlak (Hun<:aga or Hunčlk); Kubo Chlastiak trom Otožnlc; J urlak, Sato ra, Gavel, and aeveral Poles. Not a few secret accompllces, llke J uro and Kubo štukovec In Kräsna, furnlsbed hlm wlth suppl!es and informatlon. �f4 SLOVAKIA Folk stories about this interesting outlaw are, undoubtedly, gullty of several anachroni.sms. They list the following as Ms associatss: Uhorčik, Gajdošík-Mlynárčik, Surovec, Hrajnoha, Adamčik, llčík (the chief scout), Garaj, Postavčík, Tarke, Mucha, Durica. Most of these, however, were not even Jánošik's contemporaries. F or lnstance, James Surovec, from Rovný In Trenčin, who terrorized Orava, Trenčín, and Pohroni&, wa.s not born untH 1715, two years after Jánošik's death, and he himself was executed fn 1740. Hrajnoba, the famous dancer from Nitra, lived in the middle of the 18th century and wai; broken on the wheel in !lbe Smolen Castle. In 1878 Hrajnoha's treasure was unearthed by some laborers who were buildíng a highway 1:ear Nadaš. Adamčfk was a notorious bandit in Moravia, and Ilčik lived in Trenčin. Garaj must have preceded Jánoš!k, because a brook ls mentioned by that name in the judlclal documents covering the tria! of Slovakia's most famous outlaw. Some of J ánošik's asso ciates are, perhaps, p.roducts of Lhe popular imaginatlon. A triangular area, known as the K ing's Plateau, lies on a hlgh point overlooking the countles of Liptov, the Hron area and Malohont, near Hochwald, or Hovald, at a spot known as the "Tall Plne," directly above the road runnlng from Liptov to Spiš. This region was at one time covered with a thick forest, which was the hiding place of robber gangs in every century. Q.ueen Maria T,h eresa destroyed th!s picturesque rendezvous of the hlghwaymen by havlng the forest cut down by royal proclamatlon. But in J ánošík's time, thls area was the favorite h:rnnt of brigands, and lt was there that Lord Jáu Radvanský, whlle on bis way to tbe funeral of the former revolutionary general. Petrcx:zy, was robbed by tbe Slovak Robin Hood. Lord Paul Revay, Lady Schardon, and Lord Ladlslaus Zmeškal were also held up in t hls region by Jánošík's merry band. Lord Skalka fell into their hands, as dld Sipoš trom Žilina, some hO'rse dealers from the same town, ~everal wine merchants, and many others. Some of the booty was given to the poor and needy. Henc e, the story c irculated that Jánošik robbed 1he rich to give to tbe poor. This is not quite In keeping with the facts, for h!s comrades preyed upon the lower classe.s as well as on the wealthy nobillty. The jewels 1aken from Lord Skalka were dlstrfäuted among the young ladies In Ťa-rcbová. Romantic tales, which bave little historical basis, however, h ave become a part of the Jánošik saga in Slovakia. The authentic documents do not even allude to most of t,he feats attributed to Slovakla's legendary hero. At bis trlal, Jánošik admltted that he often raided the sheepfolds of the lords of the manor, that some of tbe shepherds, elther trom ľear of friendsbip, cooperated in these robberies and tben accompanled bim to celebra.te at the "Black Ant" In Klenovce, owned by tbe lnn-keeper, Martin Mravec, or at the "Wbite Horse" in Dunajov, and sometlmes at the "Blne Star" In Krásna, or tbe "Golden Eagle" in Ťarcbová. Winter tlme fonnd the moun,taln boys seeklng employment In tbe nearby bomesteads b ecanse the snow would bave betrayed thelr footprlnts leadlng to their 'bldlng-places, deep In the plne forests of Klng's Plateau. Tbus, Jánošík served as a farmhand ln tbe wlnter of 1712-1713 at Kovatlčik's and Ondrejčik's In Kokava. In tbe .~pring they bastened to tbeir mountaln rendezvous at tbe foot of the Tall Pine. �SLOVAKIA 45 Jánošík's romantic career as Slovak!a's Robin Hood W'3.S a short one, Jastlng Jess tban two years. Although he escaped after his flrst ťapture at Klooovce in the autumn of 1712, he was caught in tbe summer of tbe next year. The commissioner at Malohont had granted him an amnesty after he had been confined in Jakoffy Ca.stle in Hrachov, but aMer tbe county po'l!ce of Liptov arrested bim he neveT regained bis rreedom. No ofriclal record glves us the exact details of bis final capture; but, accordlng to tradition, Jánošik was apprebended elther b&eause of the treachery of one of his band, namely, Gajdošík, who had given away t he secret of bis ch!eťs gigant!c strength (the mag-ic belt), or because of the treachery of J ánošik's rormer sw&etheart, w·ho ,!ost her heart to the Police Captaln Joseph Lehotský, when he came to ber father's inn, the Golden Goose, in searcb of the renowned outlaw. The scene of bis arrest, in the flr&t version, was said to have been In the Little Mountain Inn in Polhora, Zvolen County, between Brru:no and Tisovec. At any rate, t he famed outlaw was taken in chalns to Liptov, where he was lodged in Vranov Castle, bui1lt by Franei11 Palugyay. There, In a dark celi, Jánoš!k was chained to the wall to await his tria! and death. Jánošik was aHowed to plead bis case. He pleaded gullty to c·ertain charges of robbery, but denied havlng committed crlmes attributed to him. Some or the acts he was accused of were perpetrat&d whlle he was In prison. Thus, he denied having anything to do with the robbery of a priest from Orava, or the hold-up or Vitko from Sllesia, the murder of the blacksmlth's son in Dobrovce, the robblng of the Galusovecs, the looting of churches in Hungary, PO'land, Slles!a, or Moravia, where the sacrilegious robbeľl! are alleged to have nailed the sacred hosts to a tree in order to determine whether blood would flow from them when ahots were flred into the.m. He was also accused of having freed one of bis band as he was ll!bout to be hanged in Žilina. It ls notewor.thy that the county sheriff, John L itlský, and !he mayor of the town of Osčadn!ce were suspected or being overly friendly w!th Jánošik. To au the charges of which he was ra,sely accused the stoutllea!'ted robber-chieftain simply pleaded innocent. Attempts to prove that he was in collusion wi,th other notorious brlgands in Slovakla, Poland, and Hungary were unsuccessful. Wben he was accused of having sbot a priest from Domanlže, 4t was proved that two or bis associates, Tu ria k and PJavčlk, had comml tted this dastardly crime in bis absence. No crime, other .than robbery, was p.roved against JáJ!lošlk, w,bo never killed anyone. But in those days a !Jhief, as well as a murderer, might be hanged. Legendary accounts of tbe tria:! picture Jánošík as remaining silent about the ldenUty of bis comrades, but the officlal records indlcate that he gave the Court a list of ťbelr names, but refused to reveal their whereabouts. As to the burled treasure, he told bis llsteners that it was hidden in a Jarge fir <tree opposlte an oak on whioh a hand was carved lndlcatlng the exact locatlon of the flr tree, In the glade where the road winds down {rom Jablonka to Klenovce. Lord Ska\ka's jewels he had hidden In the mountalns of Handlov, althougb legends have it they were bestowed on the matdens of the village of Ťarcbová. �SLOVAKIA. Jánošik was tried by the county court of Liptov, presided over by the vice-commissioner, Ladts laus Okol!csany•I, on March 16-17, 1713, in the county courthouse of St. Mlkulaš In Liptov. The other members of the court were the magl.strates of the four dlstrict-s ot Liptov county, namely, John and AndTew Rády, Andrew Andreanský, and Matthew Joob. The oftlclal prosecutor was Alexander Cemlcký, and the attorney for the defense was Balthasar Palugyay. The d&fense p leaded guilty to the charges of robbery and asked the clemency of the Cour,t. Moreover, Jánošík promLsed to glve up bis former way of llfe .and wlshed to become once a.gain a 0aw-abldlng cLtlzen. The prosecutlon, however, demanued tihe hig,hest penalty and succeeded in exactlng a two-fold sentence from the Court, so that the "doubledeallng" prisoner mlght !lrst pay the penalty for bis lighter crlmes by belng tortured on the rack, and then by belng hanged on the gallows to forfeit hls llfe for bis graver transgress1ons. T hls was in accordance witJb the laws o! the TripaTtitum ot 1515, 1625, and 1655. The death sentence was carrled out on March 17 or 18, 1713, before a vast assembly of people, on the executlon grounds of St. Mfäulaš, on the Váh near the Paludzký bridge. There the young robber-chleftaln was hanged on the gaHows, and bis llteless body was buried beneath lt as the custom of thatl. ttme. Äccordlng ,to the popular legends, Jánošík, though welgbed down by bis heavy shackles, danced the "hajduc hy" (a llvely folk da.nce) four tlmes aTound the gal!ows, just before bis death. Another legendary story tells or a courler who came dlrectly from the Emperor with hls lmperlal pardon, ,but lt was too late, for the darlng you.th, who h-ad prom.lsed to recrult four reglment.q of soldlers for the Emperor, was aAready hanglng on the rack. H e refused the amnesty wtth the words, "Now tha,t you have roasted me, you might as well devour me." He ls said to have dled after belng suspended by hls rib on the rack for three days. All natme seemed to go lnto mouring for this yout:h, whose mel'lry songs once resounded through the glen. The babbl!ng brooks became sllent, ťhe anlmals In the forest ceased their act!vity momentarlly in silent trlbute to their departed hero. A sudden hush came over all, and bis many trlends, far and near, were overcome by sorrow at bis passing. An annual penalty was lmposed on Liptov by the Emperor for havlng sentenced Jánošík to death, and, untll ~ecent times, four measures of gold ducats were pald to the lmperillll treasury each year. That is the story In legendary accounts. The people belleved in Jánošík's nobillty of character. It ls sald that hls body was buried In a crypt of the church of St. Mikulaš, where it lles In state of comp]ete preservation awaltlng the day when a new Jánošik wlll arise and strlke down the oppressors of hls poople. Many years a1!ter thls sad event, lt was reported thatl. whlle some youngsters were p.laylng nea,r the town of Hajasov, one of the boys play,f ully l!fle'd the corner of a nearby hut and hld hls cap underneath. 'Ilhls feat or amazing strength reached -the eaTs of the nobMity, ,viho qulckly remov.ed thls new performer, whom they consldered another Jánošlk. Jánošik's execution was the slgnal for the authorities to capture all the remalnlng outla,ws stm at large in Slovakla. Emerich Kublny, The reglstrar of Liptov, was sent to Malohont wltb warra,nts to arrest �SLOVAKIA au suspec.ts. In Apr!l, Uhorčik, alias M.a.rtin Mravec, was captured at St. Mlkulaš, where he had marrled and seltled down as a tavern• keeper, lhe proprletor of llhe Gray Failcon. He was given a hasty trlal and condemned to d1e on the rack. An lmperiaI decree was issued by whlch bhe county magistrates would be held r-esponslble in the future for all banditry In thelr areas, and on April 17, 1713, the assembly at Liptov approved of the motlon to round up the outlaws. The imperlal marshal, John Palty, arrived to enforce the emperor's ln&tructlons. Authentlc documents, w'ith the record of Jánošlk's apprehenslon .and ,tria!, make b.lm out to be an ordlnary hlghwayman, simllar to hundreds of •bis klnd who roamed about the country and terrorlzed the gentry. He was consldered to be a da,ngerous chaTacter, as were the others of hla notorlous professlon. Neveiitheless, the fa,ct that hls name has become an lllustrlous one In the Jegendary songs e.nd storles of h1s people, la In sharp contrast wlth the oi'ficlal p!cture or thls colorful, albelt lawless, personallty. The questlon arlses, why ·has he, alone, maintalued bis posltlon as an !dol ot the Slovak natlon? Obviously, he must have been dltferent from all bis companions and con.temporarles, both In vice and vlrtue. Although lihe aura of glory and honor that surrounds bis memory ls no doubt the result, in some measure, of th-e people's rich lmaglnatlon, yet, bis deeds durlng bis llfe are a,n argument In favor of some · outstan.dlng quallties in hls makeup. We cannot account for h1s tremendous popularity among the people, nor can we explain why bis name Ls a symbol ot vlntue rather than vice, UDJ!ess we attrlbute vlrluous qua!itles to t his youth who so fired the lmagination of the old and the young that he has become the Jmmortal hero of bis natlve !and. ·T he areas known as th'e "Queen's Meadow, Warm Sprlngs," and many other regions In tre Pohron and Malohont dl.strlcts, aboun.d even today In folk songs, ballads, and storles of bis explolts ln be· half of the poor and lhe oppres.sed. We can safely conclude that the offlclal records suppressed muoh of the truth in regard to Jánošik's aotual personallty and deeds. Slnce he was the self-constltuted champlon of the 01>pressed everywhere, one can understand why bis name should be slmp4y put on the 11st as an ordina1-y cť.iminal by the oppressors, who used thelr power to llquldate all fäose who were dangerous rebels agalnst thelr form of soclety. But despite thelr precautlons, Jánošlk's name, for almost two and a half centurles, has been the symbol of hope and courage to bis people. Unllke other parts ot the Austrlan Emplre, which revoJ.ted trom time to tlme (Magyar, Romanian, Croatlan and Serblan outbreaks occurred lntermlttently ln 1514, 1569, 1'571, 1635, 1655, 1784, etc.), the Slovaks revolted oilliy once. Thls uprlslng happened In the Potlsle reglon when a rumor was spread througbout Eastern Slovakla that the nobility had polsoned their wells. It turned out, however, that the cause ot wldespread death w.a,s actually the chlorea epldemic of that year, 1631. Historloal facts make it evldent that the S!ovaks were a patient peoplil who would not rise In rebelllon In defense of thelr Jlfe as a natlon. Passlv& endurance and reslstance under the merclless system ot polltlcal oppression was, however, aC'companled by the actlve revolt �48 SLOVAKIA of the more hlghly spirited Slovak youths, who rebelled against the existing order of things by tak!ng the law lnto their own hands, and ,by retlring lnto -the.lr mountain strongholds from which they emerged at nigbt to rígbt tbe wrongs inflicted on tbeir people. Tbey pa.id for their daring and coul'age by their lives, sooner or later. But t heir sprit kept alive 1'he spark of freedom and the love of justice in the bearts of tbe Slovak.s. They wer e, to be sure, common felons and blackguards among tbe forest bigbwaymen, but Jánošík was not one of them. He was the true embodiment of bis age, wild and untamed but not ignoble and ruthless, not savage and unrestralned, b ut gallant, generous, honest, and ·honorable with his people. T he first at:tiempts to trace the popular series of Slovak poem s, ballads, songs, and legends were made in the early l&tb century. T~b lic published a poem entltled "J ánoší k, lyptovský loupežník" (J ánošik the Robber of Liptov) in his collection called Slovenšti ve ršovc i (Vol. II, 1809). Ján Konár discovered several poems a bout S lovak h ighwaymen and published them in bis Národné Zpievanky (National Ballads) in 1834 and 1835. Slovak news-buHetins a nd almanacs contained poems and folk stories about Jánošik. The Časopis a Sborní k Muzeál nej Slovens kej Spo ločnosti (The Periodical and Almanac of the Slovak Museum Association) also published a number of works on J ánošik, based largely on early manuscrip,ts found in the museums in Liptov and Ružomberok. The Matica Slovenská (Slovak Institute) planned to continue its splendid task of collecting these old publica,!Jions, wihich are rich in folklore. By bhe m iddle of the l as.t century, the last of the outlaws in Slovakia had disappeared, but the stories of their daring exploits contlnued to interes.t the common people because of their highly imaginatlve appea,i. J ánošik's fame is preserved for the ages in the many poems that have been a distinct contribution to his nation's literature. The following poems have immortalized bis memory: Paul Šafarik's "Jáno. šík" in the S laveni pac holu S lovanských 1814; Absolon Meško's " Pieseň Jánošíková," 1842, (S lovenské Pohrady, 1897, sqq.); Michal Hodž.a's poem in the Mator; Sáva Pepkin-Medňanský's "J á nošík" in bis Poezi, Vol II ; Ján Botto's "Piese: J á nošíková" in Zpevy, 1847, and "Sm rť J ánošíková" in Lipa; Samo Chalupk a's " Likavský Väzeň" In the Orol, 1846, "Na K ráľovej Holí," 1862, and "Ju nak," 1860; August Lojko's "Jánoš íkov Stol" and " Jánoší ková Podkova"; J akub Graich• mann's " Horní Chla pc i' in the Sokol, 1861); William P auliny-Toth's " Jánoš ík s mi lou"; Ján ČaJák's "Já noší k" in the Oro l, 1870. a nd " J á nošíková Náhrada," 1875; J onas Záborský's "Smrť J á nošíková" In the S lov. Po h ľady, 1894. Paul Beblavý wrote an interesting his.torlcal story about bim in the S lov. Pohrady, 1889; Augustus Marschal-Petrovský, a long no ve!, J á nošík, Kapi t á n Ho rských Chlapcov, In 1901. Samo Zdyobavský wrote a play, J ánošík; J ona:s Zaborský, a drama, Jánošíková Večera ; Michal Skačkanský, a tragedy, J á nošík, 1880; Ľud. Kubaný, a play, Ho rní Chlapci ; Júr Mahen, a moving lragedy, Jánošík, 1910; Frances Svoboda-Goldman, a histoi,ical drama: J ohn P orod, a play, J á noliik, 1928, etc. Other articles and historlcal .•tudles about bim were written by ,the followlng: Gaspar Fejérpal11ky In Vlaste nský Kal endár, 1831: Stephen Hýroš In his Zá mok Ly ka va, 1876; Pavel Dobšinský ln Prostonárod né obyčaje, 1880; Rudolph Pokorný's Z potulek po �SLOVAKIA 49 Slovensku, 1883; Ján Bobula's Jánošík, 1863; K. Salva-Cebradskťs Jánošík; Julius Botto in bis article "Leopold I and Francis Rákoczi II" ln the Slov. Pohrady, 1904 mentions Jánoš í; Carl Kálaľs Slováci a Slovensko, 1905, and bis Na Krásnem Slovensku, 1903; Oarl Dúbravský's Jánošík, 1911; Gregor Uram·Podtatranský's "Juro Jánošík in the S bor. Muz. Slov. Sp. VIII, 1908; J aroslav Tuma's "Jánoší k," in 1911, Naše Slovensko; Michal Jiránek's " Zbojníci" in Slov. Čitanka, 1911; Samo Czambeľs "Jánošík" in Páričkov's Ružomberský Ka lendár, 1913; Joseph Škultety's Jánošíková Doba" in Slov. Pohrady, 1913; Jgnac Gessay in the A!Lmanac of the Slovák v Amerike; Pavel Sochaň's "Zbojník Juro Jánoší k," 1924. Ján L. Bella put Botto's poem "Svadba Jánošíková" to music for solo, with piano accompan.lment and oches- tr-ation. Vitezslav Novák also composed an orginaJ musical score on the subject called "Jánošík," which is to be found in Mladí, op. 55. Almost without exception the foregoing works pre.sented Jánošík as bhe idol of bis people, as por,trayed in bhe folk songs and ballads which have become a rich heritage of the Slovak nation. In some he is a patriot, in others a young t,beologian who has been Jed away from bis hlgb calling by the cruel circumstamces of bis tlme, ,vthile in all of them, with one exception, he ls depicted as a knightly hig,h• wayman who ls devoted to bis poor, oppressed poople. The one exception is Pavel Sochaň, who endeavors to debunk all the Iegendary glory surrounding the name o! Jánošík by basing bis Zbojník Juro Jánošík, akým bol v Skutočnosti (The Reail Jánošik) entirely on the cas~ records found in the County Court House of Liptov. But this is, perha,ps, the passing fancy of the times, to smash all the traditional ldols of bbe past, and Sochaň is one of tbls class of modern iconoclasts. Despite his efforts and those of others to defame the character of tlhe l~gendary heroes of yesterday, the fact remains that Jánoš!k has been an influence in popular Slovak poetry, llterature, and drama, and his name is imperisbable in tbe history of bis people. Botto's poems, alone, would make bis fame immortaJ. Not only did Slovak and Czech wrlters devote their talent.s to the singing o! •bis praises, but we find that the Polisb autbor, Przerwa-Tetmajer, wrote a whole ser.les of ballads about bim, as well as a beautlful, touobingľ poem about bis deatb. His collection of fables, folk stori~. folk songs, and poems ( Báje z Tatier) was very popular in bis n,a tive Poland. Vlad. Hnatjuk, ťhe famous Ukralnian etbnographer, wrote a treatise on Jánošík in 1889, and included numerous Slovakian songs about this national figure in bis collection of Russian, Slovak, Moravjan, and Polisb folklore. Jánoš!k has been the frequent subject of creatlve are in bis native country. Tbus, his likeness appears on glassware, prlmitive palntings, pottery, etc., in wbicb he and his gay mountain Iads are shown dres.sed in green blouses, red and wbite breecbes, shlny black boots, gally colored hats wlťb feathers in tbem, wďde walsbbands ricbly studded with gold, silver, and precious stones, and armed with muskets and hatcbets (valašky). J ánošik always has the place of honor as tbe leader, while Surovec is sbown brandishlng bis valaška; Hrajnoba shoots off tbe tip of a tall plne as he Ieaps high lnto the air in a playful mood; and Gajdošik plays h!s bagpipes, wbile tbe others dance to bis mountain music. Tbe Slovak art!sts, Mikulaš Aleš, :\fartln Benka, and Ján Alexy, have made palntlngs of J ánoli!k. Tbe �liO sculptor Franta Uprka made a number of fJgures of Jánošlk and his companions, the best of them being hls sculpture of the entlre group gathered around a bontlre on the mountalntop near the Tall Fine. l,'. Fulla executed a gorgeous linoleum design of the group. Vla.dyslav Skovzylaš, a Polls'h artist, ma.de several exqulsite wood carvings of these T atra mountaineers of Jong ago. Among them are one ot Jánošlk, alone, another of Jánošík and hls sweetheart, one of his profile, and a fourth of b.is men on the march. Jánošlk's buried treasure has engaged the popular lmaginat!on everywhere in Slovakia for centuries. The probable hlding places most frequently mentloned are: Kozia Skala, located In the šutov valiey in Turiec; Jánoiíkoá Pivnica, a cavern near Balna In tbe valley of Nemecká Lupča; Biela Skala in the Suchá Valley near Liptov; and Zemský Kľúč. Belopotecký's Mss., 1835, now in t'he Liptov Museum in Ružoml>erok, refers to all these places, besldes Pod Jedlou near Trnovec in Liptov, the Baránec Meadow near St. Andrew's in Liptov county, and many others. Pavel Sochaň's "Jánošíkové Poklady" in the Slov. Pohra.dy, 1922-23, and Ján Poroďs "Poklad a iné povesti z okolia Bytče" also conta.in clues to lhe secret hlding places of gold, silver and gems. Numerous al'tlcles have appeared in the off-lclal publlcatlons of the Sborník Muz. Sl. Spol. in recent years under the title of "Jánošíkov Poklad. Emo Bohúň wrote a fantastlc novel on the subject. The following places have been named after the famous outaaw: Jánošíková Kolkáreň (JáJnošlk's Bowling Alley) located In Liptov; Jánošíkové Husle (Jánošik's F\iddle) in Malé Smrekovice; Jánošíková Jaskyňa (Jánošilťs Cave) in the Prosiecká valley; Jánošíkov Stôl (Jánošlk's Table) In Važec; Jánošíkové Sedlo (Jánošlk's Sa.ddle) in the Queen's Meadow; Jánošíková Stupa (Jánošík's Footprlnt) in !;he Gadierská valley, In Turiec; Jánošíková Stolica (Jánošlk's County in the v;ratná valley Ťarchová; Jánošíková Skala (Jánošlk'c Rock) at L1šenlk, near Polhora, Zvolen county; Jánošíkov Chodník (Jánošlk's Path) and Jánoš íková Jaskyňa (Jánošík's Cave) near Tisovce; Jánošíková Podkova (Jánošík's Horseshoe) in the Rimavská valley under Zlamenečin Hill; 81lld Jánošíkov Skok (Jánošlk's Leap) at Dunajec. These and many otber names wlll preserve the name of Jánošík even ir all poems and stories about hlm dlsappear. Jánošlk'.s hat 1s in the Liptov museum in Ružomberok. lt 1s ma.de of clot1h rlohly embroidered with gold Jace and decorated with mussel shells, and is higb and cyllndrical in shape. Hls hatchet ls now in the natlonal museum at Budapest, whlle his plpe 1s in the Slovak Instltute's collection. Th~ famous belt, whlch had been given hlm by a fairy and was sald to have glvsn the Slovak hero preternatural powers, is now in t,he Slovak Nat1ooal Museum In St. Martln's in Turiec. A cane and tJwo ancient plctures or 'h ls band depicted on glass are there a lso. Two plctures or him are In the collectlon of the Moravian Natural Museum In Brno. The Liptov Museum at Ružomberok has a photograph of hls halrchet, a copy of the paintlngs Iu Brno, a copy ot the orlginal court records ot t,he tria! of Jánošík, several palntlngs by Fulla and Skoczylaša, and a large number of llterary works. In Rovno, Joseph Buchčar !s the proud po~essor ot an artlstlc leather belt, flllgreed lengthwise wltn goose qullls, w'hicb was found In his old mlll Jn the course ot some repairs. Although lt is sald that thls belonged to Jáno1 �SLOV.A.KU. 61 šik, it was more proba.bly the properly of Jánošík's lieutenant, Surovec, as Rovno was Suroveťs horne town. The Tatranský Museum has six old Polish g!ass likenesses of Jánošlk and hls merry men, similar to the glassware in St. Martin's in Turiec. One, however, shows the outlaiws oarrying a bag of ducats, another has the picture ot his sweetheart. The collection there contains four pistols, ten knives, four powder hom_s, and a bag in whlch the robbers used to carry thelr stolen ducats. Beneath the paintlngs of t?hese colorful personalitles of Slovak folklore there !s a brief explanation of the lnitlatlon of new members to the ro'bber gangs. 'l'hey were required to prove the:ir prowess In ,<,hooting oiif the tip of a tree with a pistol, or cuttlng lt otf wlth a throw of the hatchet, by drinldng a bottle of brandy, and then by performlng the d!fflcult "Robber's Dance." The lnitiat!on took p!ace in the evenlng around thelr bonflre. Eaoh outlaw was armed to the teeth wlth a hatohet in hls b elt, a brace of pistols, and a musket. Of course, there was the powder horn, the wlde oell, the knapsack, a Hussar's hat, and the bni:ghtly colored shirt and trousers to m ake up the rest of the1r accoutrement. Jánošiťs breeohes were said to have been red and w,hite In color. It seems lncredible, in view of Jánošlk'.s fame, that no monument stiands to honor his memory, or bhat no plaque marks bis birthplace. But he llves in the hearts of •h is people, hence needs no image of iron or stone to remind them of his life and his deeds. No other record t:Xists of the merry mountain boys who had been Jánošílťs companions. Mo.st probabtly they disbanded and under assumed names followed peaceful and honorable professions until the end of thelr lives. Uhorčik, however, was cau~ht and executed; and "Red" Ondraš disappeared In the vlclnlty of Tešlnka whlle Jánošik was stlll at Iarge. 'l1he woodlands grew silent and peaceful wlth the passlng of Jánošík from the scene. 'l'he songs of hls merry men were silenced forever, and the fores ts were left undisturbed for the deer, bear, fox, and wlld boar as they went about unchallenged. And hlgh o'erhead, an eagle on swift and silent wings surveyed the glen far below, abandoned and cheerless, for tbe ,happy throng of Jánošik's youths ba.d dlspersed, and their ohlef was dead. - (Slovenské Pohrady, V. XLV. Nos. 1-2, 1929). • • • WHO SAID IT ? "The Czechs bave been at all times all too rea.dy to look on most Slovaks as Magyarones and potentlal traltors, and have employed battallons of censors, police agents, and other customary Instruments of unpopu!ar Governments, wblcb always end by maklng the sltuation worse than hefore. Neltber the pollcy of Prague nor the attltude of the Czech offlclals In Slovakla was al• ways elther wlse or tactful. Tbe Czech Soclallsts. wbo played such a large part in the Government or tlle flrst years, incorporated all those Czech characterlstlcs most obnoxlous to the Slovaks. They were crude, tbey were 111-mannered, tbey were aggresslvely egalitarlan, and they were almost fanatlcally antl-clerlcal, seelng in the churches In Slovakla a two-fold enemy. i<ocial and natlonal." - (C. A. Macartney: H UNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS; 1937, London). � SLOVAKIA ~2 ----------------------------JANO.ŠIK - THE SWVAK ROBIN HOOD IVAN HOUDEK Much has been written about Juro (George) Jánošik, the les.der of the Slovak mountaln boys, w,bo has b&come the greatest Jegendary hero in Slovakia country, and undouMedly much more wtll still be written about hlm In hls natlve !and where hls name ls an insplration to both the old and the young. lt ls rather approprlate <to recall, at thls tlme, the &Xploits of bis so-called rebel against society in his day, for Jánošík ls the symbol ot a people's just indignatlon agadnst lnjustlce and oppresslon, as well as a symbol of hope of ultimate vlctory of jusit.lce and ot truth. The sources from which we were able to draw a reillable character sketch of thls remarkable man are twofold: the offlcial r&cords of his tria!, and the numerous folk songs, storles, and lege,ndary accounts of his explolt.s. The forwer are ne,cess,ar!ly dry, the latter rich and varled. Th ese sources represent people, of confllctlng vlews: the one class feared and hated the hold youth as its enemy; the other loved and immol'tallz&d hlm as a natlonal hero. lt is a dlfficult task to reconclle these wldely dlvergent points of vlew and, yet, these sources, whlch glve us two dlfferent plctures of hlm, are not re,ally contradlctory, but rather complement each other. The orlglnal Lartln,Slovak judlclal documents were kept In a ~peclall file In the coun,ty archlve,s of the Liptov Dis.trlct records, in St. Mlkulal'i, the county seait. Unfortunately, these disappeared rather mysterlously In the second half of the last century. Duplicates of these documents, howe,ver, have been preserved and thelr contents were flrst publlclzed by Gaspar Fejerpataky in tb.e Vlastenský Kalendár (1831-1832). These are a faithful copy of the authentlc record known as F assio Janossikiana, dated 1713. In 1880, Paul Dobšinský publ!shed hls vlews in the Prostonarodné Obyčaje (National Customs) In tbe Slovak Museum's publlcatlon ot <that year Muf. sl. spol.; VIIl,Podtatranský Juro J ánoiik). Paul Sochaň's Zbojnik Juro J ánoifk, published Jn 1924, 1s a good source ot inform-atlon and from lt and the other contemporary records and Jegendary accounts whlch have been handed down for gene,rablons, we are able to reconstruct most of the scenes of the Ume and re-enact the events In the Ufe of thls popular hero, so that they may be consldered to be truly hl.storlcal, not merely legendary. Both sources glve Ťarchová In Trenčfn County as hls blrthplace, where he wa,s born about 1688. But research has lndlcated tbat Jánoillk was actually born on a small farm In the bighlands In tbe vlclnlty of that hamlet, and the, spot today ls marked by a small, dllapldated hut wlth the number "676" on lt. It stands between two llnden trees In a place caaled Janošov, whlch boasts of a populatlon of 17 persona, most ot wbom bea.r the name Jánošlk. Jánošfk was s tm a chlld when the revolutlon under Rakoczy II (1703-1711) took place,, but he jolned the lnsurgents, whose motto, "Pro Llberate," was emblazoned on thelr banner. Later, he jolned the lmperlal army and was sent to Bytča Castle as a guard, where he met �SLOVAKIA 43 one of the Emperor's prisoners, an adventurous brigand and soldler of fortune, Thom-as Uhorčik. Thls fateful acqualntance proved to be the turning-point of bis life. Rakoczy's iJHaited rebellion was purt down In 1711, and the youthful Jánošlk returned horne after belng ransomed out of the army by his paren,t s. Tradltion has it that he bocame an outlaw and a highiw,ayman because his father was flogged to death by the lord of the manor when he refused to leave the deathbed of bis wlfe in order to work in the fields of hls master. This fatal flogg·i ng took place in Ťarohová, at the vlllage bridge, aocording to one account, and at the castle In Teplice in Žilina, according to another report. The judic-lal documents, however, merely record ,the fact that Uhorčlk, who had escaped from prlsón, had come to Ťarchová and had persuaded J ánošlk to join his robber b and in the forest. As a background to the future of Jänošlk, lt may be well t o r&call that social conditions in Slovakla at the tlme were, perhaps, at their worst. The Revdlution had falled, but many a peasanťs son was unw!Hlng to bow down under the yoke of a feudal system after tastlng freedom as a sold,ier of fortune. Conditions among the peasants in the klngdoon of Rungary after t,he death of the liberal monarch, "Mathias th e J ust," became steadily worse until they became unbearable. The peasants' revolt under George Doža in Tran.sylv ania and in the Dolná. valley was cruelly stamped out by lihe nobffllty, and the lot of the peasants was vlrtual ~lavery. Although t!he rlght to emigrate was restored to the peasantry, In view of the fact that the people were subject to burdensome taxatlon and many restrlctlons, their status by the end of the seventeenth century had grown worse, so that In reality the nobility had assumed the .rlght of life and death over its subjects. The Slovaks, especially, beoame the vlctims of a cunnlng and unscrupulous no)>llirty whtc'h en.;;Javed them. Frequent cla.ss struggles, wars. and plagues added to the mlsfortunes of the Slovak people. Many areas were reduced to poverty-stI'icken regfons where extreme mlsery and want prevalled. Northern Slovakia which had, perhaps, suffered the most in these trying <limes, became the horne of the discontented, the dise ouraged, and the desperate. These men organized rob'ber banda and preyed on t!he surroundlng countryside from th eir mountain hideouts. Tbomas Uborčik was a member of one of these bands as early as 1704. J ánošfk became a member in 1711, after taking tbe briganďs pledge and sealing bis oath w.! th bis blood. Hls explolts soon won hlm far-reaching fame not only In hls own country, but also in Moravla, P dland, Hungary and Silesla. After belng elected chleftiain, the youthful bandlt extended the zone of bis operatlons from tbe eastern count!es of Liptov, Spiš, Orava, Turiec Tekov, Malohont, and Šariš to Zvolen, Trenčln, and Nitra, and even crossed lnto Mora.vla, SHesla, Poland and Hungary. Hls comrades were, accord!ng to bis own ·a dmlsslon: Tihomas lJhorčlk (•Uhrlk); Paul Gašparec-Mlynarčlk from Rakov; Barte, the sbepherd from Predmier; "Red" Ondraš from D1há; Plavčlk from Dunajov; Gábor trom Valkov; Juro Turlak (Hun<:aga or Hunčlk); Kubo Chlastiak trom Otožnlc; J urlak, Sato ra, Gavel, and aeveral Poles. Not a few secret accompllces, llke J uro and Kubo štukovec In Kräsna, furnlsbed hlm wlth suppl!es and informatlon. �f4 SLOVAKIA Folk stories about this interesting outlaw are, undoubtedly, gullty of several anachroni.sms. They list the following as Ms associatss: Uhorčik, Gajdošík-Mlynárčik, Surovec, Hrajnoha, Adamčik, llčík (the chief scout), Garaj, Postavčík, Tarke, Mucha, Durica. Most of these, however, were not even Jánošik's contemporaries. F or lnstance, James Surovec, from Rovný In Trenčin, who terrorized Orava, Trenčín, and Pohroni&, wa.s not born untH 1715, two years after Jánošik's death, and he himself was executed fn 1740. Hrajnoba, the famous dancer from Nitra, lived in the middle of the 18th century and wai; broken on the wheel in !lbe Smolen Castle. In 1878 Hrajnoha's treasure was unearthed by some laborers who were buildíng a highway 1:ear Nadaš. Adamčfk was a notorious bandit in Moravia, and Ilčik lived in Trenčin. Garaj must have preceded Jánoš!k, because a brook ls mentioned by that name in the judlclal documents covering the tria! of Slovakia's most famous outlaw. Some of J ánošik's asso ciates are, perhaps, p.roducts of Lhe popular imaginatlon. A triangular area, known as the K ing's Plateau, lies on a hlgh point overlooking the countles of Liptov, the Hron area and Malohont, near Hochwald, or Hovald, at a spot known as the "Tall Plne," directly above the road runnlng from Liptov to Spiš. This region was at one time covered with a thick forest, which was the hiding place of robber gangs in every century. Q.ueen Maria T,h eresa destroyed th!s picturesque rendezvous of the hlghwaymen by havlng the forest cut down by royal proclamatlon. But in J ánošík's time, thls area was the favorite h:rnnt of brigands, and lt was there that Lord Jáu Radvanský, whlle on bis way to tbe funeral of the former revolutionary general. Petrcx:zy, was robbed by tbe Slovak Robin Hood. Lord Paul Revay, Lady Schardon, and Lord Ladlslaus Zmeškal were also held up in t hls region by Jánošík's merry band. Lord Skalka fell into their hands, as dld Sipoš trom Žilina, some hO'rse dealers from the same town, ~everal wine merchants, and many others. Some of the booty was given to the poor and needy. Henc e, the story c irculated that Jánošik robbed 1he rich to give to tbe poor. This is not quite In keeping with the facts, for h!s comrades preyed upon the lower classe.s as well as on the wealthy nobillty. The jewels 1aken from Lord Skalka were dlstrfäuted among the young ladies In Ťa-rcbová. Romantic tales, which bave little historical basis, however, h ave become a part of the Jánošik saga in Slovakia. The authentic documents do not even allude to most of t,he feats attributed to Slovakla's legendary hero. At bis trlal, Jánošik admltted that he often raided the sheepfolds of the lords of the manor, that some of tbe shepherds, elther trom ľear of friendsbip, cooperated in these robberies and tben accompanled bim to celebra.te at the "Black Ant" In Klenovce, owned by tbe lnn-keeper, Martin Mravec, or at the "Wbite Horse" in Dunajov, and sometlmes at the "Blne Star" In Krásna, or tbe "Golden Eagle" in Ťarcbová. Winter tlme fonnd the moun,taln boys seeklng employment In tbe nearby bomesteads b ecanse the snow would bave betrayed thelr footprlnts leadlng to their 'bldlng-places, deep In the plne forests of Klng's Plateau. Tbus, Jánošík served as a farmhand ln tbe wlnter of 1712-1713 at Kovatlčik's and Ondrejčik's In Kokava. In tbe .~pring they bastened to tbeir mountaln rendezvous at tbe foot of the Tall Pine. �SLOVAKIA 45 Jánošík's romantic career as Slovak!a's Robin Hood W'3.S a short one, Jastlng Jess tban two years. Although he escaped after his flrst ťapture at Klooovce in the autumn of 1712, he was caught in tbe summer of tbe next year. The commissioner at Malohont had granted him an amnesty after he had been confined in Jakoffy Ca.stle in Hrachov, but aMer tbe county po'l!ce of Liptov arrested bim he neveT regained bis rreedom. No ofriclal record glves us the exact details of bis final capture; but, accordlng to tradition, Jánošik was apprebended elther b&eause of the treachery of one of his band, namely, Gajdošík, who had given away t he secret of bis ch!eťs gigant!c strength (the mag-ic belt), or because of the treachery of J ánošik's rormer sw&etheart, w·ho ,!ost her heart to the Police Captaln Joseph Lehotský, when he came to ber father's inn, the Golden Goose, in searcb of the renowned outlaw. The scene of bis arrest, in the flr&t version, was said to have been In the Little Mountain Inn in Polhora, Zvolen County, between Brru:no and Tisovec. At any rate, t he famed outlaw was taken in chalns to Liptov, where he was lodged in Vranov Castle, bui1lt by Franei11 Palugyay. There, In a dark celi, Jánoš!k was chained to the wall to await his tria! and death. Jánošik was aHowed to plead bis case. He pleaded gullty to c·ertain charges of robbery, but denied havlng committed crlmes attributed to him. Some or the acts he was accused of were perpetrat&d whlle he was In prison. Thus, he denied having anything to do with the robbery of a priest from Orava, or the hold-up or Vitko from Sllesia, the murder of the blacksmlth's son in Dobrovce, the robblng of the Galusovecs, the looting of churches in Hungary, PO'land, Slles!a, or Moravia, where the sacrilegious robbeľl! are alleged to have nailed the sacred hosts to a tree in order to determine whether blood would flow from them when ahots were flred into the.m. He was also accused of having freed one of bis band as he was ll!bout to be hanged in Žilina. It ls notewor.thy that the county sheriff, John L itlský, and !he mayor of the town of Osčadn!ce were suspected or being overly friendly w!th Jánošik. To au the charges of which he was ra,sely accused the stoutllea!'ted robber-chieftain simply pleaded innocent. Attempts to prove that he was in collusion wi,th other notorious brlgands in Slovakla, Poland, and Hungary were unsuccessful. Wben he was accused of having sbot a priest from Domanlže, 4t was proved that two or bis associates, Tu ria k and PJavčlk, had comml tted this dastardly crime in bis absence. No crime, other .than robbery, was p.roved against JáJ!lošlk, w,bo never killed anyone. But in those days a !Jhief, as well as a murderer, might be hanged. Legendary accounts of tbe tria:! picture Jánošík as remaining silent about the ldenUty of bis comrades, but the officlal records indlcate that he gave the Court a list of ťbelr names, but refused to reveal their whereabouts. As to the burled treasure, he told bis llsteners that it was hidden in a Jarge fir <tree opposlte an oak on whioh a hand was carved lndlcatlng the exact locatlon of the flr tree, In the glade where the road winds down {rom Jablonka to Klenovce. Lord Ska\ka's jewels he had hidden In the mountalns of Handlov, althougb legends have it they were bestowed on the matdens of the village of Ťarcbová. �SLOVAKIA. Jánošik was tried by the county court of Liptov, presided over by the vice-commissioner, Ladts laus Okol!csany•I, on March 16-17, 1713, in the county courthouse of St. Mlkulaš In Liptov. The other members of the court were the magl.strates of the four dlstrict-s ot Liptov county, namely, John and AndTew Rády, Andrew Andreanský, and Matthew Joob. The oftlclal prosecutor was Alexander Cemlcký, and the attorney for the defense was Balthasar Palugyay. The d&fense p leaded guilty to the charges of robbery and asked the clemency of the Cour,t. Moreover, Jánošík promLsed to glve up bis former way of llfe .and wlshed to become once a.gain a 0aw-abldlng cLtlzen. The prosecutlon, however, demanued tihe hig,hest penalty and succeeded in exactlng a two-fold sentence from the Court, so that the "doubledeallng" prisoner mlght !lrst pay the penalty for bis lighter crlmes by belng tortured on the rack, and then by belng hanged on the gallows to forfeit hls llfe for bis graver transgress1ons. T hls was in accordance witJb the laws o! the TripaTtitum ot 1515, 1625, and 1655. The death sentence was carrled out on March 17 or 18, 1713, before a vast assembly of people, on the executlon grounds of St. Mfäulaš, on the Váh near the Paludzký bridge. There the young robber-chleftaln was hanged on the gaHows, and bis llteless body was buried beneath lt as the custom of thatl. ttme. Äccordlng ,to the popular legends, Jánošík, though welgbed down by bis heavy shackles, danced the "hajduc hy" (a llvely folk da.nce) four tlmes aTound the gal!ows, just before bis death. Another legendary story tells or a courler who came dlrectly from the Emperor with hls lmperlal pardon, ,but lt was too late, for the darlng you.th, who h-ad prom.lsed to recrult four reglment.q of soldlers for the Emperor, was aAready hanglng on the rack. H e refused the amnesty wtth the words, "Now tha,t you have roasted me, you might as well devour me." He ls said to have dled after belng suspended by hls rib on the rack for three days. All natme seemed to go lnto mouring for this yout:h, whose mel'lry songs once resounded through the glen. The babbl!ng brooks became sllent, ťhe anlmals In the forest ceased their act!vity momentarlly in silent trlbute to their departed hero. A sudden hush came over all, and bis many trlends, far and near, were overcome by sorrow at bis passing. An annual penalty was lmposed on Liptov by the Emperor for havlng sentenced Jánošík to death, and, untll ~ecent times, four measures of gold ducats were pald to the lmperillll treasury each year. That is the story In legendary accounts. The people belleved in Jánošík's nobillty of character. It ls sald that hls body was buried In a crypt of the church of St. Mikulaš, where it lles In state of comp]ete preservation awaltlng the day when a new Jánošik wlll arise and strlke down the oppressors of hls poople. Many years a1!ter thls sad event, lt was reported thatl. whlle some youngsters were p.laylng nea,r the town of Hajasov, one of the boys play,f ully l!fle'd the corner of a nearby hut and hld hls cap underneath. 'Ilhls feat or amazing strength reached -the eaTs of the nobMity, ,viho qulckly remov.ed thls new performer, whom they consldered another Jánošlk. Jánošik's execution was the slgnal for the authorities to capture all the remalnlng outla,ws stm at large in Slovakla. Emerich Kublny, The reglstrar of Liptov, was sent to Malohont wltb warra,nts to arrest �SLOVAKIA au suspec.ts. In Apr!l, Uhorčik, alias M.a.rtin Mravec, was captured at St. Mlkulaš, where he had marrled and seltled down as a tavern• keeper, lhe proprletor of llhe Gray Failcon. He was given a hasty trlal and condemned to d1e on the rack. An lmperiaI decree was issued by whlch bhe county magistrates would be held r-esponslble in the future for all banditry In thelr areas, and on April 17, 1713, the assembly at Liptov approved of the motlon to round up the outlaws. The imperlal marshal, John Palty, arrived to enforce the emperor's ln&tructlons. Authentlc documents, w'ith the record of Jánošlk's apprehenslon .and ,tria!, make b.lm out to be an ordlnary hlghwayman, simllar to hundreds of •bis klnd who roamed about the country and terrorlzed the gentry. He was consldered to be a da,ngerous chaTacter, as were the others of hla notorlous professlon. Neveiitheless, the fa,ct that hls name has become an lllustrlous one In the Jegendary songs e.nd storles of h1s people, la In sharp contrast wlth the oi'ficlal p!cture or thls colorful, albelt lawless, personallty. The questlon arlses, why ·has he, alone, maintalued bis posltlon as an !dol ot the Slovak natlon? Obviously, he must have been dltferent from all bis companions and con.temporarles, both In vice and vlrtue. Although lihe aura of glory and honor that surrounds bis memory ls no doubt the result, in some measure, of th-e people's rich lmaglnatlon, yet, bis deeds durlng bis llfe are a,n argument In favor of some · outstan.dlng quallties in hls makeup. We cannot account for h1s tremendous popularity among the people, nor can we explain why bis name Ls a symbol ot vlntue rather than vice, UDJ!ess we attrlbute vlrluous qua!itles to t his youth who so fired the lmagination of the old and the young that he has become the Jmmortal hero of bis natlve !and. ·T he areas known as th'e "Queen's Meadow, Warm Sprlngs," and many other regions In tre Pohron and Malohont dl.strlcts, aboun.d even today In folk songs, ballads, and storles of bis explolts ln be· half of the poor and lhe oppres.sed. We can safely conclude that the offlclal records suppressed muoh of the truth in regard to Jánošik's aotual personallty and deeds. Slnce he was the self-constltuted champlon of the 01>pressed everywhere, one can understand why bis name should be slmp4y put on the 11st as an ordina1-y cť.iminal by the oppressors, who used thelr power to llquldate all fäose who were dangerous rebels agalnst thelr form of soclety. But despite thelr precautlons, Jánošlk's name, for almost two and a half centurles, has been the symbol of hope and courage to bis people. Unllke other parts ot the Austrlan Emplre, which revoJ.ted trom time to tlme (Magyar, Romanian, Croatlan and Serblan outbreaks occurred lntermlttently ln 1514, 1569, 1'571, 1635, 1655, 1784, etc.), the Slovaks revolted oilliy once. Thls uprlslng happened In the Potlsle reglon when a rumor was spread througbout Eastern Slovakla that the nobility had polsoned their wells. It turned out, however, that the cause ot wldespread death w.a,s actually the chlorea epldemic of that year, 1631. Historloal facts make it evldent that the S!ovaks were a patient peoplil who would not rise In rebelllon In defense of thelr Jlfe as a natlon. Passlv& endurance and reslstance under the merclless system ot polltlcal oppression was, however, aC'companled by the actlve revolt �48 SLOVAKIA of the more hlghly spirited Slovak youths, who rebelled against the existing order of things by tak!ng the law lnto their own hands, and ,by retlring lnto -the.lr mountain strongholds from which they emerged at nigbt to rígbt tbe wrongs inflicted on tbeir people. Tbey pa.id for their daring and coul'age by their lives, sooner or later. But t heir sprit kept alive 1'he spark of freedom and the love of justice in the bearts of tbe Slovak.s. They wer e, to be sure, common felons and blackguards among tbe forest bigbwaymen, but Jánošík was not one of them. He was the true embodiment of bis age, wild and untamed but not ignoble and ruthless, not savage and unrestralned, b ut gallant, generous, honest, and ·honorable with his people. T he first at:tiempts to trace the popular series of Slovak poem s, ballads, songs, and legends were made in the early l&tb century. T~b lic published a poem entltled "J ánoší k, lyptovský loupežník" (J ánošik the Robber of Liptov) in his collection called Slovenšti ve ršovc i (Vol. II, 1809). Ján Konár discovered several poems a bout S lovak h ighwaymen and published them in bis Národné Zpievanky (National Ballads) in 1834 and 1835. Slovak news-buHetins a nd almanacs contained poems and folk stories about Jánošik. The Časopis a Sborní k Muzeál nej Slovens kej Spo ločnosti (The Periodical and Almanac of the Slovak Museum Association) also published a number of works on J ánošik, based largely on early manuscrip,ts found in the museums in Liptov and Ružomberok. The Matica Slovenská (Slovak Institute) planned to continue its splendid task of collecting these old publica,!Jions, wihich are rich in folklore. By bhe m iddle of the l as.t century, the last of the outlaws in Slovakia had disappeared, but the stories of their daring exploits contlnued to interes.t the common people because of their highly imaginatlve appea,i. J ánošik's fame is preserved for the ages in the many poems that have been a distinct contribution to his nation's literature. The following poems have immortalized bis memory: Paul Šafarik's "Jáno. šík" in the S laveni pac holu S lovanských 1814; Absolon Meško's " Pieseň Jánošíková," 1842, (S lovenské Pohrady, 1897, sqq.); Michal Hodž.a's poem in the Mator; Sáva Pepkin-Medňanský's "J á nošík" in bis Poezi, Vol II ; Ján Botto's "Piese: J á nošíková" in Zpevy, 1847, and "Sm rť J ánošíková" in Lipa; Samo Chalupk a's " Likavský Väzeň" In the Orol, 1846, "Na K ráľovej Holí," 1862, and "Ju nak," 1860; August Lojko's "Jánoš íkov Stol" and " Jánoší ková Podkova"; J akub Graich• mann's " Horní Chla pc i' in the Sokol, 1861); William P auliny-Toth's " Jánoš ík s mi lou"; Ján ČaJák's "Já noší k" in the Oro l, 1870. a nd " J á nošíková Náhrada," 1875; J onas Záborský's "Smrť J á nošíková" In the S lov. Po h ľady, 1894. Paul Beblavý wrote an interesting his.torlcal story about bim in the S lov. Pohrady, 1889; Augustus Marschal-Petrovský, a long no ve!, J á nošík, Kapi t á n Ho rských Chlapcov, In 1901. Samo Zdyobavský wrote a play, J ánošík; J ona:s Zaborský, a drama, Jánošíková Večera ; Michal Skačkanský, a tragedy, J á nošík, 1880; Ľud. Kubaný, a play, Ho rní Chlapci ; Júr Mahen, a moving lragedy, Jánošík, 1910; Frances Svoboda-Goldman, a histoi,ical drama: J ohn P orod, a play, J á noliik, 1928, etc. Other articles and historlcal .•tudles about bim were written by ,the followlng: Gaspar Fejérpal11ky In Vlaste nský Kal endár, 1831: Stephen Hýroš In his Zá mok Ly ka va, 1876; Pavel Dobšinský ln Prostonárod né obyčaje, 1880; Rudolph Pokorný's Z potulek po �SLOVAKIA 49 Slovensku, 1883; Ján Bobula's Jánošík, 1863; K. Salva-Cebradskťs Jánošík; Julius Botto in bis article "Leopold I and Francis Rákoczi II" ln the Slov. Pohrady, 1904 mentions Jánoš í; Carl Kálaľs Slováci a Slovensko, 1905, and bis Na Krásnem Slovensku, 1903; Oarl Dúbravský's Jánošík, 1911; Gregor Uram·Podtatranský's "Juro Jánošík in the S bor. Muz. Slov. Sp. VIII, 1908; J aroslav Tuma's "Jánoší k," in 1911, Naše Slovensko; Michal Jiránek's " Zbojníci" in Slov. Čitanka, 1911; Samo Czambeľs "Jánošík" in Páričkov's Ružomberský Ka lendár, 1913; Joseph Škultety's Jánošíková Doba" in Slov. Pohrady, 1913; Jgnac Gessay in the A!Lmanac of the Slovák v Amerike; Pavel Sochaň's "Zbojník Juro Jánoší k," 1924. Ján L. Bella put Botto's poem "Svadba Jánošíková" to music for solo, with piano accompan.lment and oches- tr-ation. Vitezslav Novák also composed an orginaJ musical score on the subject called "Jánošík," which is to be found in Mladí, op. 55. Almost without exception the foregoing works pre.sented Jánošík as bhe idol of bis people, as por,trayed in bhe folk songs and ballads which have become a rich heritage of the Slovak nation. In some he is a patriot, in others a young t,beologian who has been Jed away from bis hlgb calling by the cruel circumstamces of bis tlme, ,vthile in all of them, with one exception, he ls depicted as a knightly hig,h• wayman who ls devoted to bis poor, oppressed poople. The one exception is Pavel Sochaň, who endeavors to debunk all the Iegendary glory surrounding the name o! Jánošík by basing bis Zbojník Juro Jánošík, akým bol v Skutočnosti (The Reail Jánošik) entirely on the cas~ records found in the County Court House of Liptov. But this is, perha,ps, the passing fancy of the times, to smash all the traditional ldols of bbe past, and Sochaň is one of tbls class of modern iconoclasts. Despite his efforts and those of others to defame the character of tlhe l~gendary heroes of yesterday, the fact remains that Jánoš!k has been an influence in popular Slovak poetry, llterature, and drama, and his name is imperisbable in tbe history of bis people. Botto's poems, alone, would make bis fame immortaJ. Not only did Slovak and Czech wrlters devote their talent.s to the singing o! •bis praises, but we find that the Polisb autbor, Przerwa-Tetmajer, wrote a whole ser.les of ballads about bim, as well as a beautlful, touobingľ poem about bis deatb. His collection of fables, folk stori~. folk songs, and poems ( Báje z Tatier) was very popular in bis n,a tive Poland. Vlad. Hnatjuk, ťhe famous Ukralnian etbnographer, wrote a treatise on Jánošík in 1889, and included numerous Slovakian songs about this national figure in bis collection of Russian, Slovak, Moravjan, and Polisb folklore. Jánoš!k has been the frequent subject of creatlve are in bis native country. Tbus, his likeness appears on glassware, prlmitive palntings, pottery, etc., in wbicb he and his gay mountain Iads are shown dres.sed in green blouses, red and wbite breecbes, shlny black boots, gally colored hats wlťb feathers in tbem, wďde walsbbands ricbly studded with gold, silver, and precious stones, and armed with muskets and hatcbets (valašky). J ánošik always has the place of honor as tbe leader, while Surovec is sbown brandishlng bis valaška; Hrajnoba shoots off tbe tip of a tall plne as he Ieaps high lnto the air in a playful mood; and Gajdošik plays h!s bagpipes, wbile tbe others dance to bis mountain music. Tbe Slovak art!sts, Mikulaš Aleš, :\fartln Benka, and Ján Alexy, have made palntlngs of J ánoli!k. Tbe �liO sculptor Franta Uprka made a number of fJgures of Jánošlk and his companions, the best of them being hls sculpture of the entlre group gathered around a bontlre on the mountalntop near the Tall Fine. l,'. Fulla executed a gorgeous linoleum design of the group. Vla.dyslav Skovzylaš, a Polls'h artist, ma.de several exqulsite wood carvings of these T atra mountaineers of Jong ago. Among them are one ot Jánošlk, alone, another of Jánošík and hls sweetheart, one of his profile, and a fourth of b.is men on the march. Jánošlk's buried treasure has engaged the popular lmaginat!on everywhere in Slovakia for centuries. The probable hlding places most frequently mentloned are: Kozia Skala, located In the šutov valiey in Turiec; Jánoiíkoá Pivnica, a cavern near Balna In tbe valley of Nemecká Lupča; Biela Skala in the Suchá Valley near Liptov; and Zemský Kľúč. Belopotecký's Mss., 1835, now in t'he Liptov Museum in Ružoml>erok, refers to all these places, besldes Pod Jedlou near Trnovec in Liptov, the Baránec Meadow near St. Andrew's in Liptov county, and many others. Pavel Sochaň's "Jánošíkové Poklady" in the Slov. Pohra.dy, 1922-23, and Ján Poroďs "Poklad a iné povesti z okolia Bytče" also conta.in clues to lhe secret hlding places of gold, silver and gems. Numerous al'tlcles have appeared in the off-lclal publlcatlons of the Sborník Muz. Sl. Spol. in recent years under the title of "Jánošíkov Poklad. Emo Bohúň wrote a fantastlc novel on the subject. The following places have been named after the famous outaaw: Jánošíková Kolkáreň (JáJnošlk's Bowling Alley) located In Liptov; Jánošíkové Husle (Jánošik's F\iddle) in Malé Smrekovice; Jánošíková Jaskyňa (Jánošilťs Cave) in the Prosiecká valley; Jánošíkov Stôl (Jánošlk's Table) In Važec; Jánošíkové Sedlo (Jánošlk's Sa.ddle) in the Queen's Meadow; Jánošíková Stupa (Jánošík's Footprlnt) in !;he Gadierská valley, In Turiec; Jánošíková Stolica (Jánošlk's County in the v;ratná valley Ťarchová; Jánošíková Skala (Jánošlk'c Rock) at L1šenlk, near Polhora, Zvolen county; Jánošíkov Chodník (Jánošlk's Path) and Jánoš íková Jaskyňa (Jánošík's Cave) near Tisovce; Jánošíková Podkova (Jánošík's Horseshoe) in the Rimavská valley under Zlamenečin Hill; 81lld Jánošíkov Skok (Jánošlk's Leap) at Dunajec. These and many otber names wlll preserve the name of Jánošík even ir all poems and stories about hlm dlsappear. Jánošlk'.s hat 1s in the Liptov museum in Ružomberok. lt 1s ma.de of clot1h rlohly embroidered with gold Jace and decorated with mussel shells, and is higb and cyllndrical in shape. Hls hatchet ls now in the natlonal museum at Budapest, whlle his plpe 1s in the Slovak Instltute's collection. Th~ famous belt, whlch had been given hlm by a fairy and was sald to have glvsn the Slovak hero preternatural powers, is now in t,he Slovak Nat1ooal Museum In St. Martln's in Turiec. A cane and tJwo ancient plctures or 'h ls band depicted on glass are there a lso. Two plctures or him are In the collectlon of the Moravian Natural Museum In Brno. The Liptov Museum at Ružomberok has a photograph of hls halrchet, a copy of the paintlngs Iu Brno, a copy ot the orlginal court records ot t,he tria! of Jánošík, several palntlngs by Fulla and Skoczylaša, and a large number of llterary works. In Rovno, Joseph Buchčar !s the proud po~essor ot an artlstlc leather belt, flllgreed lengthwise wltn goose qullls, w'hicb was found In his old mlll Jn the course ot some repairs. Although lt is sald that thls belonged to Jáno1 �SLOV.A.KU. 61 šik, it was more proba.bly the properly of Jánošík's lieutenant, Surovec, as Rovno was Suroveťs horne town. The Tatranský Museum has six old Polish g!ass likenesses of Jánošlk and hls merry men, similar to the glassware in St. Martin's in Turiec. One, however, shows the outlaiws oarrying a bag of ducats, another has the picture ot his sweetheart. The collection there contains four pistols, ten knives, four powder hom_s, and a bag in whlch the robbers used to carry thelr stolen ducats. Beneath the paintlngs of t?hese colorful personalitles of Slovak folklore there !s a brief explanation of the lnitlatlon of new members to the ro'bber gangs. 'l'hey were required to prove the:ir prowess In ,<,hooting oiif the tip of a tree with a pistol, or cuttlng lt otf wlth a throw of the hatchet, by drinldng a bottle of brandy, and then by performlng the d!fflcult "Robber's Dance." The lnitiat!on took p!ace in the evenlng around thelr bonflre. Eaoh outlaw was armed to the teeth wlth a hatohet in hls b elt, a brace of pistols, and a musket. Of course, there was the powder horn, the wlde oell, the knapsack, a Hussar's hat, and the bni:ghtly colored shirt and trousers to m ake up the rest of the1r accoutrement. Jánošiťs breeohes were said to have been red and w,hite In color. It seems lncredible, in view of Jánošlk'.s fame, that no monument stiands to honor his memory, or bhat no plaque marks bis birthplace. But he llves in the hearts of •h is people, hence needs no image of iron or stone to remind them of his life and his deeds. No other record t:Xists of the merry mountain boys who had been Jánošílťs companions. Mo.st probabtly they disbanded and under assumed names followed peaceful and honorable professions until the end of thelr lives. Uhorčik, however, was cau~ht and executed; and "Red" Ondraš disappeared In the vlclnlty of Tešlnka whlle Jánošik was stlll at Iarge. 'l1he woodlands grew silent and peaceful wlth the passlng of Jánošík from the scene. 'l'he songs of hls merry men were silenced forever, and the fores ts were left undisturbed for the deer, bear, fox, and wlld boar as they went about unchallenged. And hlgh o'erhead, an eagle on swift and silent wings surveyed the glen far below, abandoned and cheerless, for tbe ,happy throng of Jánošik's youths ba.d dlspersed, and their ohlef was dead. - (Slovenské Pohrady, V. XLV. Nos. 1-2, 1929). • • • WHO SAID IT ? "The Czechs bave been at all times all too rea.dy to look on most Slovaks as Magyarones and potentlal traltors, and have employed battallons of censors, police agents, and other customary Instruments of unpopu!ar Governments, wblcb always end by maklng the sltuation worse than hefore. Neltber the pollcy of Prague nor the attltude of the Czech offlclals In Slovakla was al• ways elther wlse or tactful. Tbe Czech Soclallsts. wbo played such a large part in the Government or tlle flrst years, incorporated all those Czech characterlstlcs most obnoxlous to the Slovaks. They were crude, tbey were 111-mannered, tbey were aggresslvely egalitarlan, and they were almost fanatlcally antl-clerlcal, seelng in the churches In Slovakla a two-fold enemy. i<ocial and natlonal." - (C. A. Macartney: H UNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS; 1937, London). � 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 1952, Vol. 2 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 1952 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 3), March 1952.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 4), August 1952.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 5), December 1952.</li> </ul> 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 ----------------------------JANO.ŠIK - THE SWVAK ROBIN HOOD IVAN HOUDEK Much has been written about Juro (George) Jánošik, the les.der of the Slovak mountaln boys, w,bo has b&come the greatest Jegendary hero in Slovakia country, and undouMedly much more wtll still be written about hlm In hls natlve !and where hls name ls an insplration to both the old and the young. lt ls rather approprlate <to recall, at thls tlme, the &Xploits of bis so-called rebel against society in his day, for Jánošík ls the symbol ot a people's just indignatlon agadnst lnjustlce and oppresslon, as well as a symbol of hope of ultimate vlctory of jusit.lce and ot truth. The sources from which we were able to draw a reillable character sketch of thls remarkable man are twofold: the offlcial r&cords of his tria!, and the numerous folk songs, storles, and lege,ndary accounts of his explolt.s. The forwer are ne,cess,ar!ly dry, the latter rich and varled. Th ese sources represent people, of confllctlng vlews: the one class feared and hated the hold youth as its enemy; the other loved and immol'tallz&d hlm as a natlonal hero. lt is a dlfficult task to reconclle these wldely dlvergent points of vlew and, yet, these sources, whlch glve us two dlfferent plctures of hlm, are not re,ally contradlctory, but rather complement each other. The orlglnal Lartln,Slovak judlclal documents were kept In a ~peclall file In the coun,ty archlve,s of the Liptov Dis.trlct records, in St. Mlkulal'i, the county seait. Unfortunately, these disappeared rather mysterlously In the second half of the last century. Duplicates of these documents, howe,ver, have been preserved and thelr contents were flrst publlclzed by Gaspar Fejerpataky in tb.e Vlastenský Kalendár (1831-1832). These are a faithful copy of the authentlc record known as F assio Janossikiana, dated 1713. In 1880, Paul Dobšinský publ!shed hls vlews in the Prostonarodné Obyčaje (National Customs) In tbe Slovak Museum's publlcatlon ot <that year Muf. sl. spol.; VIIl,Podtatranský Juro J ánoiik). Paul Sochaň's Zbojnik Juro J ánoifk, published Jn 1924, 1s a good source ot inform-atlon and from lt and the other contemporary records and Jegendary accounts whlch have been handed down for gene,rablons, we are able to reconstruct most of the scenes of the Ume and re-enact the events In the Ufe of thls popular hero, so that they may be consldered to be truly hl.storlcal, not merely legendary. Both sources glve Ťarchová In Trenčfn County as hls blrthplace, where he wa,s born about 1688. But research has lndlcated tbat Jánoillk was actually born on a small farm In the bighlands In tbe vlclnlty of that hamlet, and the, spot today ls marked by a small, dllapldated hut wlth the number "676" on lt. It stands between two llnden trees In a place caaled Janošov, whlch boasts of a populatlon of 17 persona, most ot wbom bea.r the name Jánošlk. Jánošfk was s tm a chlld when the revolutlon under Rakoczy II (1703-1711) took place,, but he jolned the lnsurgents, whose motto, "Pro Llberate," was emblazoned on thelr banner. Later, he jolned the lmperlal army and was sent to Bytča Castle as a guard, where he met SLOVAKIA 43 one of the Emperor's prisoners, an adventurous brigand and soldler of fortune, Thom-as Uhorčik. Thls fateful acqualntance proved to be the turning-point of bis life. Rakoczy's iJHaited rebellion was purt down In 1711, and the youthful Jánošlk returned horne after belng ransomed out of the army by his paren,t s. Tradltion has it that he bocame an outlaw and a highiw,ayman because his father was flogged to death by the lord of the manor when he refused to leave the deathbed of bis wlfe in order to work in the fields of hls master. This fatal flogg·i ng took place in Ťarohová, at the vlllage bridge, aocording to one account, and at the castle In Teplice in Žilina, according to another report. The judic-lal documents, however, merely record ,the fact that Uhorčlk, who had escaped from prlsón, had come to Ťarchová and had persuaded J ánošlk to join his robber b and in the forest. As a background to the future of Jänošlk, lt may be well t o r&call that social conditions in Slovakla at the tlme were, perhaps, at their worst. The Revdlution had falled, but many a peasanťs son was unw!Hlng to bow down under the yoke of a feudal system after tastlng freedom as a sold,ier of fortune. Conditions among the peasants in the klngdoon of Rungary after t,he death of the liberal monarch, "Mathias th e J ust," became steadily worse until they became unbearable. The peasants' revolt under George Doža in Tran.sylv ania and in the Dolná. valley was cruelly stamped out by lihe nobffllty, and the lot of the peasants was vlrtual ~lavery. Although t!he rlght to emigrate was restored to the peasantry, In view of the fact that the people were subject to burdensome taxatlon and many restrlctlons, their status by the end of the seventeenth century had grown worse, so that In reality the nobility had assumed the .rlght of life and death over its subjects. The Slovaks, especially, beoame the vlctims of a cunnlng and unscrupulous no)>llirty whtc'h en.;;Javed them. Frequent cla.ss struggles, wars. and plagues added to the mlsfortunes of the Slovak people. Many areas were reduced to poverty-stI'icken regfons where extreme mlsery and want prevalled. Northern Slovakia which had, perhaps, suffered the most in these trying <limes, became the horne of the discontented, the dise ouraged, and the desperate. These men organized rob'ber banda and preyed on t!he surroundlng countryside from th eir mountain hideouts. Tbomas Uborčik was a member of one of these bands as early as 1704. J ánošfk became a member in 1711, after taking tbe briganďs pledge and sealing bis oath w.! th bis blood. Hls explolts soon won hlm far-reaching fame not only In hls own country, but also in Moravla, P dland, Hungary and Silesla. After belng elected chleftiain, the youthful bandlt extended the zone of bis operatlons from tbe eastern count!es of Liptov, Spiš, Orava, Turiec Tekov, Malohont, and Šariš to Zvolen, Trenčln, and Nitra, and even crossed lnto Mora.vla, SHesla, Poland and Hungary. Hls comrades were, accord!ng to bis own ·a dmlsslon: Tihomas lJhorčlk (•Uhrlk); Paul Gašparec-Mlynarčlk from Rakov; Barte, the sbepherd from Predmier; "Red" Ondraš from D1há; Plavčlk from Dunajov; Gábor trom Valkov; Juro Turlak (Hun<:aga or Hunčlk); Kubo Chlastiak trom Otožnlc; J urlak, Sato ra, Gavel, and aeveral Poles. Not a few secret accompllces, llke J uro and Kubo štukovec In Kräsna, furnlsbed hlm wlth suppl!es and informatlon. f4 SLOVAKIA Folk stories about this interesting outlaw are, undoubtedly, gullty of several anachroni.sms. They list the following as Ms associatss: Uhorčik, Gajdošík-Mlynárčik, Surovec, Hrajnoha, Adamčik, llčík (the chief scout), Garaj, Postavčík, Tarke, Mucha, Durica. Most of these, however, were not even Jánošik's contemporaries. F or lnstance, James Surovec, from Rovný In Trenčin, who terrorized Orava, Trenčín, and Pohroni&, wa.s not born untH 1715, two years after Jánošik's death, and he himself was executed fn 1740. Hrajnoba, the famous dancer from Nitra, lived in the middle of the 18th century and wai; broken on the wheel in !lbe Smolen Castle. In 1878 Hrajnoha's treasure was unearthed by some laborers who were buildíng a highway 1:ear Nadaš. Adamčfk was a notorious bandit in Moravia, and Ilčik lived in Trenčin. Garaj must have preceded Jánoš!k, because a brook ls mentioned by that name in the judlclal documents covering the tria! of Slovakia's most famous outlaw. Some of J ánošik's asso ciates are, perhaps, p.roducts of Lhe popular imaginatlon. A triangular area, known as the K ing's Plateau, lies on a hlgh point overlooking the countles of Liptov, the Hron area and Malohont, near Hochwald, or Hovald, at a spot known as the "Tall Plne," directly above the road runnlng from Liptov to Spiš. This region was at one time covered with a thick forest, which was the hiding place of robber gangs in every century. Q.ueen Maria T,h eresa destroyed th!s picturesque rendezvous of the hlghwaymen by havlng the forest cut down by royal proclamatlon. But in J ánošík's time, thls area was the favorite h:rnnt of brigands, and lt was there that Lord Jáu Radvanský, whlle on bis way to tbe funeral of the former revolutionary general. Petrcx:zy, was robbed by tbe Slovak Robin Hood. Lord Paul Revay, Lady Schardon, and Lord Ladlslaus Zmeškal were also held up in t hls region by Jánošík's merry band. Lord Skalka fell into their hands, as dld Sipoš trom Žilina, some hO'rse dealers from the same town, ~everal wine merchants, and many others. Some of the booty was given to the poor and needy. Henc e, the story c irculated that Jánošik robbed 1he rich to give to tbe poor. This is not quite In keeping with the facts, for h!s comrades preyed upon the lower classe.s as well as on the wealthy nobillty. The jewels 1aken from Lord Skalka were dlstrfäuted among the young ladies In Ťa-rcbová. Romantic tales, which bave little historical basis, however, h ave become a part of the Jánošik saga in Slovakia. The authentic documents do not even allude to most of t,he feats attributed to Slovakla's legendary hero. At bis trlal, Jánošik admltted that he often raided the sheepfolds of the lords of the manor, that some of tbe shepherds, elther trom ľear of friendsbip, cooperated in these robberies and tben accompanled bim to celebra.te at the "Black Ant" In Klenovce, owned by tbe lnn-keeper, Martin Mravec, or at the "Wbite Horse" in Dunajov, and sometlmes at the "Blne Star" In Krásna, or tbe "Golden Eagle" in Ťarcbová. Winter tlme fonnd the moun,taln boys seeklng employment In tbe nearby bomesteads b ecanse the snow would bave betrayed thelr footprlnts leadlng to their 'bldlng-places, deep In the plne forests of Klng's Plateau. Tbus, Jánošík served as a farmhand ln tbe wlnter of 1712-1713 at Kovatlčik's and Ondrejčik's In Kokava. In tbe .~pring they bastened to tbeir mountaln rendezvous at tbe foot of the Tall Pine. SLOVAKIA 45 Jánošík's romantic career as Slovak!a's Robin Hood W'3.S a short one, Jastlng Jess tban two years. Although he escaped after his flrst ťapture at Klooovce in the autumn of 1712, he was caught in tbe summer of tbe next year. The commissioner at Malohont had granted him an amnesty after he had been confined in Jakoffy Ca.stle in Hrachov, but aMer tbe county po'l!ce of Liptov arrested bim he neveT regained bis rreedom. No ofriclal record glves us the exact details of bis final capture; but, accordlng to tradition, Jánošik was apprebended elther b&eause of the treachery of one of his band, namely, Gajdošík, who had given away t he secret of bis ch!eťs gigant!c strength (the mag-ic belt), or because of the treachery of J ánošik's rormer sw&etheart, w·ho ,!ost her heart to the Police Captaln Joseph Lehotský, when he came to ber father's inn, the Golden Goose, in searcb of the renowned outlaw. The scene of bis arrest, in the flr&t version, was said to have been In the Little Mountain Inn in Polhora, Zvolen County, between Brru:no and Tisovec. At any rate, t he famed outlaw was taken in chalns to Liptov, where he was lodged in Vranov Castle, bui1lt by Franei11 Palugyay. There, In a dark celi, Jánoš!k was chained to the wall to await his tria! and death. Jánošik was aHowed to plead bis case. He pleaded gullty to c·ertain charges of robbery, but denied havlng committed crlmes attributed to him. Some or the acts he was accused of were perpetrat&d whlle he was In prison. Thus, he denied having anything to do with the robbery of a priest from Orava, or the hold-up or Vitko from Sllesia, the murder of the blacksmlth's son in Dobrovce, the robblng of the Galusovecs, the looting of churches in Hungary, PO'land, Slles!a, or Moravia, where the sacrilegious robbeľl! are alleged to have nailed the sacred hosts to a tree in order to determine whether blood would flow from them when ahots were flred into the.m. He was also accused of having freed one of bis band as he was ll!bout to be hanged in Žilina. It ls notewor.thy that the county sheriff, John L itlský, and !he mayor of the town of Osčadn!ce were suspected or being overly friendly w!th Jánošik. To au the charges of which he was ra,sely accused the stoutllea!'ted robber-chieftain simply pleaded innocent. Attempts to prove that he was in collusion wi,th other notorious brlgands in Slovakla, Poland, and Hungary were unsuccessful. Wben he was accused of having sbot a priest from Domanlže, 4t was proved that two or bis associates, Tu ria k and PJavčlk, had comml tted this dastardly crime in bis absence. No crime, other .than robbery, was p.roved against JáJ!lošlk, w,bo never killed anyone. But in those days a !Jhief, as well as a murderer, might be hanged. Legendary accounts of tbe tria:! picture Jánošík as remaining silent about the ldenUty of bis comrades, but the officlal records indlcate that he gave the Court a list of ťbelr names, but refused to reveal their whereabouts. As to the burled treasure, he told bis llsteners that it was hidden in a Jarge fir <tree opposlte an oak on whioh a hand was carved lndlcatlng the exact locatlon of the flr tree, In the glade where the road winds down {rom Jablonka to Klenovce. Lord Ska\ka's jewels he had hidden In the mountalns of Handlov, althougb legends have it they were bestowed on the matdens of the village of Ťarcbová. SLOVAKIA. Jánošik was tried by the county court of Liptov, presided over by the vice-commissioner, Ladts laus Okol!csany•I, on March 16-17, 1713, in the county courthouse of St. Mlkulaš In Liptov. The other members of the court were the magl.strates of the four dlstrict-s ot Liptov county, namely, John and AndTew Rády, Andrew Andreanský, and Matthew Joob. The oftlclal prosecutor was Alexander Cemlcký, and the attorney for the defense was Balthasar Palugyay. The d&fense p leaded guilty to the charges of robbery and asked the clemency of the Cour,t. Moreover, Jánošík promLsed to glve up bis former way of llfe .and wlshed to become once a.gain a 0aw-abldlng cLtlzen. The prosecutlon, however, demanued tihe hig,hest penalty and succeeded in exactlng a two-fold sentence from the Court, so that the "doubledeallng" prisoner mlght !lrst pay the penalty for bis lighter crlmes by belng tortured on the rack, and then by belng hanged on the gallows to forfeit hls llfe for bis graver transgress1ons. T hls was in accordance witJb the laws o! the TripaTtitum ot 1515, 1625, and 1655. The death sentence was carrled out on March 17 or 18, 1713, before a vast assembly of people, on the executlon grounds of St. Mfäulaš, on the Váh near the Paludzký bridge. There the young robber-chleftaln was hanged on the gaHows, and bis llteless body was buried beneath lt as the custom of thatl. ttme. Äccordlng ,to the popular legends, Jánošík, though welgbed down by bis heavy shackles, danced the "hajduc hy" (a llvely folk da.nce) four tlmes aTound the gal!ows, just before bis death. Another legendary story tells or a courler who came dlrectly from the Emperor with hls lmperlal pardon, ,but lt was too late, for the darlng you.th, who h-ad prom.lsed to recrult four reglment.q of soldlers for the Emperor, was aAready hanglng on the rack. H e refused the amnesty wtth the words, "Now tha,t you have roasted me, you might as well devour me." He ls said to have dled after belng suspended by hls rib on the rack for three days. All natme seemed to go lnto mouring for this yout:h, whose mel'lry songs once resounded through the glen. The babbl!ng brooks became sllent, ťhe anlmals In the forest ceased their act!vity momentarlly in silent trlbute to their departed hero. A sudden hush came over all, and bis many trlends, far and near, were overcome by sorrow at bis passing. An annual penalty was lmposed on Liptov by the Emperor for havlng sentenced Jánošík to death, and, untll ~ecent times, four measures of gold ducats were pald to the lmperillll treasury each year. That is the story In legendary accounts. The people belleved in Jánošík's nobillty of character. It ls sald that hls body was buried In a crypt of the church of St. Mikulaš, where it lles In state of comp]ete preservation awaltlng the day when a new Jánošik wlll arise and strlke down the oppressors of hls poople. Many years a1!ter thls sad event, lt was reported thatl. whlle some youngsters were p.laylng nea,r the town of Hajasov, one of the boys play,f ully l!fle'd the corner of a nearby hut and hld hls cap underneath. 'Ilhls feat or amazing strength reached -the eaTs of the nobMity, ,viho qulckly remov.ed thls new performer, whom they consldered another Jánošlk. Jánošik's execution was the slgnal for the authorities to capture all the remalnlng outla,ws stm at large in Slovakla. Emerich Kublny, The reglstrar of Liptov, was sent to Malohont wltb warra,nts to arrest SLOVAKIA au suspec.ts. In Apr!l, Uhorčik, alias M.a.rtin Mravec, was captured at St. Mlkulaš, where he had marrled and seltled down as a tavern• keeper, lhe proprletor of llhe Gray Failcon. He was given a hasty trlal and condemned to d1e on the rack. An lmperiaI decree was issued by whlch bhe county magistrates would be held r-esponslble in the future for all banditry In thelr areas, and on April 17, 1713, the assembly at Liptov approved of the motlon to round up the outlaws. The imperlal marshal, John Palty, arrived to enforce the emperor's ln&tructlons. Authentlc documents, w'ith the record of Jánošlk's apprehenslon .and ,tria!, make b.lm out to be an ordlnary hlghwayman, simllar to hundreds of •bis klnd who roamed about the country and terrorlzed the gentry. He was consldered to be a da,ngerous chaTacter, as were the others of hla notorlous professlon. Neveiitheless, the fa,ct that hls name has become an lllustrlous one In the Jegendary songs e.nd storles of h1s people, la In sharp contrast wlth the oi'ficlal p!cture or thls colorful, albelt lawless, personallty. The questlon arlses, why ·has he, alone, maintalued bis posltlon as an !dol ot the Slovak natlon? Obviously, he must have been dltferent from all bis companions and con.temporarles, both In vice and vlrtue. Although lihe aura of glory and honor that surrounds bis memory ls no doubt the result, in some measure, of th-e people's rich lmaglnatlon, yet, bis deeds durlng bis llfe are a,n argument In favor of some · outstan.dlng quallties in hls makeup. We cannot account for h1s tremendous popularity among the people, nor can we explain why bis name Ls a symbol ot vlntue rather than vice, UDJ!ess we attrlbute vlrluous qua!itles to t his youth who so fired the lmagination of the old and the young that he has become the Jmmortal hero of bis natlve !and. ·T he areas known as th'e "Queen's Meadow, Warm Sprlngs," and many other regions In tre Pohron and Malohont dl.strlcts, aboun.d even today In folk songs, ballads, and storles of bis explolts ln be· half of the poor and lhe oppres.sed. We can safely conclude that the offlclal records suppressed muoh of the truth in regard to Jánošik's aotual personallty and deeds. Slnce he was the self-constltuted champlon of the 01>pressed everywhere, one can understand why bis name should be slmp4y put on the 11st as an ordina1-y cť.iminal by the oppressors, who used thelr power to llquldate all fäose who were dangerous rebels agalnst thelr form of soclety. But despite thelr precautlons, Jánošlk's name, for almost two and a half centurles, has been the symbol of hope and courage to bis people. Unllke other parts ot the Austrlan Emplre, which revoJ.ted trom time to tlme (Magyar, Romanian, Croatlan and Serblan outbreaks occurred lntermlttently ln 1514, 1569, 1'571, 1635, 1655, 1784, etc.), the Slovaks revolted oilliy once. Thls uprlslng happened In the Potlsle reglon when a rumor was spread througbout Eastern Slovakla that the nobility had polsoned their wells. It turned out, however, that the cause ot wldespread death w.a,s actually the chlorea epldemic of that year, 1631. Historloal facts make it evldent that the S!ovaks were a patient peoplil who would not rise In rebelllon In defense of thelr Jlfe as a natlon. Passlv& endurance and reslstance under the merclless system ot polltlcal oppression was, however, aC'companled by the actlve revolt 48 SLOVAKIA of the more hlghly spirited Slovak youths, who rebelled against the existing order of things by tak!ng the law lnto their own hands, and ,by retlring lnto -the.lr mountain strongholds from which they emerged at nigbt to rígbt tbe wrongs inflicted on tbeir people. Tbey pa.id for their daring and coul'age by their lives, sooner or later. But t heir sprit kept alive 1'he spark of freedom and the love of justice in the bearts of tbe Slovak.s. They wer e, to be sure, common felons and blackguards among tbe forest bigbwaymen, but Jánošík was not one of them. He was the true embodiment of bis age, wild and untamed but not ignoble and ruthless, not savage and unrestralned, b ut gallant, generous, honest, and ·honorable with his people. T he first at:tiempts to trace the popular series of Slovak poem s, ballads, songs, and legends were made in the early l&tb century. T~b lic published a poem entltled "J ánoší k, lyptovský loupežník" (J ánošik the Robber of Liptov) in his collection called Slovenšti ve ršovc i (Vol. II, 1809). Ján Konár discovered several poems a bout S lovak h ighwaymen and published them in bis Národné Zpievanky (National Ballads) in 1834 and 1835. Slovak news-buHetins a nd almanacs contained poems and folk stories about Jánošik. The Časopis a Sborní k Muzeál nej Slovens kej Spo ločnosti (The Periodical and Almanac of the Slovak Museum Association) also published a number of works on J ánošik, based largely on early manuscrip,ts found in the museums in Liptov and Ružomberok. The Matica Slovenská (Slovak Institute) planned to continue its splendid task of collecting these old publica,!Jions, wihich are rich in folklore. By bhe m iddle of the l as.t century, the last of the outlaws in Slovakia had disappeared, but the stories of their daring exploits contlnued to interes.t the common people because of their highly imaginatlve appea,i. J ánošik's fame is preserved for the ages in the many poems that have been a distinct contribution to his nation's literature. The following poems have immortalized bis memory: Paul Šafarik's "Jáno. šík" in the S laveni pac holu S lovanských 1814; Absolon Meško's " Pieseň Jánošíková," 1842, (S lovenské Pohrady, 1897, sqq.); Michal Hodž.a's poem in the Mator; Sáva Pepkin-Medňanský's "J á nošík" in bis Poezi, Vol II ; Ján Botto's "Piese: J á nošíková" in Zpevy, 1847, and "Sm rť J ánošíková" in Lipa; Samo Chalupk a's " Likavský Väzeň" In the Orol, 1846, "Na K ráľovej Holí," 1862, and "Ju nak," 1860; August Lojko's "Jánoš íkov Stol" and " Jánoší ková Podkova"; J akub Graich• mann's " Horní Chla pc i' in the Sokol, 1861); William P auliny-Toth's " Jánoš ík s mi lou"; Ján ČaJák's "Já noší k" in the Oro l, 1870. a nd " J á nošíková Náhrada," 1875; J onas Záborský's "Smrť J á nošíková" In the S lov. Po h ľady, 1894. Paul Beblavý wrote an interesting his.torlcal story about bim in the S lov. Pohrady, 1889; Augustus Marschal-Petrovský, a long no ve!, J á nošík, Kapi t á n Ho rských Chlapcov, In 1901. Samo Zdyobavský wrote a play, J ánošík; J ona:s Zaborský, a drama, Jánošíková Večera ; Michal Skačkanský, a tragedy, J á nošík, 1880; Ľud. Kubaný, a play, Ho rní Chlapci ; Júr Mahen, a moving lragedy, Jánošík, 1910; Frances Svoboda-Goldman, a histoi,ical drama: J ohn P orod, a play, J á noliik, 1928, etc. Other articles and historlcal .•tudles about bim were written by ,the followlng: Gaspar Fejérpal11ky In Vlaste nský Kal endár, 1831: Stephen Hýroš In his Zá mok Ly ka va, 1876; Pavel Dobšinský ln Prostonárod né obyčaje, 1880; Rudolph Pokorný's Z potulek po SLOVAKIA 49 Slovensku, 1883; Ján Bobula's Jánošík, 1863; K. Salva-Cebradskťs Jánošík; Julius Botto in bis article "Leopold I and Francis Rákoczi II" ln the Slov. Pohrady, 1904 mentions Jánoš í; Carl Kálaľs Slováci a Slovensko, 1905, and bis Na Krásnem Slovensku, 1903; Oarl Dúbravský's Jánošík, 1911; Gregor Uram·Podtatranský's "Juro Jánošík in the S bor. Muz. Slov. Sp. VIII, 1908; J aroslav Tuma's "Jánoší k," in 1911, Naše Slovensko; Michal Jiránek's " Zbojníci" in Slov. Čitanka, 1911; Samo Czambeľs "Jánošík" in Páričkov's Ružomberský Ka lendár, 1913; Joseph Škultety's Jánošíková Doba" in Slov. Pohrady, 1913; Jgnac Gessay in the A!Lmanac of the Slovák v Amerike; Pavel Sochaň's "Zbojník Juro Jánoší k," 1924. Ján L. Bella put Botto's poem "Svadba Jánošíková" to music for solo, with piano accompan.lment and oches- tr-ation. Vitezslav Novák also composed an orginaJ musical score on the subject called "Jánošík," which is to be found in Mladí, op. 55. Almost without exception the foregoing works pre.sented Jánošík as bhe idol of bis people, as por,trayed in bhe folk songs and ballads which have become a rich heritage of the Slovak nation. In some he is a patriot, in others a young t,beologian who has been Jed away from bis hlgb calling by the cruel circumstamces of bis tlme, ,vthile in all of them, with one exception, he ls depicted as a knightly hig,h• wayman who ls devoted to bis poor, oppressed poople. The one exception is Pavel Sochaň, who endeavors to debunk all the Iegendary glory surrounding the name o! Jánošík by basing bis Zbojník Juro Jánošík, akým bol v Skutočnosti (The Reail Jánošik) entirely on the cas~ records found in the County Court House of Liptov. But this is, perha,ps, the passing fancy of the times, to smash all the traditional ldols of bbe past, and Sochaň is one of tbls class of modern iconoclasts. Despite his efforts and those of others to defame the character of tlhe l~gendary heroes of yesterday, the fact remains that Jánoš!k has been an influence in popular Slovak poetry, llterature, and drama, and his name is imperisbable in tbe history of bis people. Botto's poems, alone, would make bis fame immortaJ. Not only did Slovak and Czech wrlters devote their talent.s to the singing o! •bis praises, but we find that the Polisb autbor, Przerwa-Tetmajer, wrote a whole ser.les of ballads about bim, as well as a beautlful, touobingľ poem about bis deatb. His collection of fables, folk stori~. folk songs, and poems ( Báje z Tatier) was very popular in bis n,a tive Poland. Vlad. Hnatjuk, ťhe famous Ukralnian etbnographer, wrote a treatise on Jánošík in 1889, and included numerous Slovakian songs about this national figure in bis collection of Russian, Slovak, Moravjan, and Polisb folklore. Jánoš!k has been the frequent subject of creatlve are in bis native country. Tbus, his likeness appears on glassware, prlmitive palntings, pottery, etc., in wbicb he and his gay mountain Iads are shown dres.sed in green blouses, red and wbite breecbes, shlny black boots, gally colored hats wlťb feathers in tbem, wďde walsbbands ricbly studded with gold, silver, and precious stones, and armed with muskets and hatcbets (valašky). J ánošik always has the place of honor as tbe leader, while Surovec is sbown brandishlng bis valaška; Hrajnoba shoots off tbe tip of a tall plne as he Ieaps high lnto the air in a playful mood; and Gajdošik plays h!s bagpipes, wbile tbe others dance to bis mountain music. Tbe Slovak art!sts, Mikulaš Aleš, :\fartln Benka, and Ján Alexy, have made palntlngs of J ánoli!k. Tbe liO sculptor Franta Uprka made a number of fJgures of Jánošlk and his companions, the best of them being hls sculpture of the entlre group gathered around a bontlre on the mountalntop near the Tall Fine. l,'. Fulla executed a gorgeous linoleum design of the group. Vla.dyslav Skovzylaš, a Polls'h artist, ma.de several exqulsite wood carvings of these T atra mountaineers of Jong ago. Among them are one ot Jánošlk, alone, another of Jánošík and hls sweetheart, one of his profile, and a fourth of b.is men on the march. Jánošlk's buried treasure has engaged the popular lmaginat!on everywhere in Slovakia for centuries. The probable hlding places most frequently mentloned are: Kozia Skala, located In the šutov valiey in Turiec; Jánoiíkoá Pivnica, a cavern near Balna In tbe valley of Nemecká Lupča; Biela Skala in the Suchá Valley near Liptov; and Zemský Kľúč. Belopotecký's Mss., 1835, now in t'he Liptov Museum in Ružoml>erok, refers to all these places, besldes Pod Jedlou near Trnovec in Liptov, the Baránec Meadow near St. Andrew's in Liptov county, and many others. Pavel Sochaň's "Jánošíkové Poklady" in the Slov. Pohra.dy, 1922-23, and Ján Poroďs "Poklad a iné povesti z okolia Bytče" also conta.in clues to lhe secret hlding places of gold, silver and gems. Numerous al'tlcles have appeared in the off-lclal publlcatlons of the Sborník Muz. Sl. Spol. in recent years under the title of "Jánošíkov Poklad. Emo Bohúň wrote a fantastlc novel on the subject. The following places have been named after the famous outaaw: Jánošíková Kolkáreň (JáJnošlk's Bowling Alley) located In Liptov; Jánošíkové Husle (Jánošik's F\iddle) in Malé Smrekovice; Jánošíková Jaskyňa (Jánošilťs Cave) in the Prosiecká valley; Jánošíkov Stôl (Jánošlk's Table) In Važec; Jánošíkové Sedlo (Jánošlk's Sa.ddle) in the Queen's Meadow; Jánošíková Stupa (Jánošík's Footprlnt) in !;he Gadierská valley, In Turiec; Jánošíková Stolica (Jánošlk's County in the v;ratná valley Ťarchová; Jánošíková Skala (Jánošlk'c Rock) at L1šenlk, near Polhora, Zvolen county; Jánošíkov Chodník (Jánošlk's Path) and Jánoš íková Jaskyňa (Jánošík's Cave) near Tisovce; Jánošíková Podkova (Jánošík's Horseshoe) in the Rimavská valley under Zlamenečin Hill; 81lld Jánošíkov Skok (Jánošlk's Leap) at Dunajec. These and many otber names wlll preserve the name of Jánošík even ir all poems and stories about hlm dlsappear. Jánošlk'.s hat 1s in the Liptov museum in Ružomberok. lt 1s ma.de of clot1h rlohly embroidered with gold Jace and decorated with mussel shells, and is higb and cyllndrical in shape. Hls hatchet ls now in the natlonal museum at Budapest, whlle his plpe 1s in the Slovak Instltute's collection. Th~ famous belt, whlch had been given hlm by a fairy and was sald to have glvsn the Slovak hero preternatural powers, is now in t,he Slovak Nat1ooal Museum In St. Martln's in Turiec. A cane and tJwo ancient plctures or 'h ls band depicted on glass are there a lso. Two plctures or him are In the collectlon of the Moravian Natural Museum In Brno. The Liptov Museum at Ružomberok has a photograph of hls halrchet, a copy of the paintlngs Iu Brno, a copy ot the orlginal court records ot t,he tria! of Jánošík, several palntlngs by Fulla and Skoczylaša, and a large number of llterary works. In Rovno, Joseph Buchčar !s the proud po~essor ot an artlstlc leather belt, flllgreed lengthwise wltn goose qullls, w'hicb was found In his old mlll Jn the course ot some repairs. Although lt is sald that thls belonged to Jáno1 SLOV.A.KU. 61 šik, it was more proba.bly the properly of Jánošík's lieutenant, Surovec, as Rovno was Suroveťs horne town. The Tatranský Museum has six old Polish g!ass likenesses of Jánošlk and hls merry men, similar to the glassware in St. Martin's in Turiec. One, however, shows the outlaiws oarrying a bag of ducats, another has the picture ot his sweetheart. The collection there contains four pistols, ten knives, four powder hom_s, and a bag in whlch the robbers used to carry thelr stolen ducats. Beneath the paintlngs of t?hese colorful personalitles of Slovak folklore there !s a brief explanation of the lnitlatlon of new members to the ro'bber gangs. 'l'hey were required to prove the:ir prowess In ,<,hooting oiif the tip of a tree with a pistol, or cuttlng lt otf wlth a throw of the hatchet, by drinldng a bottle of brandy, and then by performlng the d!fflcult "Robber's Dance." The lnitiat!on took p!ace in the evenlng around thelr bonflre. Eaoh outlaw was armed to the teeth wlth a hatohet in hls b elt, a brace of pistols, and a musket. Of course, there was the powder horn, the wlde oell, the knapsack, a Hussar's hat, and the bni:ghtly colored shirt and trousers to m ake up the rest of the1r accoutrement. Jánošiťs breeohes were said to have been red and w,hite In color. It seems lncredible, in view of Jánošlk'.s fame, that no monument stiands to honor his memory, or bhat no plaque marks bis birthplace. But he llves in the hearts of •h is people, hence needs no image of iron or stone to remind them of his life and his deeds. No other record t:Xists of the merry mountain boys who had been Jánošílťs companions. Mo.st probabtly they disbanded and under assumed names followed peaceful and honorable professions until the end of thelr lives. Uhorčik, however, was cau~ht and executed; and "Red" Ondraš disappeared In the vlclnlty of Tešlnka whlle Jánošik was stlll at Iarge. 'l1he woodlands grew silent and peaceful wlth the passlng of Jánošík from the scene. 'l'he songs of hls merry men were silenced forever, and the fores ts were left undisturbed for the deer, bear, fox, and wlld boar as they went about unchallenged. And hlgh o'erhead, an eagle on swift and silent wings surveyed the glen far below, abandoned and cheerless, for tbe ,happy throng of Jánošik's youths ba.d dlspersed, and their ohlef was dead. - (Slovenské Pohrady, V. XLV. Nos. 1-2, 1929). • • • WHO SAID IT ? "The Czechs bave been at all times all too rea.dy to look on most Slovaks as Magyarones and potentlal traltors, and have employed battallons of censors, police agents, and other customary Instruments of unpopu!ar Governments, wblcb always end by maklng the sltuation worse than hefore. Neltber the pollcy of Prague nor the attltude of the Czech offlclals In Slovakla was al• ways elther wlse or tactful. Tbe Czech Soclallsts. wbo played such a large part in the Government or tlle flrst years, incorporated all those Czech characterlstlcs most obnoxlous to the Slovaks. They were crude, tbey were 111-mannered, tbey were aggresslvely egalitarlan, and they were almost fanatlcally antl-clerlcal, seelng in the churches In Slovakla a two-fold enemy. i<ocial and natlonal." - (C. A. Macartney: H UNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS; 1937, London).  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 Jánošík - The Slovak Robin Hood Description An account of the resource Ivan Houdek Slovakia, Vol. 2, No. 3 (5), December 1952 pp. 42-51 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Houdek, Ivan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1952 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/847fc09eac7538b42921e528d59f9fae.pdf 038707c6df155a3847caa8c68ade0a81 PDF Text Text 164 SLOVAKIA BRATISLAVA: Ancient Slovak Cultural Center (A translation from the Slovak of a portion of I.:udo Ztibek's Moja Bratislava (My Bratislava), published by Mlade Leta Publishing House, Bratislava, 1965) 1467 ACADEMIA ISTROPOLITANA Bratislava's city chamberlain, who had charge of the so-called chamberlain book (the book of the city's receipts and expenditures ) recorded on the 20th of July, 1467, that on that day the mayor and the councilmen hosted the professors who had arrived for the opening of the new school of higher learning. They gave them fried chicken, rolls, wine and fruit. Bratislava's mayor and councilmen were hospitable people, and they honored each distin guished guest with a more modest or a more expensive refreshment according to the guest's station in life. The reception, which is mentioned in the book of records, was not the poorest. From this one may conclude that the affair concerned distinguished guests. The event, with which the arrival of the professors bore upon, was centainly significant. In Bratislava they opened a university known as Academia Istropolitana. The reception of the professors was the culmination of lengthy preparatory work which began two years before in 1465. At that time the Hungarian king, Matej Korvin, sent t o Rome a mission of some renown in order to obtain from the Pope an agreement for the establishment of an institution of higher learning in Bratislava. In the fifteenth century there already existed a number of well-known universities in Europe: Salerno, Bologna, Paris, Prague, Cracow, Vienna, etc. The universities had merit for the reason, that concurrently with their fame there was also spread the glory of the city in which the institution was located. Each university depended on the fact that it should have well-known professors because its scholarly renown was the best recommendation for higher learning. Such universities had students also from distant countries. The �SLOVAKIA 165 young men of Hungary who wished to attain a higher education could only decide upon a foreign university because in Hungary there were none. They had no language difficulties, since in all the schools teaching was carried on in Latin. It is therefore natural that the king, who revered the arts and surrounded himself at his court in Budin with outstanding humanists, desired that there should be a university in his country. He could have established it himself, but in such a case the degrees granted there would have value only in Hungary. In order for it to have international academic recognition, some kind of higher authority had to permit the establishment of the university. Such an authority was the German emperor ( at that time Fridrich III) or the Pope. Since Matej's relations with Fridrich could not be called friendly, the king turned to the Pope. Under the leadership of the learned bishop Jan cezmicky, better known by the name Jan Pannonius, and the commanderin-chief Jan Rozgon, a magnificent escort numbering 300 people left on February 20, 1465 from Budin on a march to Rome. In order to make the success of the mission more certain, they carried with them for the Pope a humble "St. Peter's pence": 20,000 gold pieces. Pope Paul II settled Matej's request favorably, but in the charter with which he permitted the establishment of the Academia, he stated a condition that the new school should be set up according to the example of Bologna University. From this condition it would logically result that for Academia Istropolitana the Bologna school should be the model in all matters, but the leaders of the university used Bologna as an example only for its teaching programs. The management of the Academia had a different tenor. At Bologna the students had the greatest of power. They chose their professors and had control over their lectures. In like manner they themselves elected the rector, and he was chosen from their midst. The rector had advisors at hand with whom he exercised authority not only over the students, but also over professors. Without consent of students and presence of their representatives a professor could not call in a student and admonish or punish him. �166 SLOVAKIA Nowhere else on earth did scholars have such rights as at Bologna. At Academia Istropolitana all authority was in the hands of the chancellor, who was appointed by the king. The chancellor hired and fired professors, granted the academic degrees, and carried out his judicial and disciplinary authority over the professors and students. Academia Istropolitana was formally opened July 20, 1467, but actual teaching there did not begin until the end of September. The university obtained the building as a gift from the king and Chancellor Vitez. It was a building on Venturska Street, of which half was deeded over from a dead title to the king's possession and the other half Vitez bought for the university for 600 gold pieces. The city had the building remodeled in such a way that there would be lecture halls, apartments for professors and living quarters for the students. Commencement exercises were held in a nearby cathedral. The first chancellor of Academia Istropolitana was the above mentioned Jan Vitez, the archbishop of Ostrihom and the king's chancellor. He was not only a statesman of distinction, but also a humanistic writer of the first rank. He was born in the year 1408 in Zredna, but his forefathers came from Ostrihom. Along with his career as a priest (first he was bishop of Vel'ky Varadin, then archbishop of Ostrihom) he very quickly attained a leading position at the king's court: he became chancellor of the king Matej Korvin. At his resi_d ence in the Ostrihom palace, which he remodeled and artistically decorated at great cost, he surrounded himself with humanistic writers and scholars of the highest rank. They came to Ostrihom from almost all parts of Europe: from Czechia, Germany, Poland, France, Italy, and Greece. Vitez was a true child of his times. On the one hand, under the influence of the work of his contemporaries, he very quickly saw the reasons for unhealthy events in the country and openly warned of them. In the introduction to his book of letters (his collection of letters written in Latin) he wr.o te: "Truly I have already saturated myself with viewing so much misery, but in order that I secure a safer destiny, I shall be silent." This is the other side �SLOVAKIA 167 of his personality: behave as others behave. He dressed as a worldly magnate in clothes of embroidered gold, wore a gold chain around his neck and a wreath embeded with precious stones on his head. His personal guard consisted of 300 knights. He eagerly supported the building of new palaces and churches and put forth a great amount of money for the procurement of books, especially beautifully decorated codices. His library was world-famous. He had in it the works of all the important ancient Greek and Roman authors and prominent church fathers. Although Johannes Guttenberg was a contemporary of Vitez, the printing of books was then not yet known in Hungary. All books were transcribed by writers and illustrated by artists. Vitez's love of beautiful manuscripts financially cost him very heavily. Let us not be surprised that the chancellor wanted to obtain some books at less cost. He simply borrowed them-and didn't return them. Most frequently he would borrow them from his nephew, bishop Jan Cezmicky. When the bishop's reminders to the great chancellor reminded without result-but on the contrary, Vitez requested that his nephew lend him more codices-Pannonius answered with an ironic letter: You write that I should send you books. Well, did I not already send you enough? I have only Greek books left: you have taken away all the Latin ones. Praise God that you do not know Greek, otherwise you would not leave me even those. If you would learn Greek, I would immediately acquire a knowledge of the Hebrew language and I would establish a libvary of Hebrew codices. I ask, how it is possible, that in the procurement of books, you are so dissatisfied. Do you possibly think that in this you are not committing a sinful act? In my opinion it does not matter on what things our passions concentrate. If in fact you truly desire books so much, do not take them from others who have less of them then you. The extravagant, rich, diplomatic and literary eventfilled life of the chancellor took a sudden sharp turn when Vitez embroiled himself in a conspiracy against the king Matej. The king had him imprisoned. Shortly after (1467) the former chancellor died. At the time of the establishment of Academia Istropolitana, Vitez was at the peak of his power. His greatest responsibility in connection with the new school was to get famous professors for it. He was successful in that . �168 SLOVAKIA because already in the first year of the existence of the academy we meet here with the name of the outstanding astronomer Johann Miiller, known in the scientific world as Regiomontanus. Vitez invited him to Bratislava from Vienna, where he was a professor of the university located there. Here are at least some of the most well-known data from his life: He was born in the year 1436 in Konigsberg (from this he derived the Latinized form of his scientific name Regiomontanus). Upon completion of schooling, he taught mathematics at Vienna University, then in 1462 he left with the escort of Cardinal Bessarion to Italy in order to complete his study of Greek. The humanistic and renaissance learned men studied Greek a great deal, which previously the educated had neglected. He wanted to publish a revised translation of the works of the great ancient astronomer Ptolemy. Upon his return from Italy he lived in Vienna and in Ostrihom at the court of Jan Vitez. From there he left to become a professor at Bratislava. But he did not remain long. Maybe he lacked a properly equipped observatory; perhaps he did not wish to compose horoscopes which the king, the aristocracy and rich townsfolk requested of him. In 1471 he moved to Ntirnberg where with the financial aid of the wealthy townsman Walther he had constructed astronomical instruments and set up his own printery at which his scientific works were printed. In 1474 Pope Sixtus IV invited him to Rome in order to be the scientific advisor on calendar reform. Here he died in 1476. His most famous astronomical work was a calculation of the paths of heavenly bodies published under the title Tabulae Directionum. Still 200 years after Regiomontanus' death these tables were used as an important astronomical aid. The authorities of Bratislava hired other professors in Poland, Italy and France. From Cracow University came Professor Martin Ilkus, who in addition to philosophy also occupied himself with astronomy. Many of his astronomical instruments and handwritings of his scientific works could still be found in Cracow. There are horoscopes which Magister Martin-this is the manner in which he was �SLOVAKIA 169 referred to at the king's court-made for King Matej and members of his family. All of the aristocrats and noblemen of that time gave priority to astrology over astronomy. Ilkus must certainly have found in Regiomontanus a good co-worker because he was a scientific personality. Historians of the new era refer to Regiomontanus as a spiritual predecessor of Christopher Columbus. It seems that the fate of Academia Istropolitana was very closely tied to the fate of its chancellor Vitez. When Vitez fell into disfavor and lost his position with the university, the Academia began to decline. Vice-chancellor Schomberg did not succeed in obtaining professors of such standing as Regiomontanus. Also the number of students began to dwindle. The king had planned the construction of a new building for students in the rear of the courtyard or next to the main building. But the addition was not necessary. From foreign countries very few applicants inquired and many students from Hungary gave preference henceforth to Vienna and Cracow. And thus Academia Istropolitana ceased to exist immediately upon the death of Matej Korvin (1490). STUDENTS AND PROFESSORS Let us return to our student and follow him to the Gmaitlovsky house on Venturska Street. Academia Istropolitana is located in a building in the courtyard. The entire court is filled with building materials because King Matej has great plans for the university. He wants to build a rear wing and remodel the facade so that afterward the building would form an enclosed unit. At present there are in the completed part only lecture halls, professors' apartments, and the students' dormitory section. All students however do not live in the dormitory. The home-towners, naturally, live with their parents and those from out of town who have relatives or friends in Bratislava would rather live with them. It is more convenient because the house rules of the dormitory are very strict. It is especially bad in winter. There is heat only in the common study where, in the afternoon and evening hours under the supervision of the dormitory's headmaster, the students must repeat the subject-matter on �170 SLOVAKIA which the professors lectured in the forenoon. There is no heat in rooms where students sleep ... Let the students accustom themselves! The school years begins on the tenth of October with a high mass in the cathedral. The students had to arrive in Bratislava even before this. The first of their concerns was to announce themselves at the rector's, identify themselves with a certificate of completion of middle school, and register with one of four faculties. By registration with the rector the student formally became a member of a great university society, but he became a true student only after the Beaniae. A first year student was titled a beanus ( allegedly because of the fact that he is still stupid or a sheep which, with the exception of bleating, knows nothing else; a beanus knows only to say be). The initiation rites to which every beanus had to submit was called the Beaniae. · The comic ceremony had only one purpose: to torment the beani in the worst way. For example, they smeared their faces with some kind of black grease and then they shaved them with a large wooden razor, or they placed horns on their heads and ordered them to perform all kinds of difficult and amusing tasks. Upon completion of the production the beani had to host their professors and older colleagues. At the majority of the universities the professors themselves voted for the rector, the vice-rector and the deans. It was not so in Bratislava. Academia Istropolitana did not have a rector, but a chancellor appointed by the king. His term of office was not limited by time; while a rector was elected by professors for a term of one year, the chancellor was in fact a royal office-holder commissioned with the management of the university. He alone chose his representative, the vicechancellor. The main course of study at the Academia was theology; the weakest by attendance was in medicine. At Academia Istropolitana we know only of the master Peter who lectured here on medicine. As we speak of lecturing, this is not a completely precise description. The professor did not lecture, but read. He read the works of recognized �SLOVAKIA 171 scientific authorities and explained them. He did not add anything of his own. Students sat on simple wooden benches, on their knees were placed planks, and on those some kind of parchment or paper on which they made notes with a goose guill dipped in ink. They had a little bottle of ink tied with a string around the waist. There were no textbooks and for that reason the head-master, who had supervision over them, went over the lectured material with the students in the dormitory or study room. Because the age of those in attendance was not prescribed, 15 year old boys and 30-40 years old men sat together in the classroom. After two years of study, the student attained the academic degree of the first step: the bachelor's. The next higher step was the licenciate and the highest was titled master. Degrees were granted ceremonially after rigorous examinations of which the main part was the disputation; we could compare it to today's defense of the dissertation. It is true, disputation themes of those times were substantially different. There was a preponderance of theological and philosophical topics. Less were concerned with the natural sciences. In the archives of Prague's Karlova University there is preserved from the sixteenth century a report on the disputation of Master Ondtej Mitisko. He debated the subject of earthquakes. According to him the cause of earthquakes was warm and dry steam or wind enclosed in the bowels of the earth and searching for an escape. When the wind does not find that escape because of the firmness of those parts of the earth, it shakes those parts. The title of another disputation was again thus: "Is it proper that a Christian should look on a meteor as holding in itself a sign of the future?" It is too bad that there were not preserved the titles of the bachelor and master disputations of Academia Istropolitana. It would certainly be interesting reading. The life of students was gay, but we would be mistaken if we were to assume that equality reigned among them. A folk proverb says that a lord is in Hell also a lord. Therefore it is undestandable that the university students of nobility wanted to be lords also at Academia Istro- �172 SLOVAKIA politana. It is interesting that among the students there were also bOYIS from the poor serf families. Nearly all studied theology. The landowners prevented their subjects to send their sons to school. They themselves underrated education, and even at the time of King Matej many of the most prominent of the rich could not write and did not allow their subjects to study. They permitted an exception only with the study of theology. From the goodness-of-heart of his lord even a subject could become a priest. In order that these poor scholars could complete their studies in some way, they became a famulus to the rich students. Famulus is actually only a Latin name for the word servant. Such a poor student then took care of the bed, shoes and clothing of his rich lord colleague. For this he received from him a regular monthly payment. Many students did not remain in Bratislava until the attainment of the master's degree. As a rule they left for some foreign university as soon as they reached the bachelor's. With its relatively short existence, Academia Istropolitana could claim only a few distinguished graduates. (There is among them the notorious Stefan Verboczy, the author of the juridicial regulations called Tripartitum which, after the ill fated Dofa uprising in 1514, made the position of the Hungarian serfs substantially worse.) THE FORMER EVANGELICAL LYCEUM It seems almost unbelievable that a handful of students could imprint with its activities the mark of the times upon the city. This handful of young people entered into our national and literary history under the name of stur's Followers. Their activities in Bratislava were inseparably connected with the activities of Cudovit stur and with the former evangelical lyceum building on Konventna Street. Nearly all of his followers studied at this school. A sandstone tablet on the wall of the lyceum building calls their names to mind. It is a long list of names, well-known and lesser known people, who in some way registered themselves into our cultural history. Behold at least a few of the most famous: Cudovit stur, J. M. Hurban, M. M. Hod.fa, Samo Chalupka, Karol Kuzmany, �SLOVAKIA 173 Janko Matuska, A. H. Skultety, Jan Francisci, Andrej Sladkovic ... This generation of young men burning with a national spirit came to Bratislava as a second wave. The first were the students of the Catholic general seminary, which Maria Teresia organized at the citadel. Anton Bemolak, Juraj Fandli and others had studied at this seminary. In their company it is also necessary to include the canon of Bratislava Jozef Ignac Bajza, author of the first Slovak novel Rene, a young man of events and experiences. In the thirties 0829) Cudovit stur came to Bratislava. With his arrival the still waters of the cultural life of Slovak students in Bratislava began to move. The so-called Society of Czecho-Slovak Language and Literature, which before this lived very poorly, began to develop under Stu.r's leadership a very intensive activity. The Society had over 100 members who regularly met at common meetings. Here they always heard some kind of lecture or recitation of poems, and finally an appointed judge evaluated the literary work of the members of the Society. Because at that time Moravians, Czechs, Croatians and Serbians also studied at Bratislava's lyceum, the Society had a Slavonic character not only in the nationalities of its members, but also in the tenor of its activities. But the obligations of the members of the Society did not end at vacation time. On the contrary, stur assigned his students tasks during vacation: they traveled in Slovakia, Moravia and Czechia, established personal contacts and cultural acquaintances, collected folk-songs and folk-tales, and .searched for new students for the lyceum. In Bratislava, the activities of the Society were not limited only to the lyceum hall meetings where the students were under the control of nationally biased professorn. stur took his followers to places of former Slavonic majesty and glory: the Bratislava citadel, Kamzik mountain, and the more distant surroundings of Bratislava. Most memorable was the excursion to Devin on April 24 in 1836. It was an important national manifestation, which left its impression on the participants the rest of their lives. Such undertakings also had a political meaning and their influence grew in all of Slovakia. �174 SLOVAKIA Indeed Shir's id.eals, which the students adopted in Bratislava, were taken with them after completion of studies to their home districts. And most of all, stur began to spread his views with the printed word. Beginning with the year 1845, there appeared the most important Slovak newspaper of prerevolutionary times, the Slovak National News with its supplement, the Tatra Eagle. And in two years stur became a representative with the Bratislava parliament. We may say that all this grew from a seed which the Bratislava evangelical lyceum planted in the students. Today's building is from the year 1854, thus from post-stur times. The building is a little further from town than the original and today houses the library of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in which stur and his friends studied. Dr. Joseph Hr ad nan s k y Associate Professor Indiana University of Pennsylvania Instructor in Slovak University of Pittsburgh • • • SLOVAKIA is published annually by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. One of the purposes of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Sl-ovak nation and its long struggle foT freedom and independence. Subscription to Slovakia $3.00 per year in the U .S.A. - $4.00 el-sewhei-e. Rend subscription to: SLOVAKIA 313 Ridge A venue Mi<l.clletown, Pa. 17057 � 164 SLOVAKIA BRATISLAVA: Ancient Slovak Cultural Center (A translation from the Slovak of a portion of I.:udo Ztibek's Moja Bratislava (My Bratislava), published by Mlade Leta Publishing House, Bratislava, 1965) 1467 ACADEMIA ISTROPOLITANA Bratislava's city chamberlain, who had charge of the so-called chamberlain book (the book of the city's receipts and expenditures ) recorded on the 20th of July, 1467, that on that day the mayor and the councilmen hosted the professors who had arrived for the opening of the new school of higher learning. They gave them fried chicken, rolls, wine and fruit. Bratislava's mayor and councilmen were hospitable people, and they honored each distin guished guest with a more modest or a more expensive refreshment according to the guest's station in life. The reception, which is mentioned in the book of records, was not the poorest. From this one may conclude that the affair concerned distinguished guests. The event, with which the arrival of the professors bore upon, was centainly significant. In Bratislava they opened a university known as Academia Istropolitana. The reception of the professors was the culmination of lengthy preparatory work which began two years before in 1465. At that time the Hungarian king, Matej Korvin, sent t o Rome a mission of some renown in order to obtain from the Pope an agreement for the establishment of an institution of higher learning in Bratislava. In the fifteenth century there already existed a number of well-known universities in Europe: Salerno, Bologna, Paris, Prague, Cracow, Vienna, etc. The universities had merit for the reason, that concurrently with their fame there was also spread the glory of the city in which the institution was located. Each university depended on the fact that it should have well-known professors because its scholarly renown was the best recommendation for higher learning. Such universities had students also from distant countries. The �SLOVAKIA 165 young men of Hungary who wished to attain a higher education could only decide upon a foreign university because in Hungary there were none. They had no language difficulties, since in all the schools teaching was carried on in Latin. It is therefore natural that the king, who revered the arts and surrounded himself at his court in Budin with outstanding humanists, desired that there should be a university in his country. He could have established it himself, but in such a case the degrees granted there would have value only in Hungary. In order for it to have international academic recognition, some kind of higher authority had to permit the establishment of the university. Such an authority was the German emperor ( at that time Fridrich III) or the Pope. Since Matej's relations with Fridrich could not be called friendly, the king turned to the Pope. Under the leadership of the learned bishop Jan cezmicky, better known by the name Jan Pannonius, and the commanderin-chief Jan Rozgon, a magnificent escort numbering 300 people left on February 20, 1465 from Budin on a march to Rome. In order to make the success of the mission more certain, they carried with them for the Pope a humble "St. Peter's pence": 20,000 gold pieces. Pope Paul II settled Matej's request favorably, but in the charter with which he permitted the establishment of the Academia, he stated a condition that the new school should be set up according to the example of Bologna University. From this condition it would logically result that for Academia Istropolitana the Bologna school should be the model in all matters, but the leaders of the university used Bologna as an example only for its teaching programs. The management of the Academia had a different tenor. At Bologna the students had the greatest of power. They chose their professors and had control over their lectures. In like manner they themselves elected the rector, and he was chosen from their midst. The rector had advisors at hand with whom he exercised authority not only over the students, but also over professors. Without consent of students and presence of their representatives a professor could not call in a student and admonish or punish him. �166 SLOVAKIA Nowhere else on earth did scholars have such rights as at Bologna. At Academia Istropolitana all authority was in the hands of the chancellor, who was appointed by the king. The chancellor hired and fired professors, granted the academic degrees, and carried out his judicial and disciplinary authority over the professors and students. Academia Istropolitana was formally opened July 20, 1467, but actual teaching there did not begin until the end of September. The university obtained the building as a gift from the king and Chancellor Vitez. It was a building on Venturska Street, of which half was deeded over from a dead title to the king's possession and the other half Vitez bought for the university for 600 gold pieces. The city had the building remodeled in such a way that there would be lecture halls, apartments for professors and living quarters for the students. Commencement exercises were held in a nearby cathedral. The first chancellor of Academia Istropolitana was the above mentioned Jan Vitez, the archbishop of Ostrihom and the king's chancellor. He was not only a statesman of distinction, but also a humanistic writer of the first rank. He was born in the year 1408 in Zredna, but his forefathers came from Ostrihom. Along with his career as a priest (first he was bishop of Vel'ky Varadin, then archbishop of Ostrihom) he very quickly attained a leading position at the king's court: he became chancellor of the king Matej Korvin. At his resi_d ence in the Ostrihom palace, which he remodeled and artistically decorated at great cost, he surrounded himself with humanistic writers and scholars of the highest rank. They came to Ostrihom from almost all parts of Europe: from Czechia, Germany, Poland, France, Italy, and Greece. Vitez was a true child of his times. On the one hand, under the influence of the work of his contemporaries, he very quickly saw the reasons for unhealthy events in the country and openly warned of them. In the introduction to his book of letters (his collection of letters written in Latin) he wr.o te: "Truly I have already saturated myself with viewing so much misery, but in order that I secure a safer destiny, I shall be silent." This is the other side �SLOVAKIA 167 of his personality: behave as others behave. He dressed as a worldly magnate in clothes of embroidered gold, wore a gold chain around his neck and a wreath embeded with precious stones on his head. His personal guard consisted of 300 knights. He eagerly supported the building of new palaces and churches and put forth a great amount of money for the procurement of books, especially beautifully decorated codices. His library was world-famous. He had in it the works of all the important ancient Greek and Roman authors and prominent church fathers. Although Johannes Guttenberg was a contemporary of Vitez, the printing of books was then not yet known in Hungary. All books were transcribed by writers and illustrated by artists. Vitez's love of beautiful manuscripts financially cost him very heavily. Let us not be surprised that the chancellor wanted to obtain some books at less cost. He simply borrowed them-and didn't return them. Most frequently he would borrow them from his nephew, bishop Jan Cezmicky. When the bishop's reminders to the great chancellor reminded without result-but on the contrary, Vitez requested that his nephew lend him more codices-Pannonius answered with an ironic letter: You write that I should send you books. Well, did I not already send you enough? I have only Greek books left: you have taken away all the Latin ones. Praise God that you do not know Greek, otherwise you would not leave me even those. If you would learn Greek, I would immediately acquire a knowledge of the Hebrew language and I would establish a libvary of Hebrew codices. I ask, how it is possible, that in the procurement of books, you are so dissatisfied. Do you possibly think that in this you are not committing a sinful act? In my opinion it does not matter on what things our passions concentrate. If in fact you truly desire books so much, do not take them from others who have less of them then you. The extravagant, rich, diplomatic and literary eventfilled life of the chancellor took a sudden sharp turn when Vitez embroiled himself in a conspiracy against the king Matej. The king had him imprisoned. Shortly after (1467) the former chancellor died. At the time of the establishment of Academia Istropolitana, Vitez was at the peak of his power. His greatest responsibility in connection with the new school was to get famous professors for it. He was successful in that . �168 SLOVAKIA because already in the first year of the existence of the academy we meet here with the name of the outstanding astronomer Johann Miiller, known in the scientific world as Regiomontanus. Vitez invited him to Bratislava from Vienna, where he was a professor of the university located there. Here are at least some of the most well-known data from his life: He was born in the year 1436 in Konigsberg (from this he derived the Latinized form of his scientific name Regiomontanus). Upon completion of schooling, he taught mathematics at Vienna University, then in 1462 he left with the escort of Cardinal Bessarion to Italy in order to complete his study of Greek. The humanistic and renaissance learned men studied Greek a great deal, which previously the educated had neglected. He wanted to publish a revised translation of the works of the great ancient astronomer Ptolemy. Upon his return from Italy he lived in Vienna and in Ostrihom at the court of Jan Vitez. From there he left to become a professor at Bratislava. But he did not remain long. Maybe he lacked a properly equipped observatory; perhaps he did not wish to compose horoscopes which the king, the aristocracy and rich townsfolk requested of him. In 1471 he moved to Ntirnberg where with the financial aid of the wealthy townsman Walther he had constructed astronomical instruments and set up his own printery at which his scientific works were printed. In 1474 Pope Sixtus IV invited him to Rome in order to be the scientific advisor on calendar reform. Here he died in 1476. His most famous astronomical work was a calculation of the paths of heavenly bodies published under the title Tabulae Directionum. Still 200 years after Regiomontanus' death these tables were used as an important astronomical aid. The authorities of Bratislava hired other professors in Poland, Italy and France. From Cracow University came Professor Martin Ilkus, who in addition to philosophy also occupied himself with astronomy. Many of his astronomical instruments and handwritings of his scientific works could still be found in Cracow. There are horoscopes which Magister Martin-this is the manner in which he was �SLOVAKIA 169 referred to at the king's court-made for King Matej and members of his family. All of the aristocrats and noblemen of that time gave priority to astrology over astronomy. Ilkus must certainly have found in Regiomontanus a good co-worker because he was a scientific personality. Historians of the new era refer to Regiomontanus as a spiritual predecessor of Christopher Columbus. It seems that the fate of Academia Istropolitana was very closely tied to the fate of its chancellor Vitez. When Vitez fell into disfavor and lost his position with the university, the Academia began to decline. Vice-chancellor Schomberg did not succeed in obtaining professors of such standing as Regiomontanus. Also the number of students began to dwindle. The king had planned the construction of a new building for students in the rear of the courtyard or next to the main building. But the addition was not necessary. From foreign countries very few applicants inquired and many students from Hungary gave preference henceforth to Vienna and Cracow. And thus Academia Istropolitana ceased to exist immediately upon the death of Matej Korvin (1490). STUDENTS AND PROFESSORS Let us return to our student and follow him to the Gmaitlovsky house on Venturska Street. Academia Istropolitana is located in a building in the courtyard. The entire court is filled with building materials because King Matej has great plans for the university. He wants to build a rear wing and remodel the facade so that afterward the building would form an enclosed unit. At present there are in the completed part only lecture halls, professors' apartments, and the students' dormitory section. All students however do not live in the dormitory. The home-towners, naturally, live with their parents and those from out of town who have relatives or friends in Bratislava would rather live with them. It is more convenient because the house rules of the dormitory are very strict. It is especially bad in winter. There is heat only in the common study where, in the afternoon and evening hours under the supervision of the dormitory's headmaster, the students must repeat the subject-matter on �170 SLOVAKIA which the professors lectured in the forenoon. There is no heat in rooms where students sleep ... Let the students accustom themselves! The school years begins on the tenth of October with a high mass in the cathedral. The students had to arrive in Bratislava even before this. The first of their concerns was to announce themselves at the rector's, identify themselves with a certificate of completion of middle school, and register with one of four faculties. By registration with the rector the student formally became a member of a great university society, but he became a true student only after the Beaniae. A first year student was titled a beanus ( allegedly because of the fact that he is still stupid or a sheep which, with the exception of bleating, knows nothing else; a beanus knows only to say be). The initiation rites to which every beanus had to submit was called the Beaniae. · The comic ceremony had only one purpose: to torment the beani in the worst way. For example, they smeared their faces with some kind of black grease and then they shaved them with a large wooden razor, or they placed horns on their heads and ordered them to perform all kinds of difficult and amusing tasks. Upon completion of the production the beani had to host their professors and older colleagues. At the majority of the universities the professors themselves voted for the rector, the vice-rector and the deans. It was not so in Bratislava. Academia Istropolitana did not have a rector, but a chancellor appointed by the king. His term of office was not limited by time; while a rector was elected by professors for a term of one year, the chancellor was in fact a royal office-holder commissioned with the management of the university. He alone chose his representative, the vicechancellor. The main course of study at the Academia was theology; the weakest by attendance was in medicine. At Academia Istropolitana we know only of the master Peter who lectured here on medicine. As we speak of lecturing, this is not a completely precise description. The professor did not lecture, but read. He read the works of recognized �SLOVAKIA 171 scientific authorities and explained them. He did not add anything of his own. Students sat on simple wooden benches, on their knees were placed planks, and on those some kind of parchment or paper on which they made notes with a goose guill dipped in ink. They had a little bottle of ink tied with a string around the waist. There were no textbooks and for that reason the head-master, who had supervision over them, went over the lectured material with the students in the dormitory or study room. Because the age of those in attendance was not prescribed, 15 year old boys and 30-40 years old men sat together in the classroom. After two years of study, the student attained the academic degree of the first step: the bachelor's. The next higher step was the licenciate and the highest was titled master. Degrees were granted ceremonially after rigorous examinations of which the main part was the disputation; we could compare it to today's defense of the dissertation. It is true, disputation themes of those times were substantially different. There was a preponderance of theological and philosophical topics. Less were concerned with the natural sciences. In the archives of Prague's Karlova University there is preserved from the sixteenth century a report on the disputation of Master Ondtej Mitisko. He debated the subject of earthquakes. According to him the cause of earthquakes was warm and dry steam or wind enclosed in the bowels of the earth and searching for an escape. When the wind does not find that escape because of the firmness of those parts of the earth, it shakes those parts. The title of another disputation was again thus: "Is it proper that a Christian should look on a meteor as holding in itself a sign of the future?" It is too bad that there were not preserved the titles of the bachelor and master disputations of Academia Istropolitana. It would certainly be interesting reading. The life of students was gay, but we would be mistaken if we were to assume that equality reigned among them. A folk proverb says that a lord is in Hell also a lord. Therefore it is undestandable that the university students of nobility wanted to be lords also at Academia Istro- �172 SLOVAKIA politana. It is interesting that among the students there were also bOYIS from the poor serf families. Nearly all studied theology. The landowners prevented their subjects to send their sons to school. They themselves underrated education, and even at the time of King Matej many of the most prominent of the rich could not write and did not allow their subjects to study. They permitted an exception only with the study of theology. From the goodness-of-heart of his lord even a subject could become a priest. In order that these poor scholars could complete their studies in some way, they became a famulus to the rich students. Famulus is actually only a Latin name for the word servant. Such a poor student then took care of the bed, shoes and clothing of his rich lord colleague. For this he received from him a regular monthly payment. Many students did not remain in Bratislava until the attainment of the master's degree. As a rule they left for some foreign university as soon as they reached the bachelor's. With its relatively short existence, Academia Istropolitana could claim only a few distinguished graduates. (There is among them the notorious Stefan Verboczy, the author of the juridicial regulations called Tripartitum which, after the ill fated Dofa uprising in 1514, made the position of the Hungarian serfs substantially worse.) THE FORMER EVANGELICAL LYCEUM It seems almost unbelievable that a handful of students could imprint with its activities the mark of the times upon the city. This handful of young people entered into our national and literary history under the name of stur's Followers. Their activities in Bratislava were inseparably connected with the activities of Cudovit stur and with the former evangelical lyceum building on Konventna Street. Nearly all of his followers studied at this school. A sandstone tablet on the wall of the lyceum building calls their names to mind. It is a long list of names, well-known and lesser known people, who in some way registered themselves into our cultural history. Behold at least a few of the most famous: Cudovit stur, J. M. Hurban, M. M. Hod.fa, Samo Chalupka, Karol Kuzmany, �SLOVAKIA 173 Janko Matuska, A. H. Skultety, Jan Francisci, Andrej Sladkovic ... This generation of young men burning with a national spirit came to Bratislava as a second wave. The first were the students of the Catholic general seminary, which Maria Teresia organized at the citadel. Anton Bemolak, Juraj Fandli and others had studied at this seminary. In their company it is also necessary to include the canon of Bratislava Jozef Ignac Bajza, author of the first Slovak novel Rene, a young man of events and experiences. In the thirties 0829) Cudovit stur came to Bratislava. With his arrival the still waters of the cultural life of Slovak students in Bratislava began to move. The so-called Society of Czecho-Slovak Language and Literature, which before this lived very poorly, began to develop under Stu.r's leadership a very intensive activity. The Society had over 100 members who regularly met at common meetings. Here they always heard some kind of lecture or recitation of poems, and finally an appointed judge evaluated the literary work of the members of the Society. Because at that time Moravians, Czechs, Croatians and Serbians also studied at Bratislava's lyceum, the Society had a Slavonic character not only in the nationalities of its members, but also in the tenor of its activities. But the obligations of the members of the Society did not end at vacation time. On the contrary, stur assigned his students tasks during vacation: they traveled in Slovakia, Moravia and Czechia, established personal contacts and cultural acquaintances, collected folk-songs and folk-tales, and .searched for new students for the lyceum. In Bratislava, the activities of the Society were not limited only to the lyceum hall meetings where the students were under the control of nationally biased professorn. stur took his followers to places of former Slavonic majesty and glory: the Bratislava citadel, Kamzik mountain, and the more distant surroundings of Bratislava. Most memorable was the excursion to Devin on April 24 in 1836. It was an important national manifestation, which left its impression on the participants the rest of their lives. Such undertakings also had a political meaning and their influence grew in all of Slovakia. �174 SLOVAKIA Indeed Shir's id.eals, which the students adopted in Bratislava, were taken with them after completion of studies to their home districts. And most of all, stur began to spread his views with the printed word. Beginning with the year 1845, there appeared the most important Slovak newspaper of prerevolutionary times, the Slovak National News with its supplement, the Tatra Eagle. And in two years stur became a representative with the Bratislava parliament. We may say that all this grew from a seed which the Bratislava evangelical lyceum planted in the students. Today's building is from the year 1854, thus from post-stur times. The building is a little further from town than the original and today houses the library of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in which stur and his friends studied. Dr. Joseph Hr ad nan s k y Associate Professor Indiana University of Pennsylvania Instructor in Slovak University of Pittsburgh • • • SLOVAKIA is published annually by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. One of the purposes of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Sl-ovak nation and its long struggle foT freedom and independence. Subscription to Slovakia $3.00 per year in the U .S.A. - $4.00 el-sewhei-e. Rend subscription to: SLOVAKIA 313 Ridge A venue Mi<l.clletown, Pa. 17057 � 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 1971, Vol. 21 Description An account of the resource Vol. 21 (No. 44), 1971. 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 1971 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 164 SLOVAKIA BRATISLAVA: Ancient Slovak Cultural Center (A translation from the Slovak of a portion of I.:udo Ztibek's Moja Bratislava (My Bratislava), published by Mlade Leta Publishing House, Bratislava, 1965) 1467 ACADEMIA ISTROPOLITANA Bratislava's city chamberlain, who had charge of the so-called chamberlain book (the book of the city's receipts and expenditures ) recorded on the 20th of July, 1467, that on that day the mayor and the councilmen hosted the professors who had arrived for the opening of the new school of higher learning. They gave them fried chicken, rolls, wine and fruit. Bratislava's mayor and councilmen were hospitable people, and they honored each distin guished guest with a more modest or a more expensive refreshment according to the guest's station in life. The reception, which is mentioned in the book of records, was not the poorest. From this one may conclude that the affair concerned distinguished guests. The event, with which the arrival of the professors bore upon, was centainly significant. In Bratislava they opened a university known as Academia Istropolitana. The reception of the professors was the culmination of lengthy preparatory work which began two years before in 1465. At that time the Hungarian king, Matej Korvin, sent t o Rome a mission of some renown in order to obtain from the Pope an agreement for the establishment of an institution of higher learning in Bratislava. In the fifteenth century there already existed a number of well-known universities in Europe: Salerno, Bologna, Paris, Prague, Cracow, Vienna, etc. The universities had merit for the reason, that concurrently with their fame there was also spread the glory of the city in which the institution was located. Each university depended on the fact that it should have well-known professors because its scholarly renown was the best recommendation for higher learning. Such universities had students also from distant countries. The SLOVAKIA 165 young men of Hungary who wished to attain a higher education could only decide upon a foreign university because in Hungary there were none. They had no language difficulties, since in all the schools teaching was carried on in Latin. It is therefore natural that the king, who revered the arts and surrounded himself at his court in Budin with outstanding humanists, desired that there should be a university in his country. He could have established it himself, but in such a case the degrees granted there would have value only in Hungary. In order for it to have international academic recognition, some kind of higher authority had to permit the establishment of the university. Such an authority was the German emperor ( at that time Fridrich III) or the Pope. Since Matej's relations with Fridrich could not be called friendly, the king turned to the Pope. Under the leadership of the learned bishop Jan cezmicky, better known by the name Jan Pannonius, and the commanderin-chief Jan Rozgon, a magnificent escort numbering 300 people left on February 20, 1465 from Budin on a march to Rome. In order to make the success of the mission more certain, they carried with them for the Pope a humble "St. Peter's pence": 20,000 gold pieces. Pope Paul II settled Matej's request favorably, but in the charter with which he permitted the establishment of the Academia, he stated a condition that the new school should be set up according to the example of Bologna University. From this condition it would logically result that for Academia Istropolitana the Bologna school should be the model in all matters, but the leaders of the university used Bologna as an example only for its teaching programs. The management of the Academia had a different tenor. At Bologna the students had the greatest of power. They chose their professors and had control over their lectures. In like manner they themselves elected the rector, and he was chosen from their midst. The rector had advisors at hand with whom he exercised authority not only over the students, but also over professors. Without consent of students and presence of their representatives a professor could not call in a student and admonish or punish him. 166 SLOVAKIA Nowhere else on earth did scholars have such rights as at Bologna. At Academia Istropolitana all authority was in the hands of the chancellor, who was appointed by the king. The chancellor hired and fired professors, granted the academic degrees, and carried out his judicial and disciplinary authority over the professors and students. Academia Istropolitana was formally opened July 20, 1467, but actual teaching there did not begin until the end of September. The university obtained the building as a gift from the king and Chancellor Vitez. It was a building on Venturska Street, of which half was deeded over from a dead title to the king's possession and the other half Vitez bought for the university for 600 gold pieces. The city had the building remodeled in such a way that there would be lecture halls, apartments for professors and living quarters for the students. Commencement exercises were held in a nearby cathedral. The first chancellor of Academia Istropolitana was the above mentioned Jan Vitez, the archbishop of Ostrihom and the king's chancellor. He was not only a statesman of distinction, but also a humanistic writer of the first rank. He was born in the year 1408 in Zredna, but his forefathers came from Ostrihom. Along with his career as a priest (first he was bishop of Vel'ky Varadin, then archbishop of Ostrihom) he very quickly attained a leading position at the king's court: he became chancellor of the king Matej Korvin. At his resi_d ence in the Ostrihom palace, which he remodeled and artistically decorated at great cost, he surrounded himself with humanistic writers and scholars of the highest rank. They came to Ostrihom from almost all parts of Europe: from Czechia, Germany, Poland, France, Italy, and Greece. Vitez was a true child of his times. On the one hand, under the influence of the work of his contemporaries, he very quickly saw the reasons for unhealthy events in the country and openly warned of them. In the introduction to his book of letters (his collection of letters written in Latin) he wr.o te: "Truly I have already saturated myself with viewing so much misery, but in order that I secure a safer destiny, I shall be silent." This is the other side SLOVAKIA 167 of his personality: behave as others behave. He dressed as a worldly magnate in clothes of embroidered gold, wore a gold chain around his neck and a wreath embeded with precious stones on his head. His personal guard consisted of 300 knights. He eagerly supported the building of new palaces and churches and put forth a great amount of money for the procurement of books, especially beautifully decorated codices. His library was world-famous. He had in it the works of all the important ancient Greek and Roman authors and prominent church fathers. Although Johannes Guttenberg was a contemporary of Vitez, the printing of books was then not yet known in Hungary. All books were transcribed by writers and illustrated by artists. Vitez's love of beautiful manuscripts financially cost him very heavily. Let us not be surprised that the chancellor wanted to obtain some books at less cost. He simply borrowed them-and didn't return them. Most frequently he would borrow them from his nephew, bishop Jan Cezmicky. When the bishop's reminders to the great chancellor reminded without result-but on the contrary, Vitez requested that his nephew lend him more codices-Pannonius answered with an ironic letter: You write that I should send you books. Well, did I not already send you enough? I have only Greek books left: you have taken away all the Latin ones. Praise God that you do not know Greek, otherwise you would not leave me even those. If you would learn Greek, I would immediately acquire a knowledge of the Hebrew language and I would establish a libvary of Hebrew codices. I ask, how it is possible, that in the procurement of books, you are so dissatisfied. Do you possibly think that in this you are not committing a sinful act? In my opinion it does not matter on what things our passions concentrate. If in fact you truly desire books so much, do not take them from others who have less of them then you. The extravagant, rich, diplomatic and literary eventfilled life of the chancellor took a sudden sharp turn when Vitez embroiled himself in a conspiracy against the king Matej. The king had him imprisoned. Shortly after (1467) the former chancellor died. At the time of the establishment of Academia Istropolitana, Vitez was at the peak of his power. His greatest responsibility in connection with the new school was to get famous professors for it. He was successful in that . 168 SLOVAKIA because already in the first year of the existence of the academy we meet here with the name of the outstanding astronomer Johann Miiller, known in the scientific world as Regiomontanus. Vitez invited him to Bratislava from Vienna, where he was a professor of the university located there. Here are at least some of the most well-known data from his life: He was born in the year 1436 in Konigsberg (from this he derived the Latinized form of his scientific name Regiomontanus). Upon completion of schooling, he taught mathematics at Vienna University, then in 1462 he left with the escort of Cardinal Bessarion to Italy in order to complete his study of Greek. The humanistic and renaissance learned men studied Greek a great deal, which previously the educated had neglected. He wanted to publish a revised translation of the works of the great ancient astronomer Ptolemy. Upon his return from Italy he lived in Vienna and in Ostrihom at the court of Jan Vitez. From there he left to become a professor at Bratislava. But he did not remain long. Maybe he lacked a properly equipped observatory; perhaps he did not wish to compose horoscopes which the king, the aristocracy and rich townsfolk requested of him. In 1471 he moved to Ntirnberg where with the financial aid of the wealthy townsman Walther he had constructed astronomical instruments and set up his own printery at which his scientific works were printed. In 1474 Pope Sixtus IV invited him to Rome in order to be the scientific advisor on calendar reform. Here he died in 1476. His most famous astronomical work was a calculation of the paths of heavenly bodies published under the title Tabulae Directionum. Still 200 years after Regiomontanus' death these tables were used as an important astronomical aid. The authorities of Bratislava hired other professors in Poland, Italy and France. From Cracow University came Professor Martin Ilkus, who in addition to philosophy also occupied himself with astronomy. Many of his astronomical instruments and handwritings of his scientific works could still be found in Cracow. There are horoscopes which Magister Martin-this is the manner in which he was SLOVAKIA 169 referred to at the king's court-made for King Matej and members of his family. All of the aristocrats and noblemen of that time gave priority to astrology over astronomy. Ilkus must certainly have found in Regiomontanus a good co-worker because he was a scientific personality. Historians of the new era refer to Regiomontanus as a spiritual predecessor of Christopher Columbus. It seems that the fate of Academia Istropolitana was very closely tied to the fate of its chancellor Vitez. When Vitez fell into disfavor and lost his position with the university, the Academia began to decline. Vice-chancellor Schomberg did not succeed in obtaining professors of such standing as Regiomontanus. Also the number of students began to dwindle. The king had planned the construction of a new building for students in the rear of the courtyard or next to the main building. But the addition was not necessary. From foreign countries very few applicants inquired and many students from Hungary gave preference henceforth to Vienna and Cracow. And thus Academia Istropolitana ceased to exist immediately upon the death of Matej Korvin (1490). STUDENTS AND PROFESSORS Let us return to our student and follow him to the Gmaitlovsky house on Venturska Street. Academia Istropolitana is located in a building in the courtyard. The entire court is filled with building materials because King Matej has great plans for the university. He wants to build a rear wing and remodel the facade so that afterward the building would form an enclosed unit. At present there are in the completed part only lecture halls, professors' apartments, and the students' dormitory section. All students however do not live in the dormitory. The home-towners, naturally, live with their parents and those from out of town who have relatives or friends in Bratislava would rather live with them. It is more convenient because the house rules of the dormitory are very strict. It is especially bad in winter. There is heat only in the common study where, in the afternoon and evening hours under the supervision of the dormitory's headmaster, the students must repeat the subject-matter on 170 SLOVAKIA which the professors lectured in the forenoon. There is no heat in rooms where students sleep ... Let the students accustom themselves! The school years begins on the tenth of October with a high mass in the cathedral. The students had to arrive in Bratislava even before this. The first of their concerns was to announce themselves at the rector's, identify themselves with a certificate of completion of middle school, and register with one of four faculties. By registration with the rector the student formally became a member of a great university society, but he became a true student only after the Beaniae. A first year student was titled a beanus ( allegedly because of the fact that he is still stupid or a sheep which, with the exception of bleating, knows nothing else; a beanus knows only to say be). The initiation rites to which every beanus had to submit was called the Beaniae. · The comic ceremony had only one purpose: to torment the beani in the worst way. For example, they smeared their faces with some kind of black grease and then they shaved them with a large wooden razor, or they placed horns on their heads and ordered them to perform all kinds of difficult and amusing tasks. Upon completion of the production the beani had to host their professors and older colleagues. At the majority of the universities the professors themselves voted for the rector, the vice-rector and the deans. It was not so in Bratislava. Academia Istropolitana did not have a rector, but a chancellor appointed by the king. His term of office was not limited by time; while a rector was elected by professors for a term of one year, the chancellor was in fact a royal office-holder commissioned with the management of the university. He alone chose his representative, the vicechancellor. The main course of study at the Academia was theology; the weakest by attendance was in medicine. At Academia Istropolitana we know only of the master Peter who lectured here on medicine. As we speak of lecturing, this is not a completely precise description. The professor did not lecture, but read. He read the works of recognized SLOVAKIA 171 scientific authorities and explained them. He did not add anything of his own. Students sat on simple wooden benches, on their knees were placed planks, and on those some kind of parchment or paper on which they made notes with a goose guill dipped in ink. They had a little bottle of ink tied with a string around the waist. There were no textbooks and for that reason the head-master, who had supervision over them, went over the lectured material with the students in the dormitory or study room. Because the age of those in attendance was not prescribed, 15 year old boys and 30-40 years old men sat together in the classroom. After two years of study, the student attained the academic degree of the first step: the bachelor's. The next higher step was the licenciate and the highest was titled master. Degrees were granted ceremonially after rigorous examinations of which the main part was the disputation; we could compare it to today's defense of the dissertation. It is true, disputation themes of those times were substantially different. There was a preponderance of theological and philosophical topics. Less were concerned with the natural sciences. In the archives of Prague's Karlova University there is preserved from the sixteenth century a report on the disputation of Master Ondtej Mitisko. He debated the subject of earthquakes. According to him the cause of earthquakes was warm and dry steam or wind enclosed in the bowels of the earth and searching for an escape. When the wind does not find that escape because of the firmness of those parts of the earth, it shakes those parts. The title of another disputation was again thus: "Is it proper that a Christian should look on a meteor as holding in itself a sign of the future?" It is too bad that there were not preserved the titles of the bachelor and master disputations of Academia Istropolitana. It would certainly be interesting reading. The life of students was gay, but we would be mistaken if we were to assume that equality reigned among them. A folk proverb says that a lord is in Hell also a lord. Therefore it is undestandable that the university students of nobility wanted to be lords also at Academia Istro- 172 SLOVAKIA politana. It is interesting that among the students there were also bOYIS from the poor serf families. Nearly all studied theology. The landowners prevented their subjects to send their sons to school. They themselves underrated education, and even at the time of King Matej many of the most prominent of the rich could not write and did not allow their subjects to study. They permitted an exception only with the study of theology. From the goodness-of-heart of his lord even a subject could become a priest. In order that these poor scholars could complete their studies in some way, they became a famulus to the rich students. Famulus is actually only a Latin name for the word servant. Such a poor student then took care of the bed, shoes and clothing of his rich lord colleague. For this he received from him a regular monthly payment. Many students did not remain in Bratislava until the attainment of the master's degree. As a rule they left for some foreign university as soon as they reached the bachelor's. With its relatively short existence, Academia Istropolitana could claim only a few distinguished graduates. (There is among them the notorious Stefan Verboczy, the author of the juridicial regulations called Tripartitum which, after the ill fated Dofa uprising in 1514, made the position of the Hungarian serfs substantially worse.) THE FORMER EVANGELICAL LYCEUM It seems almost unbelievable that a handful of students could imprint with its activities the mark of the times upon the city. This handful of young people entered into our national and literary history under the name of stur's Followers. Their activities in Bratislava were inseparably connected with the activities of Cudovit stur and with the former evangelical lyceum building on Konventna Street. Nearly all of his followers studied at this school. A sandstone tablet on the wall of the lyceum building calls their names to mind. It is a long list of names, well-known and lesser known people, who in some way registered themselves into our cultural history. Behold at least a few of the most famous: Cudovit stur, J. M. Hurban, M. M. Hod.fa, Samo Chalupka, Karol Kuzmany, SLOVAKIA 173 Janko Matuska, A. H. Skultety, Jan Francisci, Andrej Sladkovic ... This generation of young men burning with a national spirit came to Bratislava as a second wave. The first were the students of the Catholic general seminary, which Maria Teresia organized at the citadel. Anton Bemolak, Juraj Fandli and others had studied at this seminary. In their company it is also necessary to include the canon of Bratislava Jozef Ignac Bajza, author of the first Slovak novel Rene, a young man of events and experiences. In the thirties 0829) Cudovit stur came to Bratislava. With his arrival the still waters of the cultural life of Slovak students in Bratislava began to move. The so-called Society of Czecho-Slovak Language and Literature, which before this lived very poorly, began to develop under Stu.r's leadership a very intensive activity. The Society had over 100 members who regularly met at common meetings. Here they always heard some kind of lecture or recitation of poems, and finally an appointed judge evaluated the literary work of the members of the Society. Because at that time Moravians, Czechs, Croatians and Serbians also studied at Bratislava's lyceum, the Society had a Slavonic character not only in the nationalities of its members, but also in the tenor of its activities. But the obligations of the members of the Society did not end at vacation time. On the contrary, stur assigned his students tasks during vacation: they traveled in Slovakia, Moravia and Czechia, established personal contacts and cultural acquaintances, collected folk-songs and folk-tales, and .searched for new students for the lyceum. In Bratislava, the activities of the Society were not limited only to the lyceum hall meetings where the students were under the control of nationally biased professorn. stur took his followers to places of former Slavonic majesty and glory: the Bratislava citadel, Kamzik mountain, and the more distant surroundings of Bratislava. Most memorable was the excursion to Devin on April 24 in 1836. It was an important national manifestation, which left its impression on the participants the rest of their lives. Such undertakings also had a political meaning and their influence grew in all of Slovakia. 174 SLOVAKIA Indeed Shir's id.eals, which the students adopted in Bratislava, were taken with them after completion of studies to their home districts. And most of all, stur began to spread his views with the printed word. Beginning with the year 1845, there appeared the most important Slovak newspaper of prerevolutionary times, the Slovak National News with its supplement, the Tatra Eagle. And in two years stur became a representative with the Bratislava parliament. We may say that all this grew from a seed which the Bratislava evangelical lyceum planted in the students. Today's building is from the year 1854, thus from post-stur times. The building is a little further from town than the original and today houses the library of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in which stur and his friends studied. Dr. Joseph Hr ad nan s k y Associate Professor Indiana University of Pennsylvania Instructor in Slovak University of Pittsburgh • • • SLOVAKIA is published annually by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. One of the purposes of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Sl-ovak nation and its long struggle foT freedom and independence. Subscription to Slovakia $3.00 per year in the U .S.A. - $4.00 el-sewhei-e. Rend subscription to: SLOVAKIA 313 Ridge A venue Mi<l.clletown, Pa. 17057  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 Bratislava: Ancient Slovak Cultural Center Description An account of the resource Dr. Joseph Hradnansky Slovakia, Vol. 21 (No. 44), 1971 pp. 164-174 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hradnansky, Joseph Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1971 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d033383ad3e73b0c22316c27576ac95d.pdf 9a1c0f39a0c07be4b8a5ddd7714e1a34 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 78 HOW '.fillE COMMUNISTS SEIZED POWER IN SWVAKIA (STATEMENT BY PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA AND EDITOR OF THE JEDNOTA, OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE FIRST CATHOLIC SLOVAK UNION, MADE BEFORE THE KERSTEN COMMITTEE ON COMMUNIST AGGRESSION, IN THE COUNTY COURT HOUSE, MILWAUKEE, FRIDAY AFTERNOON, OCT0!3ER 22, 1954) If there is a nation in the world today that really is anti-Communist, that nation is th,e Slovak nation. It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks have fought the plague of materialistic- Communism consistently and persistently, in and OU! of season, for over a hundred years. Louis Stur, champion of democracy and Slovak freedom, repudiated the godless, materialistic philosophy of Marx in 1849. In his book "SLOV ANSTVO A SVET BUDUCNOSTI" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), written in 1849 but published after his death in 1856, he wrote: "In every instance Communism means the collapse and the destruction of the State. Communism arrived at this aim through atheism and apostacy from Christianity. In every form of Communism, n_o matter what its origin, the outlook on life is gloomy, lacking every tender joy. It brings the most cruel slavery. Communism, let it strive and pretend in any manner whatsoever that it will make all peoples share in all rights, nevertheless, knows nothing about humanity; it degrades humanity and because it holds to systems that are impractical and unrealizable, it belongs among the most stupid innovations that have thus far been created by the human mind." In 1905, at its very first session, the newly organized Hlinka Slovak Peoples Party, did not hesitate to condemn CommuniSIIIl. Fourteen years later, in 1919, when CzechoSlovakia was already established, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia cautioned T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes not to flirt with Communism, not to make any compromises with the Bolsheviks. Stefanik was in Russia �SLOVAKIA 79 during 1918-1919 and saw Communism at work first hand. In February, he sent a telegram to Masaryk in Prague which said: "To flirt with Bolshevist tendencies would be comparable to foresaking the path of honor and sanity. The fight against Bolshevism in all its manifestations must prevail in our politics." Andrew Hlinka, fearless champion of Slovak freedom and founder and head of the Slovak Peoples Party, fought Communism and Communists all his life. So did Martin Razus, head of the Slovak National Party and distin. guished poet. Finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, president and martyr of the Slovak Republic, exhorted his Slovak people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to the gallows on April 18, 1947, by order of the Communist-dominated National Front government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition. Up to the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918, materialistic Communism could not gain a foothold among the Slovaks. After the Bolshevik group headed by Bela Kun seized the government in Hungary, his Red horde: invaded southern Slovakia, murdering thousands of innocent people and pillaging their lands. This only steeled the Slova.ks in their determination to fight Communism and Communists. In the early years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, the Prague Gove,r nrnent sent some 200,000 "progressive and liberal-minded" Czechs to Slovakia to take over various government posts, educational positions and other tasks. Their main objective, however, was to make Czechs out of Slovaks. It was then that leftist tendrncies began to take hold among some of the intelligentsia. The Communist Party, however, had pretty rough going among the Slovaks, who were traditionally deeply religious and opposed to the godless philosophy of Marx. Up to Munich, J 938, the Communist Party never represented more than JO per cent of the electorate in Slovakia. We must not forget, however, that the Czechs in Slovakia represented about 15· per cent of the electorate. It was the Czech group that gave the greatest support to Communists in Slovakia. �80 SLOVAKIA After Munich and the cowardly resignation of president Edward Benes, Slovakia was granted autonomy by the Prague Parliament. The government of the Slovak State was in Christian democratic hands. The Communist Party was outlawed in Slovakia in 1938 by the Slovak Government. Of course, the Reds worked underground, keeping their contacts with Moscow and, later, with the London government of Dr. Edward Benes. When Benes concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak Soviet" Treaty on December 12, 1943, the Slovaks knew definitely that not only they, but even the Czechs wert' formally sold out to the Kremlin. Benes had always been pro-Soviet and admitted it openly. So did his followers, the Czech National Socialists (The Czech Nazis). The Slovaks opposed his policy consistently and resolutely even in the Prague Parliament, declaring that such a policy even. tually would bring ruin and Red enslavement to the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia. But the Slovaks were in a minority, so the policy of Benes and his followers, supported by other Czech leftist parties and the Slovak Agrarians, the socalled "Czechoslova ks" (Slovaks in the pay of the Czechs), prevailed. In 1943, Moscow parachuted Soviet partisan leaders into Slovakia to create incidents, to spread terror and confusion among the population of central Slovakia. Communists, led by Schmid,ke and Husak, and the Slovak Agrarians, led by Dr. Joseph Lettric,h, and assuming the name of Slovak "Democrats," got together on Christmas Day, 1943, and concluded an agreement to collaborate as closely as possible in all things with the USSR in the spirit of the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943. And they did. They planned and executed the Communist-in spired Slovak uprising in August, 1944, which they misnomered the "Slovak National Uprising," in order to make the world believe that the whole Slovak nation revolted against its government to destroy its own Republic. The terroristic acts of the partisans brought the German Anny into Slovakia, and terror and destruction, and mass murders and �SLOVAKIA 81 mass graves. Some 70,000 Slovaks were killed . The Communist revolt of August, 1944, prepared the ground for the Communists to take over key posts in SlQlVakia in 1945 and, later, In February 1948, the entire Government of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was recognized by both the United Nations and the USSR. The Slovaks, completely abandoned, were helpless; their situation desperate. The victorious United Nations were not at all interested in the political will of the Slovak Nation. Benes and his Moscow-created government had all the say in 1945, they controlled the press and radio, Slovakia was wantonly destroyed. The Communist-dominated National Front government wasted no time in Slovakia. The Slovak National Council - a 50-50 coalition of Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" nationalized churches, ecclesiastical schools and institutions, confiscated properties, set up a concentration camp and "people's" courts to mete out "justice" to all who opposed the regime, that is Benes, the Communists and the USSR. A wave o,f ruthless, brutal perse.cution of all anti-Communist element ensued. Over 130,000 were placed under arrest, tens of thousands were deported, disfranchised and dispossessed, and hundreds were murdered. In 1946 the vast masses of the Slovak people had little choice in the elections held in May. In 1945 only two political parties were allowed to organize in Slovakia by the Benes government: the old Communist Party and the old Agrarian Party; the latter, however, had to change its name to the "Democratic" Party, because the Agrarian Party had been outlawed in Czech lands. Two other parties were allowed to form just prior to the elections of 1946 by the Communist-domin ated Prague government which were supposed to weaken the "Democrats" and, therefore strengthen the position of the Communists. The ruse, however, failed. The Slovaks could vote for the Lettrich "Democrats," or for the Communists who held the upper hand in Slovakia. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, which was Catholic (about 85 per cent), was not allowed to organize a political party. Being advised and instru.cted by their religious a:nd political leaders, the Slovak �82 SLOVAKIA Catholics voted for the Lettrich "Democrats" - after a,n agreement had been reached by the leaders of the Catholics and the "Democrats." Doing so, they recikoned, they chose the lesser of two evils. The Communists were beaten decisively; they received only 30 per cent of the votes cast, while the "Democrats" poled 62 per cent . The difference would have been still greater if thousands of Slovaks had not been disfranchised ; jailed and intimidated; and if the army, the partisans and imported Czech Reds had not been allowed to vote in Slovakia. In the Czech lands (Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia), where the Prague government had allowed four parties to ex,ist, the Communists and Socialists came out on top (over 54 per centJ. 'l'he Lettrich "Democrats" won the elections in Slovakia in 1946, but the Communists continued to hold on to the key positions; of course, with the blessing of Moscow and the Communist-do minated National Front Government of Prague. The Slovaks proved themselves courageous and valiant in voting against the Communists, but it availed them nothing. The Lettrich "Democrats" lacked the courage and fight; their spineless leaders conveniently forgot the working agreement with the Catholics; and yielded to the Communists on practically every score. So the Communists ran Slovakia the way they wanted to, oppressing and suppressing all non~Communist elements ruthlessly. True it is that the "Democrats" protested weakly on occasions, but nothing more, even though they did have the backing of the overwhelming majority of the Slovak people. They were gradually awakening to what collaboration with the Communists means. They were partners in the National Front and the Slovak National Counoil; they had agreed to collaborate closely with the Reds. And the Reds had only one purpose: to make Slovakia and the.n the whole of Czecho-Slovak ia subservient to them and to Moscow. If the "Democrats" balked or tried to back out, they could very easily be labeled "enemies" of the State and the National Front, according to the decrees and regulations which they had formulated with the Communists, and which they used against all so-called "Fascist and Nazi" elements, meaning, of course, anti-Communist elements �SLOVAKIA 83 in Slovakia. So they continued to collaborate and govern with the Communists, until the Reds threw them out. Dr. Eward Benes, president of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, resigned in 1938 and fled his country during its worst crisis, congratulating his successor, who was elected in his place according to the Constitution of Czecho-Slovakia. Later he reappointed himself president again and, by the grace of Stalin, returned as such with his Moscowformed government behind the Red Army. This, l believe, is without precedent in history. Benes became president again, but only at a price, a very high price - the sell-out of the Slovaks and the Czechs to the men of the Kremlin. Stalin did no favors for nothing. The Slovaks and the Czechs at home had no voice in the matter. As a result of Benes's pro-Soviet policy, nothing else could have happened in Czecho-Slovakia except what did happen on February 25, 1948. Such and only such can be the conclusion of all thoroughly informed observers. Moscow and her stooges had a "sure thing" in Czecho-Slovakia ; they simply could not miss Benes and his Czech Socialists. supported by their stooges in Slovakia, the "Czechoslovaks" or Lettrich "Democrats" - the traitqrs of the Slovak nation - had prepared the way and, hence, are responsible for the sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations to the ruthless men of the Kremlin. Benes and his political entourage firmly believed that collaboration between the USSR and Czecho-Slovakia was not only feasible, but highly desirable; that peaceful coexistence with the Reds was possible without the loss of freedoms and rights. And they promoted that policy to the bitter end. Czecho-Slovakia ended up just as did the other countries whose political leaders thought they could collaborate with Communists and the USSR, form coalition governments with them, and still preserve their independence, freedoms and rights. Moscow and its stooges deeply appreciated all such collaborations and rewarded all collaborators in the customary Red fashion - it liquidated them, proving again that Communism devours its own children. Many Slovak Communists and Lettrich "Democrat,s " have �84 SLOVAKIA already paid for their folly and the ruinous pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes with their lives. Many more languish in prisons, concentration camps and forced labor camps - the very same institutions they helped the Communists to establish. The Communists were able to seize Slovakia not beca use they had the support of the vast masses of the Slovak people, but despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the Slovak nation opposed them. And, in fact, sWl opposes them today. The victorious United Nations did not respect the will of the Slovak nation, in fact, were not even interested in ascertaining the will of the Slovaks. They did, however, respect the will of Benes and his Cze<!h Socialists, who, in the end, brought ruin and Red enslavement even on their own Czech nation. Slovakia was, therefore, sold out to the Reds by Benes and the victorious United Nations whose favor and confidence he enjo,yed. Slovakia is ruled by force and violence - the Communist system. The lesson of Slovakia, and then that of Czecho-Slovakia should be repeated over and over again so that it might be learned thoroughly. Peaceful coexistence with the USSR, the Communist world, is strictly a myth. To give it credence would be folly. Collaboration with Communists and the USSR means, in the end, a brutal suppression of all freedoms and rights and Red enslavement. • • • WHO SAID IT? "With equal enthusiasm we are today manifesting for the idea~s of our, and only our, Ozechoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn. . . . T.he unresel"ved alliance with our Eastern neighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, .bl.lit also our friendly contacts wi•th the rest of the world, espeoi:aUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeling of cel"tainty that no matter what might hiappen a,broad, aur internati<ona1 posilt'ion is f.imn and we need not ferur that we can come urpon new dangers and dif.ficu1ties." (!Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vic~Ohairm.an of the Executive Committee of the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," C.AIS, Novemlber 18, 1947). � SLOVAKIA 78 HOW '.fillE COMMUNISTS SEIZED POWER IN SWVAKIA (STATEMENT BY PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA AND EDITOR OF THE JEDNOTA, OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE FIRST CATHOLIC SLOVAK UNION, MADE BEFORE THE KERSTEN COMMITTEE ON COMMUNIST AGGRESSION, IN THE COUNTY COURT HOUSE, MILWAUKEE, FRIDAY AFTERNOON, OCT0!3ER 22, 1954) If there is a nation in the world today that really is anti-Communist, that nation is th,e Slovak nation. It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks have fought the plague of materialistic- Communism consistently and persistently, in and OU! of season, for over a hundred years. Louis Stur, champion of democracy and Slovak freedom, repudiated the godless, materialistic philosophy of Marx in 1849. In his book "SLOV ANSTVO A SVET BUDUCNOSTI" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), written in 1849 but published after his death in 1856, he wrote: "In every instance Communism means the collapse and the destruction of the State. Communism arrived at this aim through atheism and apostacy from Christianity. In every form of Communism, n_o matter what its origin, the outlook on life is gloomy, lacking every tender joy. It brings the most cruel slavery. Communism, let it strive and pretend in any manner whatsoever that it will make all peoples share in all rights, nevertheless, knows nothing about humanity; it degrades humanity and because it holds to systems that are impractical and unrealizable, it belongs among the most stupid innovations that have thus far been created by the human mind." In 1905, at its very first session, the newly organized Hlinka Slovak Peoples Party, did not hesitate to condemn CommuniSIIIl. Fourteen years later, in 1919, when CzechoSlovakia was already established, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia cautioned T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes not to flirt with Communism, not to make any compromises with the Bolsheviks. Stefanik was in Russia �SLOVAKIA 79 during 1918-1919 and saw Communism at work first hand. In February, he sent a telegram to Masaryk in Prague which said: "To flirt with Bolshevist tendencies would be comparable to foresaking the path of honor and sanity. The fight against Bolshevism in all its manifestations must prevail in our politics." Andrew Hlinka, fearless champion of Slovak freedom and founder and head of the Slovak Peoples Party, fought Communism and Communists all his life. So did Martin Razus, head of the Slovak National Party and distin. guished poet. Finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, president and martyr of the Slovak Republic, exhorted his Slovak people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to the gallows on April 18, 1947, by order of the Communist-dominated National Front government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition. Up to the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918, materialistic Communism could not gain a foothold among the Slovaks. After the Bolshevik group headed by Bela Kun seized the government in Hungary, his Red horde: invaded southern Slovakia, murdering thousands of innocent people and pillaging their lands. This only steeled the Slova.ks in their determination to fight Communism and Communists. In the early years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, the Prague Gove,r nrnent sent some 200,000 "progressive and liberal-minded" Czechs to Slovakia to take over various government posts, educational positions and other tasks. Their main objective, however, was to make Czechs out of Slovaks. It was then that leftist tendrncies began to take hold among some of the intelligentsia. The Communist Party, however, had pretty rough going among the Slovaks, who were traditionally deeply religious and opposed to the godless philosophy of Marx. Up to Munich, J 938, the Communist Party never represented more than JO per cent of the electorate in Slovakia. We must not forget, however, that the Czechs in Slovakia represented about 15· per cent of the electorate. It was the Czech group that gave the greatest support to Communists in Slovakia. �80 SLOVAKIA After Munich and the cowardly resignation of president Edward Benes, Slovakia was granted autonomy by the Prague Parliament. The government of the Slovak State was in Christian democratic hands. The Communist Party was outlawed in Slovakia in 1938 by the Slovak Government. Of course, the Reds worked underground, keeping their contacts with Moscow and, later, with the London government of Dr. Edward Benes. When Benes concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak Soviet" Treaty on December 12, 1943, the Slovaks knew definitely that not only they, but even the Czechs wert' formally sold out to the Kremlin. Benes had always been pro-Soviet and admitted it openly. So did his followers, the Czech National Socialists (The Czech Nazis). The Slovaks opposed his policy consistently and resolutely even in the Prague Parliament, declaring that such a policy even. tually would bring ruin and Red enslavement to the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia. But the Slovaks were in a minority, so the policy of Benes and his followers, supported by other Czech leftist parties and the Slovak Agrarians, the socalled "Czechoslova ks" (Slovaks in the pay of the Czechs), prevailed. In 1943, Moscow parachuted Soviet partisan leaders into Slovakia to create incidents, to spread terror and confusion among the population of central Slovakia. Communists, led by Schmid,ke and Husak, and the Slovak Agrarians, led by Dr. Joseph Lettric,h, and assuming the name of Slovak "Democrats," got together on Christmas Day, 1943, and concluded an agreement to collaborate as closely as possible in all things with the USSR in the spirit of the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943. And they did. They planned and executed the Communist-in spired Slovak uprising in August, 1944, which they misnomered the "Slovak National Uprising," in order to make the world believe that the whole Slovak nation revolted against its government to destroy its own Republic. The terroristic acts of the partisans brought the German Anny into Slovakia, and terror and destruction, and mass murders and �SLOVAKIA 81 mass graves. Some 70,000 Slovaks were killed . The Communist revolt of August, 1944, prepared the ground for the Communists to take over key posts in SlQlVakia in 1945 and, later, In February 1948, the entire Government of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was recognized by both the United Nations and the USSR. The Slovaks, completely abandoned, were helpless; their situation desperate. The victorious United Nations were not at all interested in the political will of the Slovak Nation. Benes and his Moscow-created government had all the say in 1945, they controlled the press and radio, Slovakia was wantonly destroyed. The Communist-dominated National Front government wasted no time in Slovakia. The Slovak National Council - a 50-50 coalition of Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" nationalized churches, ecclesiastical schools and institutions, confiscated properties, set up a concentration camp and "people's" courts to mete out "justice" to all who opposed the regime, that is Benes, the Communists and the USSR. A wave o,f ruthless, brutal perse.cution of all anti-Communist element ensued. Over 130,000 were placed under arrest, tens of thousands were deported, disfranchised and dispossessed, and hundreds were murdered. In 1946 the vast masses of the Slovak people had little choice in the elections held in May. In 1945 only two political parties were allowed to organize in Slovakia by the Benes government: the old Communist Party and the old Agrarian Party; the latter, however, had to change its name to the "Democratic" Party, because the Agrarian Party had been outlawed in Czech lands. Two other parties were allowed to form just prior to the elections of 1946 by the Communist-domin ated Prague government which were supposed to weaken the "Democrats" and, therefore strengthen the position of the Communists. The ruse, however, failed. The Slovaks could vote for the Lettrich "Democrats," or for the Communists who held the upper hand in Slovakia. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, which was Catholic (about 85 per cent), was not allowed to organize a political party. Being advised and instru.cted by their religious a:nd political leaders, the Slovak �82 SLOVAKIA Catholics voted for the Lettrich "Democrats" - after a,n agreement had been reached by the leaders of the Catholics and the "Democrats." Doing so, they recikoned, they chose the lesser of two evils. The Communists were beaten decisively; they received only 30 per cent of the votes cast, while the "Democrats" poled 62 per cent . The difference would have been still greater if thousands of Slovaks had not been disfranchised ; jailed and intimidated; and if the army, the partisans and imported Czech Reds had not been allowed to vote in Slovakia. In the Czech lands (Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia), where the Prague government had allowed four parties to ex,ist, the Communists and Socialists came out on top (over 54 per centJ. 'l'he Lettrich "Democrats" won the elections in Slovakia in 1946, but the Communists continued to hold on to the key positions; of course, with the blessing of Moscow and the Communist-do minated National Front Government of Prague. The Slovaks proved themselves courageous and valiant in voting against the Communists, but it availed them nothing. The Lettrich "Democrats" lacked the courage and fight; their spineless leaders conveniently forgot the working agreement with the Catholics; and yielded to the Communists on practically every score. So the Communists ran Slovakia the way they wanted to, oppressing and suppressing all non~Communist elements ruthlessly. True it is that the "Democrats" protested weakly on occasions, but nothing more, even though they did have the backing of the overwhelming majority of the Slovak people. They were gradually awakening to what collaboration with the Communists means. They were partners in the National Front and the Slovak National Counoil; they had agreed to collaborate closely with the Reds. And the Reds had only one purpose: to make Slovakia and the.n the whole of Czecho-Slovak ia subservient to them and to Moscow. If the "Democrats" balked or tried to back out, they could very easily be labeled "enemies" of the State and the National Front, according to the decrees and regulations which they had formulated with the Communists, and which they used against all so-called "Fascist and Nazi" elements, meaning, of course, anti-Communist elements �SLOVAKIA 83 in Slovakia. So they continued to collaborate and govern with the Communists, until the Reds threw them out. Dr. Eward Benes, president of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, resigned in 1938 and fled his country during its worst crisis, congratulating his successor, who was elected in his place according to the Constitution of Czecho-Slovakia. Later he reappointed himself president again and, by the grace of Stalin, returned as such with his Moscowformed government behind the Red Army. This, l believe, is without precedent in history. Benes became president again, but only at a price, a very high price - the sell-out of the Slovaks and the Czechs to the men of the Kremlin. Stalin did no favors for nothing. The Slovaks and the Czechs at home had no voice in the matter. As a result of Benes's pro-Soviet policy, nothing else could have happened in Czecho-Slovakia except what did happen on February 25, 1948. Such and only such can be the conclusion of all thoroughly informed observers. Moscow and her stooges had a "sure thing" in Czecho-Slovakia ; they simply could not miss Benes and his Czech Socialists. supported by their stooges in Slovakia, the "Czechoslovaks" or Lettrich "Democrats" - the traitqrs of the Slovak nation - had prepared the way and, hence, are responsible for the sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations to the ruthless men of the Kremlin. Benes and his political entourage firmly believed that collaboration between the USSR and Czecho-Slovakia was not only feasible, but highly desirable; that peaceful coexistence with the Reds was possible without the loss of freedoms and rights. And they promoted that policy to the bitter end. Czecho-Slovakia ended up just as did the other countries whose political leaders thought they could collaborate with Communists and the USSR, form coalition governments with them, and still preserve their independence, freedoms and rights. Moscow and its stooges deeply appreciated all such collaborations and rewarded all collaborators in the customary Red fashion - it liquidated them, proving again that Communism devours its own children. Many Slovak Communists and Lettrich "Democrat,s " have �84 SLOVAKIA already paid for their folly and the ruinous pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes with their lives. Many more languish in prisons, concentration camps and forced labor camps - the very same institutions they helped the Communists to establish. The Communists were able to seize Slovakia not beca use they had the support of the vast masses of the Slovak people, but despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the Slovak nation opposed them. And, in fact, sWl opposes them today. The victorious United Nations did not respect the will of the Slovak nation, in fact, were not even interested in ascertaining the will of the Slovaks. They did, however, respect the will of Benes and his Cze<!h Socialists, who, in the end, brought ruin and Red enslavement even on their own Czech nation. Slovakia was, therefore, sold out to the Reds by Benes and the victorious United Nations whose favor and confidence he enjo,yed. Slovakia is ruled by force and violence - the Communist system. The lesson of Slovakia, and then that of Czecho-Slovakia should be repeated over and over again so that it might be learned thoroughly. Peaceful coexistence with the USSR, the Communist world, is strictly a myth. To give it credence would be folly. Collaboration with Communists and the USSR means, in the end, a brutal suppression of all freedoms and rights and Red enslavement. • • • WHO SAID IT? "With equal enthusiasm we are today manifesting for the idea~s of our, and only our, Ozechoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn. . . . T.he unresel"ved alliance with our Eastern neighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, .bl.lit also our friendly contacts wi•th the rest of the world, espeoi:aUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeling of cel"tainty that no matter what might hiappen a,broad, aur internati<ona1 posilt'ion is f.imn and we need not ferur that we can come urpon new dangers and dif.ficu1ties." (!Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vic~Ohairm.an of the Executive Committee of the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," C.AIS, Novemlber 18, 1947). � 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 1954, Vol. 4 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 10), March 1954.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 11), June 1954.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954.</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 1954 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 78 HOW '.fillE COMMUNISTS SEIZED POWER IN SWVAKIA (STATEMENT BY PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA AND EDITOR OF THE JEDNOTA, OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE FIRST CATHOLIC SLOVAK UNION, MADE BEFORE THE KERSTEN COMMITTEE ON COMMUNIST AGGRESSION, IN THE COUNTY COURT HOUSE, MILWAUKEE, FRIDAY AFTERNOON, OCT0!3ER 22, 1954) If there is a nation in the world today that really is anti-Communist, that nation is th,e Slovak nation. It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks have fought the plague of materialistic- Communism consistently and persistently, in and OU! of season, for over a hundred years. Louis Stur, champion of democracy and Slovak freedom, repudiated the godless, materialistic philosophy of Marx in 1849. In his book "SLOV ANSTVO A SVET BUDUCNOSTI" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), written in 1849 but published after his death in 1856, he wrote: "In every instance Communism means the collapse and the destruction of the State. Communism arrived at this aim through atheism and apostacy from Christianity. In every form of Communism, n_o matter what its origin, the outlook on life is gloomy, lacking every tender joy. It brings the most cruel slavery. Communism, let it strive and pretend in any manner whatsoever that it will make all peoples share in all rights, nevertheless, knows nothing about humanity; it degrades humanity and because it holds to systems that are impractical and unrealizable, it belongs among the most stupid innovations that have thus far been created by the human mind." In 1905, at its very first session, the newly organized Hlinka Slovak Peoples Party, did not hesitate to condemn CommuniSIIIl. Fourteen years later, in 1919, when CzechoSlovakia was already established, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia cautioned T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes not to flirt with Communism, not to make any compromises with the Bolsheviks. Stefanik was in Russia SLOVAKIA 79 during 1918-1919 and saw Communism at work first hand. In February, he sent a telegram to Masaryk in Prague which said: "To flirt with Bolshevist tendencies would be comparable to foresaking the path of honor and sanity. The fight against Bolshevism in all its manifestations must prevail in our politics." Andrew Hlinka, fearless champion of Slovak freedom and founder and head of the Slovak Peoples Party, fought Communism and Communists all his life. So did Martin Razus, head of the Slovak National Party and distin. guished poet. Finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, president and martyr of the Slovak Republic, exhorted his Slovak people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to the gallows on April 18, 1947, by order of the Communist-dominated National Front government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition. Up to the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918, materialistic Communism could not gain a foothold among the Slovaks. After the Bolshevik group headed by Bela Kun seized the government in Hungary, his Red horde: invaded southern Slovakia, murdering thousands of innocent people and pillaging their lands. This only steeled the Slova.ks in their determination to fight Communism and Communists. In the early years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, the Prague Gove,r nrnent sent some 200,000 "progressive and liberal-minded" Czechs to Slovakia to take over various government posts, educational positions and other tasks. Their main objective, however, was to make Czechs out of Slovaks. It was then that leftist tendrncies began to take hold among some of the intelligentsia. The Communist Party, however, had pretty rough going among the Slovaks, who were traditionally deeply religious and opposed to the godless philosophy of Marx. Up to Munich, J 938, the Communist Party never represented more than JO per cent of the electorate in Slovakia. We must not forget, however, that the Czechs in Slovakia represented about 15· per cent of the electorate. It was the Czech group that gave the greatest support to Communists in Slovakia. 80 SLOVAKIA After Munich and the cowardly resignation of president Edward Benes, Slovakia was granted autonomy by the Prague Parliament. The government of the Slovak State was in Christian democratic hands. The Communist Party was outlawed in Slovakia in 1938 by the Slovak Government. Of course, the Reds worked underground, keeping their contacts with Moscow and, later, with the London government of Dr. Edward Benes. When Benes concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak Soviet" Treaty on December 12, 1943, the Slovaks knew definitely that not only they, but even the Czechs wert' formally sold out to the Kremlin. Benes had always been pro-Soviet and admitted it openly. So did his followers, the Czech National Socialists (The Czech Nazis). The Slovaks opposed his policy consistently and resolutely even in the Prague Parliament, declaring that such a policy even. tually would bring ruin and Red enslavement to the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia. But the Slovaks were in a minority, so the policy of Benes and his followers, supported by other Czech leftist parties and the Slovak Agrarians, the socalled "Czechoslova ks" (Slovaks in the pay of the Czechs), prevailed. In 1943, Moscow parachuted Soviet partisan leaders into Slovakia to create incidents, to spread terror and confusion among the population of central Slovakia. Communists, led by Schmid,ke and Husak, and the Slovak Agrarians, led by Dr. Joseph Lettric,h, and assuming the name of Slovak "Democrats," got together on Christmas Day, 1943, and concluded an agreement to collaborate as closely as possible in all things with the USSR in the spirit of the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943. And they did. They planned and executed the Communist-in spired Slovak uprising in August, 1944, which they misnomered the "Slovak National Uprising," in order to make the world believe that the whole Slovak nation revolted against its government to destroy its own Republic. The terroristic acts of the partisans brought the German Anny into Slovakia, and terror and destruction, and mass murders and SLOVAKIA 81 mass graves. Some 70,000 Slovaks were killed . The Communist revolt of August, 1944, prepared the ground for the Communists to take over key posts in SlQlVakia in 1945 and, later, In February 1948, the entire Government of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was recognized by both the United Nations and the USSR. The Slovaks, completely abandoned, were helpless; their situation desperate. The victorious United Nations were not at all interested in the political will of the Slovak Nation. Benes and his Moscow-created government had all the say in 1945, they controlled the press and radio, Slovakia was wantonly destroyed. The Communist-dominated National Front government wasted no time in Slovakia. The Slovak National Council - a 50-50 coalition of Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" nationalized churches, ecclesiastical schools and institutions, confiscated properties, set up a concentration camp and "people's" courts to mete out "justice" to all who opposed the regime, that is Benes, the Communists and the USSR. A wave o,f ruthless, brutal perse.cution of all anti-Communist element ensued. Over 130,000 were placed under arrest, tens of thousands were deported, disfranchised and dispossessed, and hundreds were murdered. In 1946 the vast masses of the Slovak people had little choice in the elections held in May. In 1945 only two political parties were allowed to organize in Slovakia by the Benes government: the old Communist Party and the old Agrarian Party; the latter, however, had to change its name to the "Democratic" Party, because the Agrarian Party had been outlawed in Czech lands. Two other parties were allowed to form just prior to the elections of 1946 by the Communist-domin ated Prague government which were supposed to weaken the "Democrats" and, therefore strengthen the position of the Communists. The ruse, however, failed. The Slovaks could vote for the Lettrich "Democrats," or for the Communists who held the upper hand in Slovakia. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, which was Catholic (about 85 per cent), was not allowed to organize a political party. Being advised and instru.cted by their religious a:nd political leaders, the Slovak 82 SLOVAKIA Catholics voted for the Lettrich "Democrats" - after a,n agreement had been reached by the leaders of the Catholics and the "Democrats." Doing so, they recikoned, they chose the lesser of two evils. The Communists were beaten decisively; they received only 30 per cent of the votes cast, while the "Democrats" poled 62 per cent . The difference would have been still greater if thousands of Slovaks had not been disfranchised ; jailed and intimidated; and if the army, the partisans and imported Czech Reds had not been allowed to vote in Slovakia. In the Czech lands (Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia), where the Prague government had allowed four parties to ex,ist, the Communists and Socialists came out on top (over 54 per centJ. 'l'he Lettrich "Democrats" won the elections in Slovakia in 1946, but the Communists continued to hold on to the key positions; of course, with the blessing of Moscow and the Communist-do minated National Front Government of Prague. The Slovaks proved themselves courageous and valiant in voting against the Communists, but it availed them nothing. The Lettrich "Democrats" lacked the courage and fight; their spineless leaders conveniently forgot the working agreement with the Catholics; and yielded to the Communists on practically every score. So the Communists ran Slovakia the way they wanted to, oppressing and suppressing all non~Communist elements ruthlessly. True it is that the "Democrats" protested weakly on occasions, but nothing more, even though they did have the backing of the overwhelming majority of the Slovak people. They were gradually awakening to what collaboration with the Communists means. They were partners in the National Front and the Slovak National Counoil; they had agreed to collaborate closely with the Reds. And the Reds had only one purpose: to make Slovakia and the.n the whole of Czecho-Slovak ia subservient to them and to Moscow. If the "Democrats" balked or tried to back out, they could very easily be labeled "enemies" of the State and the National Front, according to the decrees and regulations which they had formulated with the Communists, and which they used against all so-called "Fascist and Nazi" elements, meaning, of course, anti-Communist elements SLOVAKIA 83 in Slovakia. So they continued to collaborate and govern with the Communists, until the Reds threw them out. Dr. Eward Benes, president of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, resigned in 1938 and fled his country during its worst crisis, congratulating his successor, who was elected in his place according to the Constitution of Czecho-Slovakia. Later he reappointed himself president again and, by the grace of Stalin, returned as such with his Moscowformed government behind the Red Army. This, l believe, is without precedent in history. Benes became president again, but only at a price, a very high price - the sell-out of the Slovaks and the Czechs to the men of the Kremlin. Stalin did no favors for nothing. The Slovaks and the Czechs at home had no voice in the matter. As a result of Benes's pro-Soviet policy, nothing else could have happened in Czecho-Slovakia except what did happen on February 25, 1948. Such and only such can be the conclusion of all thoroughly informed observers. Moscow and her stooges had a "sure thing" in Czecho-Slovakia ; they simply could not miss Benes and his Czech Socialists. supported by their stooges in Slovakia, the "Czechoslovaks" or Lettrich "Democrats" - the traitqrs of the Slovak nation - had prepared the way and, hence, are responsible for the sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations to the ruthless men of the Kremlin. Benes and his political entourage firmly believed that collaboration between the USSR and Czecho-Slovakia was not only feasible, but highly desirable; that peaceful coexistence with the Reds was possible without the loss of freedoms and rights. And they promoted that policy to the bitter end. Czecho-Slovakia ended up just as did the other countries whose political leaders thought they could collaborate with Communists and the USSR, form coalition governments with them, and still preserve their independence, freedoms and rights. Moscow and its stooges deeply appreciated all such collaborations and rewarded all collaborators in the customary Red fashion - it liquidated them, proving again that Communism devours its own children. Many Slovak Communists and Lettrich "Democrat,s " have 84 SLOVAKIA already paid for their folly and the ruinous pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes with their lives. Many more languish in prisons, concentration camps and forced labor camps - the very same institutions they helped the Communists to establish. The Communists were able to seize Slovakia not beca use they had the support of the vast masses of the Slovak people, but despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the Slovak nation opposed them. And, in fact, sWl opposes them today. The victorious United Nations did not respect the will of the Slovak nation, in fact, were not even interested in ascertaining the will of the Slovaks. They did, however, respect the will of Benes and his Cze<!h Socialists, who, in the end, brought ruin and Red enslavement even on their own Czech nation. Slovakia was, therefore, sold out to the Reds by Benes and the victorious United Nations whose favor and confidence he enjo,yed. Slovakia is ruled by force and violence - the Communist system. The lesson of Slovakia, and then that of Czecho-Slovakia should be repeated over and over again so that it might be learned thoroughly. Peaceful coexistence with the USSR, the Communist world, is strictly a myth. To give it credence would be folly. Collaboration with Communists and the USSR means, in the end, a brutal suppression of all freedoms and rights and Red enslavement. • • • WHO SAID IT? "With equal enthusiasm we are today manifesting for the idea~s of our, and only our, Ozechoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn. . . . T.he unresel"ved alliance with our Eastern neighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, .bl.lit also our friendly contacts wi•th the rest of the world, espeoi:aUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeling of cel"tainty that no matter what might hiappen a,broad, aur internati<ona1 posilt'ion is f.imn and we need not ferur that we can come urpon new dangers and dif.ficu1ties." (!Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vic~Ohairm.an of the Executive Committee of the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," C.AIS, Novemlber 18, 1947).  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 How the Communists Seized Power in Slovakia Description An account of the resource Statement by Philip A. Hrobak, President of the Slovak League of America and editor of the Jednota, official organ of the First Catholic Slovak Union, made before the Kersten Committee on Communist Aggression, in the county court house, Milwaukee, Friday afternoon, October 22, 1954 Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 3-4 (12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954 pp. 78-84 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 Sept.-Dec. 1954 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/c81966ab83aa490ff8e2044117e0e4b7.pdf 1c14a39865f9334c9f66438c5a8e0681 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 39 Collaboration and Coexistence: THE LETI'RICH "DEMOCRATS" AND COMMUNISTS P.A. Hrobak The Slovak Democratic Party did not exist in pre-war Slovakia, whereas the Slovak Communist Party did. The Democratic Party came into existence when the left-wing Agrarians decided to salvage their wealth and their political prestige at the expense of their own nation. They were well aware of the fact that they represented a negligible amount of the Slovak electorate in Slovakia and, hence, could never be elected as representatives of the political will of the Slovak nation in any free elections. The Communists in pre-war Slovakia were just about in the same fix; they did not have the backing of even 10 % of the electorate. But the Communists were in a more favorable position at the end of 1943, because it was quite evident at that time that the USSR would have a lot to say about the order that was to prevail in Czecho-Slovakia after the war. Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-stil'l president" of Czecho-Slovakia, had concluded the "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" on December 12, 1943, which formally sold out that hapless country to the USSR. The Lettrich "Democrats" were fully aware of the situation at that time. The Lettrich "Democrats" could become a power in post-war Slovakia only with the help of the Communists, so they joined up with them to destroy the Republic of Slovakia and estaiblish a "new" Czecho-Slovakia - a "people's" democracy - subordinated to the USSR. They concluded several agreements with the Communists which are referred to writers from time to time. We produce them in toto here. The 1943 "Christmas" Agreement "The ideological tendencies in Slovakia - which even after October 6, 1938, continued on the principles of antiFascist democracy and to the present day have actively opposed the political, economic and cultural violation of the Slovak people and which today represent the actual think- �SLOVAKIA ing of all groups of the Slovak people - have decided to create a common political leadership which shall be the SLOVAK NATIONAL COUNCIL, the sole representative of the political will of the Slovak nation at home. "I. The Role and the Aims of the Slovak National Council are: . "1. Unitedly and centrally to wage the fight of the Slovak nation for the removal of the Nazi-German dictatorship, which is being enforced even by native usurpers of political power. "2. At the fi..rst opportune moment to seize all political, legislative, military, or administrative executive power in Slovakia and administer it according to the will of the people until such time as freely elected representatives of the people shall be able to take over all power. "3. As soon as possible after the seizure of power, the Slovak National Council shall see to it that the Slovak people of its own will shall freely designate its own representatives to whom the Slovak National Council shall surrender all power. "4. In its activity the Slovak National Council shall proceed in understanding with the Czecho-Slovak Government and the entire resistance movement abroad, whose work in the international and military fields it recognizes and supports. "II. The associated tendencies and groups of the Council have agreed on these principles: "1. It is our desire that the Slovak nation and the Czech nation, as the most related Slovanic nations, work out their future destiny in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, that is, in a joint State of the Slovaks and Czechs, and on a basis of equality. "2. We desire close collaboration with all Slovanic States and nations, especially with the Soviet Union in which we see the guarantee of a free life and general growth of small nations generally and of the Slovanic nations in particular . ., ~· , · "3. · ·The future Czecho-Slovak Republic shall conduct its foreign policy in the spirit of these principles and, there- �SLOVAKIA 41 fore in the field of foreign policy and in the military field shall rely on the USSR. "4. The internal order of the future Czecho-Slovak Repurblic shall be democratic, but all Fascist, racial, totalitarian tendencies, and all such as shall be in conflict with these principles, shall be eradicated. In this spirit the internal political government shall be firmly conducted, but, nevertheless, in a democratic manner. It is necessary to avoid the mistakes and errors of the past. "5. The concept of democracy must be carried over and intensified also in the economic and social fields, so that the distribution of the national income among all the inhabitants be as equal as possible and the life of every citizen be humanly dignified. "6. Culture, education and training must be conducted by these principles. Freedom of religious beliefs shall be preserved, but the influence of the churches on the tendency and the management of the State shall be excluded. "7. About the definite adjustment of these questions - and especially about the legal, constitutional adjustment of the relationship of the Slovak nation to the Czech nation - shall be decided, on the Slovak side, exclusively by freely (designated) representatives of the Slovak nation. "Bratislava, Christmas, 1943." T·h e Agreement of June 26, 1945 . "1. Neither party of the National Front has any other aims than a united, indivisible, democratic Czecho-Slovak Republic, built on the legally equal union of the Slovak and Czech nations and, in its foreign, Slovak and economic policies, depending on the Soviet Union, keeping brotherly contacts with all Slovanic States and nations, preserving the traditional friendly contacts with the western allies. "2. Both parties of the National Front - the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia - are aware of the fact that to successfully perform the tasks of one class pr of one political party is not sufficient, but that harmonious cooperation of all working groups of the nation �42 SLOVAKIA is necessary, and that of both our political parties which represent the will of the nation. "3. It is our unalterable will to preserve and consolidate the National Front, which is built first of all on the collaboration of the Democratic Party with the Communist Party of Slovakia, so that it could fulfill its great task of consolidation and reconstruction. "In the spirit of fraternal friendship of the Czech and Slovak nations, we want to keep up the most friendly cooperation of the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party, federated in the Slovak National Front, with the political parties in the Czech lands, especially with the bloc of working people of the cities and their vicinities which forms the core of political representation of the Czech nation. "4. Just as we fought together during the national rebellion against the Gellman invaders and their Magyar helpers, so together we want to cleanse Slovakia of Nazi Germans, Fascist Magyars, to achieve the exchange of the remaining Magyar population for the Slovaks in Hungary and abroad and thus contribute to the fulfillment of the governmental program to build the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a State of the Czechs and the Slovaks. "5. By mutual collaboration we want to continue inexorably and uncompromisingly to expose and disarm all Fascist, collaborationist and exploitationary elements. "6. Just as we value highly respectable, conscientious and qualified citizens, even if they are not adherents of political parties, we shall just as certainly disarm characterless conjuncturalists, chameleons, opportunists, as well as the prejudiced, even if they should cloak themselves with adherence to some of our parties. "7. Between the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party there is complete agreement on the matter that local and district National Committees, just like economic, industrial, social, health, cultural and other institutions of a national character, shall not become the object of one of our political parties, but shall be so composed that they adequately represent all democratic and working groups of our citizenry. �SLOVAKIA 43 "8. The Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia are completely united in respecting and defending the right of religious confession, but also in the matter that Slovak citizens of whatever faith are equal citizens of our State. On the other hand, they expect that the churches shall not afford asylum to Fascist culprits and shall not become tools of any sort of political agitation. "9. The Democratic Party, just like the Communist Party of Slovakia, is striving for extensive social reforms to raise the living and cultural standard of the working people and, on the other hand, the Communist Party of Slovakia, just like the Democratic Party, resolutely respects private property of peasants, tradesmen, businessmen, small and medium entrepreneurs and officials. "10. Since there is agreement ,o n all vital questions between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia, both parties shall strive for the end that, in the spirit of the collacboration of the underground and the uprising, the methods of honorable, open, sincere and loyal collaboration, become domesticated in all organizations and groups of the party. "June 26, 1945. "For the Communist Party of Slovakia: Karol Schmidke, Dr. Gustav Husak, Laco Novomesky, Dr. E. Frisch, Karol Bacilek. "For the Democratic Party: Dr. Jozef Lettrich, Dr. Fedor Hodza, Dr. Matej Josko, Dr. Jozef Kysely, Milan Polak." It is obvious that the Lettrich "Democrats" collaborated with Communists and the USSR deliberately and willingly against the national interests of their own people. They wanted to coexist and co-govern with the Reds, but forgot that the Reds had other plans, their own plans, based on the Moscow blueprint or master plan. After the Reds and Moscow used them to attain their ends in Czecho-Slovakia, the Lettrich "Democrats" were relegated to the political rubbish heap. The Slovak people, whom they betrayed, want to keep them there. Why should our State Department, the �SLOVAKIA 44 U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) and other American institutions still try to salvage them? Why insist that such 0 political dupes" ( ?) represent the political will of the Slovak nation? They never did and never shall! • RECOMMENDED $3.00; SWVAK FOR (the set); "Hirdbak's "S'IJOVAK LffiSSONS" • • BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Jwrchak BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 Eniglish-,Sl{)IVa;k Dictionary" $4.00; (iHrolbak) $3.50 . • • • NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN SLOVAKIA Andrej Gemersky When Edward Benes signed the governmental decree in 1945 to nationalize '.key (heavy) indrustry, the Communists in Slovakia and the Czech lands became the masters of the economic situation. By signing that decree Benes sealed the fate not only of heaJVy industry, Wihich thereto was owned for the most part rb y share-holders' associations, 1b ut also the industry which was owned by indirviduals. Benes's decree nationali0ed all industrial enterprises which employed: more than 50 persons. For the time bemg, therefore, enterprises with u:p to 50 emptoyees were not affeded by the decree. Bwt only for a short time. The Co1mmunists are rk nown for their consistent stand on a!bolishing all rprivaJte ownership. They ibelieve in the prinrciple that man s'hould not exiploit man, that man must not be ex!ploited 'by the bourgeois, the capitalists, who. according to the Communists are represented by private OIWltlers withO'llt regard to the iltind and ~tent of prirvate ownership. The Communists, therefore, once they were in key positliooo in SlovaJki1a , sought to nationalilze every private enter.prise, large and small. I had said that enterprises with up to 50 employees were not nationalized at the outset (1945). These the � SLOVAKIA 39 Collaboration and Coexistence: THE LETI'RICH "DEMOCRATS" AND COMMUNISTS P.A. Hrobak The Slovak Democratic Party did not exist in pre-war Slovakia, whereas the Slovak Communist Party did. The Democratic Party came into existence when the left-wing Agrarians decided to salvage their wealth and their political prestige at the expense of their own nation. They were well aware of the fact that they represented a negligible amount of the Slovak electorate in Slovakia and, hence, could never be elected as representatives of the political will of the Slovak nation in any free elections. The Communists in pre-war Slovakia were just about in the same fix; they did not have the backing of even 10 % of the electorate. But the Communists were in a more favorable position at the end of 1943, because it was quite evident at that time that the USSR would have a lot to say about the order that was to prevail in Czecho-Slovakia after the war. Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-stil'l president" of Czecho-Slovakia, had concluded the "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" on December 12, 1943, which formally sold out that hapless country to the USSR. The Lettrich "Democrats" were fully aware of the situation at that time. The Lettrich "Democrats" could become a power in post-war Slovakia only with the help of the Communists, so they joined up with them to destroy the Republic of Slovakia and estaiblish a "new" Czecho-Slovakia - a "people's" democracy - subordinated to the USSR. They concluded several agreements with the Communists which are referred to writers from time to time. We produce them in toto here. The 1943 "Christmas" Agreement "The ideological tendencies in Slovakia - which even after October 6, 1938, continued on the principles of antiFascist democracy and to the present day have actively opposed the political, economic and cultural violation of the Slovak people and which today represent the actual think- �SLOVAKIA ing of all groups of the Slovak people - have decided to create a common political leadership which shall be the SLOVAK NATIONAL COUNCIL, the sole representative of the political will of the Slovak nation at home. "I. The Role and the Aims of the Slovak National Council are: . "1. Unitedly and centrally to wage the fight of the Slovak nation for the removal of the Nazi-German dictatorship, which is being enforced even by native usurpers of political power. "2. At the fi..rst opportune moment to seize all political, legislative, military, or administrative executive power in Slovakia and administer it according to the will of the people until such time as freely elected representatives of the people shall be able to take over all power. "3. As soon as possible after the seizure of power, the Slovak National Council shall see to it that the Slovak people of its own will shall freely designate its own representatives to whom the Slovak National Council shall surrender all power. "4. In its activity the Slovak National Council shall proceed in understanding with the Czecho-Slovak Government and the entire resistance movement abroad, whose work in the international and military fields it recognizes and supports. "II. The associated tendencies and groups of the Council have agreed on these principles: "1. It is our desire that the Slovak nation and the Czech nation, as the most related Slovanic nations, work out their future destiny in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, that is, in a joint State of the Slovaks and Czechs, and on a basis of equality. "2. We desire close collaboration with all Slovanic States and nations, especially with the Soviet Union in which we see the guarantee of a free life and general growth of small nations generally and of the Slovanic nations in particular . ., ~· , · "3. · ·The future Czecho-Slovak Republic shall conduct its foreign policy in the spirit of these principles and, there- �SLOVAKIA 41 fore in the field of foreign policy and in the military field shall rely on the USSR. "4. The internal order of the future Czecho-Slovak Repurblic shall be democratic, but all Fascist, racial, totalitarian tendencies, and all such as shall be in conflict with these principles, shall be eradicated. In this spirit the internal political government shall be firmly conducted, but, nevertheless, in a democratic manner. It is necessary to avoid the mistakes and errors of the past. "5. The concept of democracy must be carried over and intensified also in the economic and social fields, so that the distribution of the national income among all the inhabitants be as equal as possible and the life of every citizen be humanly dignified. "6. Culture, education and training must be conducted by these principles. Freedom of religious beliefs shall be preserved, but the influence of the churches on the tendency and the management of the State shall be excluded. "7. About the definite adjustment of these questions - and especially about the legal, constitutional adjustment of the relationship of the Slovak nation to the Czech nation - shall be decided, on the Slovak side, exclusively by freely (designated) representatives of the Slovak nation. "Bratislava, Christmas, 1943." T·h e Agreement of June 26, 1945 . "1. Neither party of the National Front has any other aims than a united, indivisible, democratic Czecho-Slovak Republic, built on the legally equal union of the Slovak and Czech nations and, in its foreign, Slovak and economic policies, depending on the Soviet Union, keeping brotherly contacts with all Slovanic States and nations, preserving the traditional friendly contacts with the western allies. "2. Both parties of the National Front - the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia - are aware of the fact that to successfully perform the tasks of one class pr of one political party is not sufficient, but that harmonious cooperation of all working groups of the nation �42 SLOVAKIA is necessary, and that of both our political parties which represent the will of the nation. "3. It is our unalterable will to preserve and consolidate the National Front, which is built first of all on the collaboration of the Democratic Party with the Communist Party of Slovakia, so that it could fulfill its great task of consolidation and reconstruction. "In the spirit of fraternal friendship of the Czech and Slovak nations, we want to keep up the most friendly cooperation of the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party, federated in the Slovak National Front, with the political parties in the Czech lands, especially with the bloc of working people of the cities and their vicinities which forms the core of political representation of the Czech nation. "4. Just as we fought together during the national rebellion against the Gellman invaders and their Magyar helpers, so together we want to cleanse Slovakia of Nazi Germans, Fascist Magyars, to achieve the exchange of the remaining Magyar population for the Slovaks in Hungary and abroad and thus contribute to the fulfillment of the governmental program to build the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a State of the Czechs and the Slovaks. "5. By mutual collaboration we want to continue inexorably and uncompromisingly to expose and disarm all Fascist, collaborationist and exploitationary elements. "6. Just as we value highly respectable, conscientious and qualified citizens, even if they are not adherents of political parties, we shall just as certainly disarm characterless conjuncturalists, chameleons, opportunists, as well as the prejudiced, even if they should cloak themselves with adherence to some of our parties. "7. Between the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party there is complete agreement on the matter that local and district National Committees, just like economic, industrial, social, health, cultural and other institutions of a national character, shall not become the object of one of our political parties, but shall be so composed that they adequately represent all democratic and working groups of our citizenry. �SLOVAKIA 43 "8. The Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia are completely united in respecting and defending the right of religious confession, but also in the matter that Slovak citizens of whatever faith are equal citizens of our State. On the other hand, they expect that the churches shall not afford asylum to Fascist culprits and shall not become tools of any sort of political agitation. "9. The Democratic Party, just like the Communist Party of Slovakia, is striving for extensive social reforms to raise the living and cultural standard of the working people and, on the other hand, the Communist Party of Slovakia, just like the Democratic Party, resolutely respects private property of peasants, tradesmen, businessmen, small and medium entrepreneurs and officials. "10. Since there is agreement ,o n all vital questions between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia, both parties shall strive for the end that, in the spirit of the collacboration of the underground and the uprising, the methods of honorable, open, sincere and loyal collaboration, become domesticated in all organizations and groups of the party. "June 26, 1945. "For the Communist Party of Slovakia: Karol Schmidke, Dr. Gustav Husak, Laco Novomesky, Dr. E. Frisch, Karol Bacilek. "For the Democratic Party: Dr. Jozef Lettrich, Dr. Fedor Hodza, Dr. Matej Josko, Dr. Jozef Kysely, Milan Polak." It is obvious that the Lettrich "Democrats" collaborated with Communists and the USSR deliberately and willingly against the national interests of their own people. They wanted to coexist and co-govern with the Reds, but forgot that the Reds had other plans, their own plans, based on the Moscow blueprint or master plan. After the Reds and Moscow used them to attain their ends in Czecho-Slovakia, the Lettrich "Democrats" were relegated to the political rubbish heap. The Slovak people, whom they betrayed, want to keep them there. Why should our State Department, the �SLOVAKIA 44 U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) and other American institutions still try to salvage them? Why insist that such 0 political dupes" ( ?) represent the political will of the Slovak nation? They never did and never shall! • RECOMMENDED $3.00; SWVAK FOR (the set); "Hirdbak's "S'IJOVAK LffiSSONS" • • BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Jwrchak BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 Eniglish-,Sl{)IVa;k Dictionary" $4.00; (iHrolbak) $3.50 . • • • NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN SLOVAKIA Andrej Gemersky When Edward Benes signed the governmental decree in 1945 to nationalize '.key (heavy) indrustry, the Communists in Slovakia and the Czech lands became the masters of the economic situation. By signing that decree Benes sealed the fate not only of heaJVy industry, Wihich thereto was owned for the most part rb y share-holders' associations, 1b ut also the industry which was owned by indirviduals. Benes's decree nationali0ed all industrial enterprises which employed: more than 50 persons. For the time bemg, therefore, enterprises with u:p to 50 emptoyees were not affeded by the decree. Bwt only for a short time. The Co1mmunists are rk nown for their consistent stand on a!bolishing all rprivaJte ownership. They ibelieve in the prinrciple that man s'hould not exiploit man, that man must not be ex!ploited 'by the bourgeois, the capitalists, who. according to the Communists are represented by private OIWltlers withO'llt regard to the iltind and ~tent of prirvate ownership. The Communists, therefore, once they were in key positliooo in SlovaJki1a , sought to nationalilze every private enter.prise, large and small. I had said that enterprises with up to 50 employees were not nationalized at the outset (1945). These the � 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 1954, Vol. 4 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 10), March 1954.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 11), June 1954.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954.</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 1954 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 39 Collaboration and Coexistence: THE LETI'RICH "DEMOCRATS" AND COMMUNISTS P.A. Hrobak The Slovak Democratic Party did not exist in pre-war Slovakia, whereas the Slovak Communist Party did. The Democratic Party came into existence when the left-wing Agrarians decided to salvage their wealth and their political prestige at the expense of their own nation. They were well aware of the fact that they represented a negligible amount of the Slovak electorate in Slovakia and, hence, could never be elected as representatives of the political will of the Slovak nation in any free elections. The Communists in pre-war Slovakia were just about in the same fix; they did not have the backing of even 10 % of the electorate. But the Communists were in a more favorable position at the end of 1943, because it was quite evident at that time that the USSR would have a lot to say about the order that was to prevail in Czecho-Slovakia after the war. Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-stil'l president" of Czecho-Slovakia, had concluded the "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" on December 12, 1943, which formally sold out that hapless country to the USSR. The Lettrich "Democrats" were fully aware of the situation at that time. The Lettrich "Democrats" could become a power in post-war Slovakia only with the help of the Communists, so they joined up with them to destroy the Republic of Slovakia and estaiblish a "new" Czecho-Slovakia - a "people's" democracy - subordinated to the USSR. They concluded several agreements with the Communists which are referred to writers from time to time. We produce them in toto here. The 1943 "Christmas" Agreement "The ideological tendencies in Slovakia - which even after October 6, 1938, continued on the principles of antiFascist democracy and to the present day have actively opposed the political, economic and cultural violation of the Slovak people and which today represent the actual think- SLOVAKIA ing of all groups of the Slovak people - have decided to create a common political leadership which shall be the SLOVAK NATIONAL COUNCIL, the sole representative of the political will of the Slovak nation at home. "I. The Role and the Aims of the Slovak National Council are: . "1. Unitedly and centrally to wage the fight of the Slovak nation for the removal of the Nazi-German dictatorship, which is being enforced even by native usurpers of political power. "2. At the fi..rst opportune moment to seize all political, legislative, military, or administrative executive power in Slovakia and administer it according to the will of the people until such time as freely elected representatives of the people shall be able to take over all power. "3. As soon as possible after the seizure of power, the Slovak National Council shall see to it that the Slovak people of its own will shall freely designate its own representatives to whom the Slovak National Council shall surrender all power. "4. In its activity the Slovak National Council shall proceed in understanding with the Czecho-Slovak Government and the entire resistance movement abroad, whose work in the international and military fields it recognizes and supports. "II. The associated tendencies and groups of the Council have agreed on these principles: "1. It is our desire that the Slovak nation and the Czech nation, as the most related Slovanic nations, work out their future destiny in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, that is, in a joint State of the Slovaks and Czechs, and on a basis of equality. "2. We desire close collaboration with all Slovanic States and nations, especially with the Soviet Union in which we see the guarantee of a free life and general growth of small nations generally and of the Slovanic nations in particular . ., ~· , · "3. · ·The future Czecho-Slovak Republic shall conduct its foreign policy in the spirit of these principles and, there- SLOVAKIA 41 fore in the field of foreign policy and in the military field shall rely on the USSR. "4. The internal order of the future Czecho-Slovak Repurblic shall be democratic, but all Fascist, racial, totalitarian tendencies, and all such as shall be in conflict with these principles, shall be eradicated. In this spirit the internal political government shall be firmly conducted, but, nevertheless, in a democratic manner. It is necessary to avoid the mistakes and errors of the past. "5. The concept of democracy must be carried over and intensified also in the economic and social fields, so that the distribution of the national income among all the inhabitants be as equal as possible and the life of every citizen be humanly dignified. "6. Culture, education and training must be conducted by these principles. Freedom of religious beliefs shall be preserved, but the influence of the churches on the tendency and the management of the State shall be excluded. "7. About the definite adjustment of these questions - and especially about the legal, constitutional adjustment of the relationship of the Slovak nation to the Czech nation - shall be decided, on the Slovak side, exclusively by freely (designated) representatives of the Slovak nation. "Bratislava, Christmas, 1943." T·h e Agreement of June 26, 1945 . "1. Neither party of the National Front has any other aims than a united, indivisible, democratic Czecho-Slovak Republic, built on the legally equal union of the Slovak and Czech nations and, in its foreign, Slovak and economic policies, depending on the Soviet Union, keeping brotherly contacts with all Slovanic States and nations, preserving the traditional friendly contacts with the western allies. "2. Both parties of the National Front - the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia - are aware of the fact that to successfully perform the tasks of one class pr of one political party is not sufficient, but that harmonious cooperation of all working groups of the nation 42 SLOVAKIA is necessary, and that of both our political parties which represent the will of the nation. "3. It is our unalterable will to preserve and consolidate the National Front, which is built first of all on the collaboration of the Democratic Party with the Communist Party of Slovakia, so that it could fulfill its great task of consolidation and reconstruction. "In the spirit of fraternal friendship of the Czech and Slovak nations, we want to keep up the most friendly cooperation of the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party, federated in the Slovak National Front, with the political parties in the Czech lands, especially with the bloc of working people of the cities and their vicinities which forms the core of political representation of the Czech nation. "4. Just as we fought together during the national rebellion against the Gellman invaders and their Magyar helpers, so together we want to cleanse Slovakia of Nazi Germans, Fascist Magyars, to achieve the exchange of the remaining Magyar population for the Slovaks in Hungary and abroad and thus contribute to the fulfillment of the governmental program to build the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a State of the Czechs and the Slovaks. "5. By mutual collaboration we want to continue inexorably and uncompromisingly to expose and disarm all Fascist, collaborationist and exploitationary elements. "6. Just as we value highly respectable, conscientious and qualified citizens, even if they are not adherents of political parties, we shall just as certainly disarm characterless conjuncturalists, chameleons, opportunists, as well as the prejudiced, even if they should cloak themselves with adherence to some of our parties. "7. Between the Communist Party of Slovakia and the Democratic Party there is complete agreement on the matter that local and district National Committees, just like economic, industrial, social, health, cultural and other institutions of a national character, shall not become the object of one of our political parties, but shall be so composed that they adequately represent all democratic and working groups of our citizenry. SLOVAKIA 43 "8. The Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia are completely united in respecting and defending the right of religious confession, but also in the matter that Slovak citizens of whatever faith are equal citizens of our State. On the other hand, they expect that the churches shall not afford asylum to Fascist culprits and shall not become tools of any sort of political agitation. "9. The Democratic Party, just like the Communist Party of Slovakia, is striving for extensive social reforms to raise the living and cultural standard of the working people and, on the other hand, the Communist Party of Slovakia, just like the Democratic Party, resolutely respects private property of peasants, tradesmen, businessmen, small and medium entrepreneurs and officials. "10. Since there is agreement ,o n all vital questions between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Slovakia, both parties shall strive for the end that, in the spirit of the collacboration of the underground and the uprising, the methods of honorable, open, sincere and loyal collaboration, become domesticated in all organizations and groups of the party. "June 26, 1945. "For the Communist Party of Slovakia: Karol Schmidke, Dr. Gustav Husak, Laco Novomesky, Dr. E. Frisch, Karol Bacilek. "For the Democratic Party: Dr. Jozef Lettrich, Dr. Fedor Hodza, Dr. Matej Josko, Dr. Jozef Kysely, Milan Polak." It is obvious that the Lettrich "Democrats" collaborated with Communists and the USSR deliberately and willingly against the national interests of their own people. They wanted to coexist and co-govern with the Reds, but forgot that the Reds had other plans, their own plans, based on the Moscow blueprint or master plan. After the Reds and Moscow used them to attain their ends in Czecho-Slovakia, the Lettrich "Democrats" were relegated to the political rubbish heap. The Slovak people, whom they betrayed, want to keep them there. Why should our State Department, the SLOVAKIA 44 U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) and other American institutions still try to salvage them? Why insist that such 0 political dupes" ( ?) represent the political will of the Slovak nation? They never did and never shall! • RECOMMENDED $3.00; SWVAK FOR (the set); "Hirdbak's "S'IJOVAK LffiSSONS" • • BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Jwrchak BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 Eniglish-,Sl{)IVa;k Dictionary" $4.00; (iHrolbak) $3.50 . • • • NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN SLOVAKIA Andrej Gemersky When Edward Benes signed the governmental decree in 1945 to nationalize '.key (heavy) indrustry, the Communists in Slovakia and the Czech lands became the masters of the economic situation. By signing that decree Benes sealed the fate not only of heaJVy industry, Wihich thereto was owned for the most part rb y share-holders' associations, 1b ut also the industry which was owned by indirviduals. Benes's decree nationali0ed all industrial enterprises which employed: more than 50 persons. For the time bemg, therefore, enterprises with u:p to 50 emptoyees were not affeded by the decree. Bwt only for a short time. The Co1mmunists are rk nown for their consistent stand on a!bolishing all rprivaJte ownership. They ibelieve in the prinrciple that man s'hould not exiploit man, that man must not be ex!ploited 'by the bourgeois, the capitalists, who. according to the Communists are represented by private OIWltlers withO'llt regard to the iltind and ~tent of prirvate ownership. The Communists, therefore, once they were in key positliooo in SlovaJki1a , sought to nationalilze every private enter.prise, large and small. I had said that enterprises with up to 50 employees were not nationalized at the outset (1945). These the  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 Lettrich "Democrats" and Communists Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 3-4 (12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954 pp. 39-44 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 Sept.-Dec. 1954 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/c2398952a9a832ef2d719b0303bda680.pdf f3534c93f3653f59c63899e5c876bdb7 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA THE SWVAK UPRISING OF AUGUST 1944 Philip A. Hrobak Much has been said and written about the "Slovak Uprising" of August 1944, by the Benes Czechs (Socialists), the "Czechoslovaks" (Slovaks in the pay of Benes Czechs), and the Communists. Their versions of the uprising have been widely publicized and have been accepted as true, it seems, even by our State Department (Voice of America) and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe). Of course, patriotic Slovaks also have said and written much about the uprising which brought terror and confusion, death and destruction, and the German Army to thier land. But their story of that massacre, mass murders, and mass graves, has not been given publicity and has not been accepted as true by our State Department and the Free Europe Committee. Why? It seems simply for political reasons. To me it is plainly clear that forces are at work to prevent Americans and the rest of the free world from getting the true version, all the availa;ble facts, about the Slovak uprising of August 1944. After the uprising in Slovakia got under way "officially" on August 29, 1944, Dr. Edward Benes, the Lettrich "Democrats," the Husak Communists, and Moscow - all in unison - proclaimed it a spontaneous action of the Slovak nation and labeled it as the "Slovak National Uprising," which, they said would be inscribed in the history of the Slovak people with golden letters. They told us then - and keep telling us even today - that the uprising was thoroughly planned, well-timed and perfectly executed. It is true that the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Benes Czechs have given various "modifications" of their original story about the uprising since February 25, 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic and anti-Communist," but they still have not given us the whole truth, all the facts as they know them. Since they have admitted that they organized the Slovak uprising of August 1944 with the Communists, they undoubtedly do know the facts, but for obvious reasons are not willing to reveal them even today. �SLOVAKIA 5 "National Fronters" in America As late as August 29, 1954, in a letter published in the NEW YORK TIMES, recalling the "Slovak Uprising" of 1944, the signatories - Josef Lettrich, Matej Josko and Juraj Slavik (Slova:ks in the pay of Benes Czechs, regarded as traitors by all truly patriotic Slovaks), and Adolf Klimek and Peter Zenkl (Benes Czechs who promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and were members of his Communits-dominated National Front government) - tell us: 1. The Slovak people did not want to be independent; independence was forced on them by Hitler. 2. The Slova,k people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government. 3. More than 70,000 soldiers and 12,000 partisans participated in the uprising of 1944. 4. The great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their lea,dership were of democratic, Western orientation. 5. The Slovak fighters manifested by their action their "Czechoslovwk" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs. 6. Even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans. The letter proves beyond a shadow of doubt that the Benes Czechs and their Slovak stooges have not changed their program or amended their ways. They still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak uprising which was fabricated in Moscow and propagated by the Communists under Karol Schmidke and the so-called "Democrats" (formerly Agrarians) under Josef Lettrich after the uprising was under way. Ten years after the horrible massacre and betrayal of the Slovak people by the Husak Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats," and the Benes Czechs, the signers of the TIMES letter would still have Americans believe the lie that the Slovaks did not want to be free and independent, but preferred to be dominated and exploited by the Czechs and, therefore, the Slovak nation rose up spontaneously in armed �6 SLOVAKIA revolt against its own State and against its own Government. How stupid do they think Americans are? Yes, how stupid must they think we are, since our own State Department, the U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) still faH for their line and even help propagate the same lie? Lettrich and Josko must know the truth about the Slovak uprising, because they played an active role in it. The other three signatories did not participate actively and directly, as far as I could ascertain. All of them, however, and others of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia" which operates out of Washington and New York, do claim credit for the Communist-in spired .putsch of 1944 which they prefer to call - even as the Commu~ists do - the "Slovak National Uprising." Lettrich and Josko do not want to divulge the truth about the uprising, because they would rather not implicate themselves. But the irrefutable fact remains that they were deeply implicated in the Communist-in spired putsch which claimed the lives of some 70,000 Slovaks, resulted in mass murders and mass graves, and brought the German Army into Slovakia. Moscow Brigades in Slovakia Furthermore, it is a matter of record that up to February 25, 1948, the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" ("Czechoslova ks") celebrated the Slovak uprising annually in the same fashion as the Communists of Slovakia, glorifying the Slovak partisans under Communist Schmidke and the Soviet partisans under Velicko of the USSR, the "great and glorious achievements " of the revolt, the wisdom and leadership of Stalin, and the heroic deeds of the USSR and the Red Army, which led to the "liberation" of the Slovak nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Together with the Communists they claimed credit for the "Slovak National Uprising" - and even today claim credit for it, though not together with the Communists. And patriotic, democratic Slovaks everywhere did and still do give them full credit for all the terroristic acts, mass murders and mass graves, indescribable crimes and terror, �SLOVAKIA 7 misery and Red enslavement that ensued. They hold them fully responsible for it. When the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich ",Democrats" persist in upholding the lie that the '~Slov-ak people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government," they are deliberately concealing the facts. They certainly must know that the German Army came into Slovakia only after the partisans had captured several army garrisons in central Slovakia and began terrorizing and murdering the population. And they certainly could not have forgotten the slogans used and the contents of the broadcasts made by the partisans at that time. If their memory is conveniently failing them, I might suggest that they refresh it by reading their own publications (CAS; NOVE CASY, 1944, London; PARTIZANI NA SLOVENSKU; NAD TATROU SA BL"'2'"1SKA; SLOBODNE CESKOSLOVENSKO; NARODNA OBRODA; etc.). I have it from reliable sources that no more than 35,000 sol~iers of the Slovak Army participated in the uprising the majority of whom were forced to fight on the side of the partisans against their own State and against their own government by the partisans and Red commanders of the USSR. But the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" - like the Communists - still tell us that the figure was 70,000 so that the uprising might appear as "national" in character. Furthermore, they state that 12,000 partisans participated in the Slovak uprising of 1944, in which "even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans," but conveniently omit to say that the Slovak partisans were led by the Communist Karol Schmidke, the Soviet partisans by Velicko of the USSR, while French partisans naturally were led by a French Communist. Indeed, it would not surprise me at all, if we eventually learned that other "international brigades" also participated in the 1944 putsch in Slovakia! I simply cannot believe that the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" have forgotten that various units of the rebel army were commanded by Soviet military men who were subordinate to the Soviet Chief of Staff in Kyjev, among whom were: Jegorov, Osmolov, Sukajev, Sadilenko, �8 SLOVAKIA Volkov, Smirnov, Krajuskin, Popov, Kolesnikov, Arsenev, Surkov, Solosenko, Cernogorov, Vysocky, Krasiev-Stepanov, and Poliakov. What, then, is the purpose of the balderdash that "the great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their leadership were of democratic, Western orientation"? After being accorded political asylum in America, why should Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" still want to deceive Americans in 1954? By their actions did they not then, and are they not now manifesting - like the "Slovak fighters" of the 1944 uprising - their "Czechoslovak" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs? Indeed, something that requires more looking into! Is it any wonder then that informed Americans, together with our good Slovak friends behind the Iron Curtain and in exile, are rudely shocked and thoroughly indignant, because our State Department, the U.S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) not only permit, but even help the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" deceive the American public and the rest of the free world? Lettrich and J osko could also tell us a bit about the background of the uprising of 1944, if they only wanted to - something of the events which preceded and the people who prepared the ground for the horrible massacre of the Slovaks in 1944, especially the agreements between the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Schmidke ...Husak Communists which were negotiated on December 25, 1943, and on June 26, 1945, and called for the closest collaboration between the parties concerned and the USSR. They negotiated and signed those agreements! The situation prior to 1944 Until about the end of 1942, there were no "illegal" groups in Slovakia, that is, active resistance groups. To the fall of Stalingrad, Slovak Communists used to meet socially with Slovak Czechs ("Czechoslovaks" - followers of Dr. Edward Benes's "one-nation" theory and his pro-Soviet policy). This was not connected with any hazards. The Slovak Government was aware of this, but did nothing to prevent �SLOVAKIA 9 their social meetings. The Communist Party had been outlawed in 1938 by the autonomous Slovak Government, but individual members were not persecuted or interned just because they were Communists. Some Communists and many Lettrich "Democrats" held government positions and other well-paying jobs. In 1943, two Moscow-trained Communists, Karol Schmidke, a Silesian half-German, and the Czech Karol Bacilek, were parachuted into Slova:kia by the Soviets to organize and direct illegal activities. But it was not until the end of that year that the Slovak Communists and left-wing Agrarians began to meet regularly to discuss organizing resistance groups and planning for the future. After Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-still-president" of CzechoSlovakia, concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" in Moscow, on December 12, 1943, the left-wing Slovak Agrarians (Lettrich's group) got together with the Slovak Communists (the Schmidke-Husak group) to conclude the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, whereby they created a "common political leadership" under the name of the "Slovak National Council" and declared "eternal friendship" for each other. The Slovak National Council, they declared, is "the one and only representative of the political will of the Slovak nation" and the "body supreme" as far as the affairs of Slovakia were concerned. These Slovak Agrarians, later re-christened to Slovak "Democrats," united with the Slovak Communists to collaborate with Moscow in the destruction of the Slovak Republic and in the establishment of a "new" Czecho-Slovak democracy, a "people's democratic State." From available accounts, it is quite evident that there were differences of opinion among the Husak Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" as far as the future of Slovakia was concerned. Slovak Communists did not care whether Slovakia became a Soviet Republic or remained within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, as a unit of a federative system, as long as it was governed by them. Lettrich's "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" - how- �10 SLOVAKIA ever, did not have a clear-cut program; at times they knew not what they wanted or where they were really going. Some were for the relationship which existed prior to Munich, 1938, while others preferred that which existed after Munich, but prior to March 14, 1939, when the Slovak parliament declared Slovakia independent. The latter were for the federative system, which T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes proposed for Czecho-Slovakia to the Allies in 1918 but never inaugurated. Communists in Slovakia were aware of the fact that the ovewhelming majority of the Slovak people resolutely opposed the conception of a "one-nation" Czecho-Slovakia, which the Benes Czechs propagated. They used this knowledge to gain supporters for their cause whenever an opportunity presented itself. It so happened when they repudiated the proclamation of the "London Government" of Dr. Edward Benes of June 30, 1943, which declared that the future of Czecho-Slovakia would rest on the conception of a "onenation" Czecho-Slovakia - a unified or united "Czechoslovak" nation. The Lettrich "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" on the other hand, accepted the conception of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation of the Benes Czechs, even though they could not agree among themselves just what the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks should be like in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. After Dr. Milan Hodza, former premier of Czecho-Slovakia, parted with Benes, many of them had lost faith in the president who resigned and then made himself president again. Nevertheless, they sided with Benes, because he was recognized both by the democratic' powers and the USSR. Like the Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats" hated the Tiso regime, which was thoroughly Christian and as democratic as it possibly could be under the circumstances; like the Communists they were not interested in a truly democratic Slovak State, because they knew they could never becoming ruling figures in it by the free will of the Slovak people. So, the Lettrich "Democrats" decided to go along with the Communists, proclaiming the establishment of a �SLOVAKIA 11 "new" Czecho-Slovakia as one of their chief aims, based, of course, on the spirit and the letter of the Treaty of December 12, 1943, which Benes had concluded with the Soviet Union and by which not only the Slovaks, but also the Czechs were formally sold out to the men of the Kremlin. The right of Benes to conclude such a treaty might be justly questioned, since the nations of Czecho-Slovakia had not authorized him to act in their behalf after his resignation as president in 1938, but that would be of little consequence today. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, with its political and religious leadership - the followers of Andrew Hlinka and Martin Razus - was definitely for a Christian, democratic, independent Slovak State, a Slovakia free of all foreign domination and rid of all Communists. It still is for such a State today. The Red Front Approaches Slovakia After concluding the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Husak Communists, began to discuss the matter of an armed putsch or revolt. In April, 1944, Dr. Vavro Srobar, one of the oldest and most intimate friends of Dr. Edward Benes in Slovakia, asked Benes what the Slovaks should do in the event that Hungary would quit the war and join the Allies, and/ or in the event that Germany should occupy Slovakia. Benes strongly advised an open revolt in his reply, because this, he said, would enable a speedy occupation of Slovakia by the Soviet Army. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of Slovakia, and the Slovak Government, including Slovak military leaders, had other plans. They did not want Slovakia to become an open battleground ; they tried to spare their people from the horrors of war. To avoid unnecessary bloodshed and occupation by the German and Soviet armies, they thought it best if the Slovak Army would take over the Government of Slovakia at the opportune moment. The "opportune moment" - it was understood - meant the fall of Cracow on the North, or the fall ·of Miskovec in the South. When that happened, the Slovak Army was to occupy the borders of Slovakia; �12 SLOVAKIA then the Slovak Government would step out in favor of the Army which, with the help of political parties, would form a new government, temporarily, which, in turn, would tie up with the United Nations, especially the West. Since the Slovak Government at that time had no contact with the West, thanks to Dr. Benes's refusal to deal with it, it tried to inform the West BJbout its plan through the USSR, even though it did so with great misgivings. General Augustine Malar personally contacted the Soviet Military Staff in the Ukraine, revealed the plan at least partly, and requested, in the name of the Slovak Government, that the Soviets and the Western Allies agree to this plan of action and also recognize the political independence of Slovakia. Malar, respecting the advice of the Slovak Government, wisely omitted to say anything about Slovakia's intention of joining the West. In reply, the Soviets said that they had not planned on penetrating through Slovakia; they were willing to recognize the political independence of Slovakia, as they already had in 1939, but steadfastly refused to agree on the point that military operations in Slovakia should be undertaken by the Slovak Army alone. It was quite obvious already then that the USSR wanted to occupy Slovakia for political reasons. The story of General Mala.r's contact with the Soviet Military on December 17, 1943, was told during the trial of Dr. Joseph Tiso and members of the 'Slovak Government (19461947) before the National Court in Bratislava. About the end of June the Slovak National Council decided to send a delegation to Moscow to inform Stalin of its plans and to petition the Soviets to include Slovakia in their plan of operations. Karol Schmidke and General Nicholas Ferjencik were selected to make the trip. Because of "technical" reasons, they did not undertake the trip until August 4, 1944. Ferjencik, now enjoying political asylum in America, could easily give us the details of that meeting, if he desired to do so. The partisans engaged in terroristic acts rather regularly at the end of July and the beginning of August, 1944. When they seized the command of several garrisons in �SLOVAKIA 13 central Slovakia and murdered many persons in that section of the country, General Malar, to save the situation, appealed to the Army in a radio broadcast not to be taken in by partisan rumors, not to join the partisans, because "our time has not yet arrived . . . When it does come, then we shall all pull at the same end of the rope." The terroristic acts of the partisans alarmed even Lt. Col. Golian, to whom Benes had entrusted the military preparations and operations of the "resistance" in Slovakia. G-Olian demanded that the partisans subordinate their activity to his command, the "authorized" military command of the "illegal" forces. Velicko, commander of the Soviet partisans, informed Golian that he would do so, but continued on his own any way. Angered and frustrated, Golian sent Lt. Col. Manica, August 20, 1944, with a request that Velicko order the partisans to cease their activities, otherwise the Germans would surely intervene. Velicko, however, disregarded the request and his .partisans continued to spread terror and violence in central and eastern Slovakia. The terroristic acts of the partisans created a very difficult situation for President Tiso and the Slovak Government. They did what they could to keep the German Army from occupying Slovakia. They explained that the disturbances were not widespread or "national," but local, and that the Slovak Army was capable of handling them and restoring order. The Germans, however, were reluctant to believe the Slovaks, especially after the murder of General Otto and his military mission at Banska Bystrica, August 27, 1944. Hitler's Wehrmacht began to occupy Slovakia, and the Slovaks really were in for the worst. The uprising, in which the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists collaborated fully to the joy of Moscow, was responsible for the Germans occupying Slovalkia in 1944. Why August 29, 1944? Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke Communists had told us - and are still telling us - that the Slovak uprising began on August 29, 1944. Why was that partic'ular date selected, when they knew - as we know now, �14 8LOVAKIA because even they themselves admitted it - that the partisans committed terroristic acts before that date? They selected that date as the "official" date so that they could tell the world that President Tiso and the Slovak Government called or invited the German Army to Slovakia and thus cover up the fact that the distuvbances created by the partisans were really responsible for the occupation of Slovakia by the Germans. Lettrich, Husak, N ovomesky and other "leaders" of the uprising were not even in Banska Bystrica on August 29, 1944. The Slovak National Council did not issue its declaration of the revolt until September 1, 1944. When German military units began moving into Slovakia as a result of partisan terroristic activities, the leaders of the uprising resorted to lies to gain the support of the Slovak Army and the Slovak people. They said: the Germans were coming to occupy the whole of ,Slovakia; that President Tiso was murdered; that members of the Slovak Government were seized and taken to Germany, etc. The ruse, however, even thoogh at first it deceiived many in SlovaJki:a and abroad, failed to attain its objective. What happened in Slovakia prior t,o August 29, 1944? Partisans committed terroristic acts in eastern and central Slovakia for at least three or four weeks before that date. The situation grew so tense that the Slovak Government conitem.iplated declaring Martial La,w on August 1, 1944, but did not resort to it till later. On several occasions the Germans warned Tiso and the Slovak Government that if they could not cope with the situation and keep order in Slovakia, the German Army definitely would move in to make order. Tiso and the Slovak Government did what they could under the circumstances to restore order and, thereby, keep the Germans out of Slovakia. They knew that their plans for joining with western forces of the United Nations could not be realized if the Germans occupied Slovakia. The partisans, however, taking orders from Moscow and London, were not interested in preserving order; they were only interested in preparing the ground for the Red Army: After �SLOVAKIA 15 the latter occupied 'Slovakia, they figured they would take over all power in Slovakia. And they did. After the German front collapsed in Rumania, German diplomatic personnel - some thirty persons, including women and children - were hurriedly evacuated. Communist agents already were quite active in Slovakia, creating chaos and confusion and provoking incidents with Germany. The train carrying German diplomats from Bucharest was halted on the evening of August 26, 1944, at Turciansky Svaty Martin, Slovakia, by partisans. The passengers were told rather politely that it would be impossible for them to go farther, because of engine trouble. Quarters were arranged for them in the local barracks. The next morning the entire group was ordered into the barracks square by one Major Kuchta, lined up and mowed down with machine guns. It was thus that the military mission of General Otto perished. Two days later German troops came in force into Slovakia "to restore order." The partisans, of course, told the Slovaks that the German occupation was entirely ttnprovoked and that they now had to fight for their freedom, Tiso was murdered, etc., as mentioned above. Before that time, however, on August 20, 1944, Velicko and his .partisans were busy in Turiec requisitioning autos, robbing stores and farmers. During the night of August 24 a group of German field gendarmes were taken by surprise and shot while they slept in the Hotel Slavia in Vrutky. Turiec and vicinity were also terrorized and victimized by a group led by the sadistic Lutheran preacher Vojtech HruskaTerenyi, the Communist from Hungary who already back in 1919, as a young preacher, had participated in the Red revolt of Bela Kun (Cohen). Francis Slamen, member of the Slovak Assembly and chairman of the Slovak Christian Labor Union, was among several persons murdered in Brezno Natl Hronom, August 27, 1944. On August 28, 1944, partisan officers shot Col. Zverin and Col. Kanak of the Slovak Army in Banska Bystrica. In Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas they arrested Col. Kl'ucik, of the garrison there, and Lt. Frecer; later they murdered them. �16 SLOVAKIA Let's fight to the last drop of your blood! On September 1, 1944, the Slovak National Council, headed by "Democrat" Lettrich and Communist Schmidke, met in Banska Bystrica and immediately made August 29, 1944, the "official" date of the start of the Slovak uprising. Futhermore, they issued a declaration which stated that the Council was the body supreme in Slovakia, the only representative and authorized body in Slovakia which had the right to speak in the name of the Slovak nation. The Slovak National Council was composed of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Hus a:k Communists (-50-50); Dr. Joseph Lettrich was chairman and Karol Schmidke co-chairman of the Council. On September 5, 1944, during its first "solemn" session, the so-called Slovak National Council sent two telegrams: one to Stalin, the other to Benes. The Stalin telegram read as follows (translated from the Slovak): Josip Visarionovic ,Stalin Marshal of the USSR Moscow, Kremlin The Slovak National Council sends You and the nations of the Soviet Union from its solemn session its most cordial greetings and thanks You for the understanding which You have manifested for our fight of liberation, waged against the common enemy. Glory to the victorious Red Army! Banska Bystrica, September 5, 1944 The Slovak National Council It is significant that the Council made up of Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" sent no greeting at that time either to the President of the United States or the King of England, who apparently did not rate. The Slovak National Council called in all reservists and ordered full mobilization. The response was poor; not many Slovaks answered the call voluntarily. The Council had to rest satisfied with those it could force to bear arms against their country in the area held by the partisans, a few districts in central and eastern Slovakia. A part of the Trnava garrison, led by John Benko, defected and joined the partisans; General Mala.r's divisions, however, refused to join. The German forces, led by Gen. Berger and Gen. iHoffle, soon encircled the partisan putschists. The heaviest fighting �SLOVAKIA 17 took place near Telgart, Cremosne, Dubrava and Kremnicka, during which some 4,000 were killed. The partisans, who had taken to the hills and mountains of Slovakia before the Germans moved in, soon realized that their situation was quite hopeless. They lacked men and material to cope with the situation they had created. And promised help from the USSR and from Benes in London did not materialize to any noticeaible extent. Sporadic skirmishes continued for about two months; by the end of October the Communist-inspired "national" uprising in Slovakia was completely liquidated. Of course, the press of the USSR and the "Czechoslovak Press Bureau (CTK) of Dr. Benes in London supplied the world press, including our own OWI, with sensational fabrications; reports which told of the glorious and valiant stand of the Slovak nation which fought to renew the CzechoSlovak Republic - a "new" Republic, a Czecho-.Slovakia which would be a "people's" democracy - and shed its blood so that Benes might be president again; reports which told the world that the partisans had one third, then one-half and, later, almost the whole of Slovakia under their control after a week or two of "furious" fighting. Balderdash! The partisans fought in the fashion of partisans; there were practically no open, regular battles, but only sporadic skirmishes and attacks. When the "heroic" commanders of the partisan units saw that the situation was hopeless, they flew out of Slovakia into the USSR in planes that were ready just for such an eventuality. Talsky, a Czech and commander of the "eastern front" who was supposed to join with the Red Army at the opportune moment, flew to the USSR, leaving his "army" behind; there he was promptly arrested as a deserter. Generals Golian and Viest, officers who defected from the Slovak Army and joined the partisans, were ready to leave the scene of the "glorious" revolt, when their own soldiers blew up their plane with grenades. Viest and Golian hid themselves in a certain village, but were betrayed by their own men when the Germans sought them. Captured, they were taken to Germany and later shot. �18 SLOVAKIA The charact.er of the, -si.ovak uprising The Slovak National Council was busy issuing decrees to terrorize the vast masses of the Slovak population. It decreed the dissolution of the IIlinka Slovak People's Party, the German Party, and the Magyar Christian Social Party; ecclesiastical properties and institutions were nationalized and confiscated; a concentration camp was established at Slovenska Lupca, where over 700 victims were held to await partisan "justice." Partisan "people's" courts were quickly set up at Sklabina, Kunerad and elsewhere. Thousands of Slovaks were arbitrarily convicted and jailed; hundreds were liquidated without a hearing. The 1944 uprising in Slovakia pad all the earmarks of a bolshevik rebellion: partisans w~re :r:ed kerchiefs round their necks, Lenin goatees, and a rosary of grenades around their belts. They robbed and raped, plundered and murdered wherever they went. They forced priests to act friendly towards them, bless their weapons and even read the Holy Mass for the success of their diabolical venture. If a priest hesitated or refused to follow their orders, he was beaten, threatened with shooting or actually. shot. Joseph and Andrew Kocalko from Sucany, father and son respectively, were beaten to death beyond recognition by Hruska-Terenyi and his men. The father had spent quite a number of years in America. The Communist Lutheran preacher, Vojtech Hruska-Terenyi, and Jersov, a ·Russian professor, killed 147 Slovaks and buried them in a mass grave at Sklabina. Hruska-Terenyi was judge, jury and executioner. Those whom he sentenced to death had to strip down to their underclothes and march to the foot of the forest in Sklabina. There each victim was given a spade to dig his own grave. Some of the victims cracked under the ordeal and were shot forthwith; the rest kept digging slowly until Jersov blew his whistle and machine guns mowed them down into their shallow graves. The bodies of the hopeless victims were covered with twigs and a little dirt. The mass grave at Sklabina was uncovered in November 1944. Many of the victims had a bullet hole back of the neck. �SLOVAKIA 19 Among the priests who were murdered there were: Rev. Anthony Salat, member of the Slovak Parliament and pastor of the Catholic congregation at Hajniky; Rev. Martinka of Liptovsky Svaty Michal; Rev. John Nemec of Zavadka; Rev. Sedo of Liptovsky Svaty Jan. In Povazska Bystrica, -a theologian named Milan was also murdered. I might note here for the record that the Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" joyously celebrated the "silver anniversary" of the invasion of Slovakia by the bolshevik hordes of Bela Kun from Hungary during the uprising of 1944 - the first time any one in Slovakia made a hero of the Magyar Communist revolutionary who murdered Slovaks, pillaged their lands and destroyed their homes! Need any more be said about the character of the Slovak uprising of 1944? I might add, too, that the same Slovak National Council of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Husak Communists was making extensive preparations to celebrate "Czechoslovak Independence Day" on October 28, 1944, as it never had been celebrated before, but the events that followed the terroristic acts of the partisans forestalled the celebration. Mass murders and mass graves We have heard of mass murders and mass graves· i'n Poland (Katyn Forest), the Ukraine (Vinnitsia), and elsewhere, but little or nothing about those in Slovakia. In Slovakia mass graves have been uncovered in Micinska Dolina, Sklene, Podsucha, Pusty Hrad, in the Prievidza Valley, Lucivna, Sklabina, Kunerad, L'ubietova; also in the vicinity of Kovacova, Ruzomberok, Zvolen, Humenne, Bosany, and Tri Vody. There is also a mass grave near Petrzalka, but this one came into being after the occupation of Bratislava by the Red Army in the spring of 1945. The partisans were responsible for most of the murders and mass graves. During the trial of President Tiso in 1947, the prosecution stated that some 4,316 persons were buried in mass graves and blamed Tiso and the Slovak Government for them for obvious reasons. There is, of course, no way of ascertaining whether that figure is accurate or not. A thorough investigation would probably at least double it. �20 SLOVAKIA Why the putsch failed When Generals Golian and Viest were apprehended by the Germans, after their own soldiers had betrayed their hidingplace, they declared that the "uprising" had failed, because: 1. low morale prevailed in the army; soldiers had no desire to fight for a "new" Czecho-Slovakia or the USSR; · and they did not want to destroy their own State and their own Government; 2. partisan provocateurs and saboteurs had absolutely no respect or regard for the feelings of the Slovak people; they were beyond the law, brutal and reckless; 3. the Germans sent captured soldiers home, after disarming and a hearing them; 4. the partisan army lacked capable leadership; 5. communications were bad; 6. the Slovak population was hostile to the partisans and their cause; 7. little help came from the USSR and the West (Benes); 8. the Red Army was not ready to march into Slovakia; 9. the partisans did not have sufficient food, munition, guns and planes ; 10. thousands of men deserted. Conclusions From the above it is evident that the Slovak uprising of August, 1944, was not national in character; it did not have the backing of the vast ma,sses of the Slovak population. It was Communist-inspired and led; it was engineered by the Reds in Moscow and London, with the participation of Benes, without regard to the interests of the Slovak people. The partisans, no matter what their origin, were guilty of the most horrible crimes. The Communist-inspired putsch of 1944 brought terror and chaos, destruction and death, misery and Red enslavement to Slovakia. In reality, the Slovak uprising of 1944 was a "Warsaw" in miniature. Only the Communists and Moscow profited from it. Slovak Communists, Lettrich "Democrats" and Benes Czechs profited from it, but only temporarily. Together they celebrated the "great and lasting achievements" of that massacre, glorifying Stalin, the USSR, the Red Army and Benes, until February 25, 1948. And they still celebrate it today; of course, not with the Communists, nor in the same fashion as they did �SLOVAKIA 21 prior to 1948. Those that were lucky enough to escape the hell they helped to create in Slovakia, that is. What fools they be, and what fools are we, if we continue to believe their version of the horrible massacre of the Slovak people in 1944, if we continue to trust them. The blood of thousands and thousands of innocent victims in mass graves of Slovakia cries to heaven for vengeance against them. Patriotic Slovaks everywhere do commemorate the Communist-inspired Slovak uprising of 1944, but not in the manner of the Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists. Recalling the uprising as one of the darkest chapters in their history, which brought death and destruction and Red enslavement to their country, good Slovaks bow their heads reverently in prayer for the victims of that massacre and ask the almighty and just God to speed the day of judgment for all who were responsible for it and, too, that in His mercy He might also speed the day of liberation of their nation from the Godless, ruthless rule of Moscow and from all foreign domination. I firmly believe that it is in the highest interests of America and the rest of the free world that they lend a willing ear to the story patriotic Slovaks have to tell not only about the uprising of 1944, but also about the political mess that was Czecho-Slovakia, prior to Munich and after the "liberation" in 1945. I cannot and will not believe that our State Department, the U. S. Infonnation Agency (Voice of America), other U. S. government agencies, and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) are working in the interests of America and the rest of the free world, when they serve and promote the interests of the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" who collaiborated with the Communists and the USSR as members of the National Front government of the BenesGottwald coalition. Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" - now members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" operating out of Washington and New York - are gradually coming to the point of openly admitting that collaboration �22 SLOV.AK[A with Communists does not pay, that the history of CzechoSlovakia is clear proof of what attempted co-existence with Communists leads to. But they still are loath to admit that they did colla,borate with Communists and the USSR, that they did promote the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and, hence, are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the peoples of CzechoJSlovakia. And they still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak up~ rising which was fabricated by Moscow and the LettrichSchmidke Slovak National Council. Jfow, then, can we believe that they have really broken completely with the past? • • • WHO SAID IT? "The post~war economic changes in Czechoslovakia some of them revolutionary in tiheir scope but none of them an entirely new departure in CzechoslO'Vak history - have occurred with a minimum of political friction. It seems to have been generally understood that the rebuilding of capital and the recovery of ;production were the national needs, rather than a revhnal of the conflict of ideologies which paved the way to the Second World War. For these objectives, all political parties were willing to work together. Czechoslovakia has a Communist Party which accepts joint power with non-Communist parties; its second Marxist party the Social Democrats, works ~ith non-Socialists. The other Czech parties, non-Communist but not anti-Communist, are equally willing to cooperate with the Communist Party. The Slovak Democratic Party alone contains elements of irreconcilable opposition to the Communists, with the result that it is the weatl{est linlk in the National Front. There are no deiiinitely anti-Communist parties; these were all liquidated as a result of their pre-war and wartime activities. 'I'his coHalboration of Communists, socialists and liberals in a National Front Government has boon a condition (William Diamond, Czechoslovaof post-was process." kia Between East and West, 1947, !Stevens and Sons, Ltd., London ; p. 233) . � SLOVAKIA THE SWVAK UPRISING OF AUGUST 1944 Philip A. Hrobak Much has been said and written about the "Slovak Uprising" of August 1944, by the Benes Czechs (Socialists), the "Czechoslovaks" (Slovaks in the pay of Benes Czechs), and the Communists. Their versions of the uprising have been widely publicized and have been accepted as true, it seems, even by our State Department (Voice of America) and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe). Of course, patriotic Slovaks also have said and written much about the uprising which brought terror and confusion, death and destruction, and the German Army to thier land. But their story of that massacre, mass murders, and mass graves, has not been given publicity and has not been accepted as true by our State Department and the Free Europe Committee. Why? It seems simply for political reasons. To me it is plainly clear that forces are at work to prevent Americans and the rest of the free world from getting the true version, all the availa;ble facts, about the Slovak uprising of August 1944. After the uprising in Slovakia got under way "officially" on August 29, 1944, Dr. Edward Benes, the Lettrich "Democrats," the Husak Communists, and Moscow - all in unison - proclaimed it a spontaneous action of the Slovak nation and labeled it as the "Slovak National Uprising," which, they said would be inscribed in the history of the Slovak people with golden letters. They told us then - and keep telling us even today - that the uprising was thoroughly planned, well-timed and perfectly executed. It is true that the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Benes Czechs have given various "modifications" of their original story about the uprising since February 25, 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic and anti-Communist," but they still have not given us the whole truth, all the facts as they know them. Since they have admitted that they organized the Slovak uprising of August 1944 with the Communists, they undoubtedly do know the facts, but for obvious reasons are not willing to reveal them even today. �SLOVAKIA 5 "National Fronters" in America As late as August 29, 1954, in a letter published in the NEW YORK TIMES, recalling the "Slovak Uprising" of 1944, the signatories - Josef Lettrich, Matej Josko and Juraj Slavik (Slova:ks in the pay of Benes Czechs, regarded as traitors by all truly patriotic Slovaks), and Adolf Klimek and Peter Zenkl (Benes Czechs who promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and were members of his Communits-dominated National Front government) - tell us: 1. The Slovak people did not want to be independent; independence was forced on them by Hitler. 2. The Slova,k people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government. 3. More than 70,000 soldiers and 12,000 partisans participated in the uprising of 1944. 4. The great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their lea,dership were of democratic, Western orientation. 5. The Slovak fighters manifested by their action their "Czechoslovwk" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs. 6. Even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans. The letter proves beyond a shadow of doubt that the Benes Czechs and their Slovak stooges have not changed their program or amended their ways. They still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak uprising which was fabricated in Moscow and propagated by the Communists under Karol Schmidke and the so-called "Democrats" (formerly Agrarians) under Josef Lettrich after the uprising was under way. Ten years after the horrible massacre and betrayal of the Slovak people by the Husak Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats," and the Benes Czechs, the signers of the TIMES letter would still have Americans believe the lie that the Slovaks did not want to be free and independent, but preferred to be dominated and exploited by the Czechs and, therefore, the Slovak nation rose up spontaneously in armed �6 SLOVAKIA revolt against its own State and against its own Government. How stupid do they think Americans are? Yes, how stupid must they think we are, since our own State Department, the U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) still faH for their line and even help propagate the same lie? Lettrich and Josko must know the truth about the Slovak uprising, because they played an active role in it. The other three signatories did not participate actively and directly, as far as I could ascertain. All of them, however, and others of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia" which operates out of Washington and New York, do claim credit for the Communist-in spired .putsch of 1944 which they prefer to call - even as the Commu~ists do - the "Slovak National Uprising." Lettrich and Josko do not want to divulge the truth about the uprising, because they would rather not implicate themselves. But the irrefutable fact remains that they were deeply implicated in the Communist-in spired putsch which claimed the lives of some 70,000 Slovaks, resulted in mass murders and mass graves, and brought the German Army into Slovakia. Moscow Brigades in Slovakia Furthermore, it is a matter of record that up to February 25, 1948, the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" ("Czechoslova ks") celebrated the Slovak uprising annually in the same fashion as the Communists of Slovakia, glorifying the Slovak partisans under Communist Schmidke and the Soviet partisans under Velicko of the USSR, the "great and glorious achievements " of the revolt, the wisdom and leadership of Stalin, and the heroic deeds of the USSR and the Red Army, which led to the "liberation" of the Slovak nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Together with the Communists they claimed credit for the "Slovak National Uprising" - and even today claim credit for it, though not together with the Communists. And patriotic, democratic Slovaks everywhere did and still do give them full credit for all the terroristic acts, mass murders and mass graves, indescribable crimes and terror, �SLOVAKIA 7 misery and Red enslavement that ensued. They hold them fully responsible for it. When the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich ",Democrats" persist in upholding the lie that the '~Slov-ak people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government," they are deliberately concealing the facts. They certainly must know that the German Army came into Slovakia only after the partisans had captured several army garrisons in central Slovakia and began terrorizing and murdering the population. And they certainly could not have forgotten the slogans used and the contents of the broadcasts made by the partisans at that time. If their memory is conveniently failing them, I might suggest that they refresh it by reading their own publications (CAS; NOVE CASY, 1944, London; PARTIZANI NA SLOVENSKU; NAD TATROU SA BL"'2'"1SKA; SLOBODNE CESKOSLOVENSKO; NARODNA OBRODA; etc.). I have it from reliable sources that no more than 35,000 sol~iers of the Slovak Army participated in the uprising the majority of whom were forced to fight on the side of the partisans against their own State and against their own government by the partisans and Red commanders of the USSR. But the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" - like the Communists - still tell us that the figure was 70,000 so that the uprising might appear as "national" in character. Furthermore, they state that 12,000 partisans participated in the Slovak uprising of 1944, in which "even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans," but conveniently omit to say that the Slovak partisans were led by the Communist Karol Schmidke, the Soviet partisans by Velicko of the USSR, while French partisans naturally were led by a French Communist. Indeed, it would not surprise me at all, if we eventually learned that other "international brigades" also participated in the 1944 putsch in Slovakia! I simply cannot believe that the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" have forgotten that various units of the rebel army were commanded by Soviet military men who were subordinate to the Soviet Chief of Staff in Kyjev, among whom were: Jegorov, Osmolov, Sukajev, Sadilenko, �8 SLOVAKIA Volkov, Smirnov, Krajuskin, Popov, Kolesnikov, Arsenev, Surkov, Solosenko, Cernogorov, Vysocky, Krasiev-Stepanov, and Poliakov. What, then, is the purpose of the balderdash that "the great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their leadership were of democratic, Western orientation"? After being accorded political asylum in America, why should Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" still want to deceive Americans in 1954? By their actions did they not then, and are they not now manifesting - like the "Slovak fighters" of the 1944 uprising - their "Czechoslovak" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs? Indeed, something that requires more looking into! Is it any wonder then that informed Americans, together with our good Slovak friends behind the Iron Curtain and in exile, are rudely shocked and thoroughly indignant, because our State Department, the U.S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) not only permit, but even help the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" deceive the American public and the rest of the free world? Lettrich and J osko could also tell us a bit about the background of the uprising of 1944, if they only wanted to - something of the events which preceded and the people who prepared the ground for the horrible massacre of the Slovaks in 1944, especially the agreements between the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Schmidke ...Husak Communists which were negotiated on December 25, 1943, and on June 26, 1945, and called for the closest collaboration between the parties concerned and the USSR. They negotiated and signed those agreements! The situation prior to 1944 Until about the end of 1942, there were no "illegal" groups in Slovakia, that is, active resistance groups. To the fall of Stalingrad, Slovak Communists used to meet socially with Slovak Czechs ("Czechoslovaks" - followers of Dr. Edward Benes's "one-nation" theory and his pro-Soviet policy). This was not connected with any hazards. The Slovak Government was aware of this, but did nothing to prevent �SLOVAKIA 9 their social meetings. The Communist Party had been outlawed in 1938 by the autonomous Slovak Government, but individual members were not persecuted or interned just because they were Communists. Some Communists and many Lettrich "Democrats" held government positions and other well-paying jobs. In 1943, two Moscow-trained Communists, Karol Schmidke, a Silesian half-German, and the Czech Karol Bacilek, were parachuted into Slova:kia by the Soviets to organize and direct illegal activities. But it was not until the end of that year that the Slovak Communists and left-wing Agrarians began to meet regularly to discuss organizing resistance groups and planning for the future. After Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-still-president" of CzechoSlovakia, concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" in Moscow, on December 12, 1943, the left-wing Slovak Agrarians (Lettrich's group) got together with the Slovak Communists (the Schmidke-Husak group) to conclude the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, whereby they created a "common political leadership" under the name of the "Slovak National Council" and declared "eternal friendship" for each other. The Slovak National Council, they declared, is "the one and only representative of the political will of the Slovak nation" and the "body supreme" as far as the affairs of Slovakia were concerned. These Slovak Agrarians, later re-christened to Slovak "Democrats," united with the Slovak Communists to collaborate with Moscow in the destruction of the Slovak Republic and in the establishment of a "new" Czecho-Slovak democracy, a "people's democratic State." From available accounts, it is quite evident that there were differences of opinion among the Husak Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" as far as the future of Slovakia was concerned. Slovak Communists did not care whether Slovakia became a Soviet Republic or remained within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, as a unit of a federative system, as long as it was governed by them. Lettrich's "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" - how- �10 SLOVAKIA ever, did not have a clear-cut program; at times they knew not what they wanted or where they were really going. Some were for the relationship which existed prior to Munich, 1938, while others preferred that which existed after Munich, but prior to March 14, 1939, when the Slovak parliament declared Slovakia independent. The latter were for the federative system, which T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes proposed for Czecho-Slovakia to the Allies in 1918 but never inaugurated. Communists in Slovakia were aware of the fact that the ovewhelming majority of the Slovak people resolutely opposed the conception of a "one-nation" Czecho-Slovakia, which the Benes Czechs propagated. They used this knowledge to gain supporters for their cause whenever an opportunity presented itself. It so happened when they repudiated the proclamation of the "London Government" of Dr. Edward Benes of June 30, 1943, which declared that the future of Czecho-Slovakia would rest on the conception of a "onenation" Czecho-Slovakia - a unified or united "Czechoslovak" nation. The Lettrich "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" on the other hand, accepted the conception of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation of the Benes Czechs, even though they could not agree among themselves just what the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks should be like in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. After Dr. Milan Hodza, former premier of Czecho-Slovakia, parted with Benes, many of them had lost faith in the president who resigned and then made himself president again. Nevertheless, they sided with Benes, because he was recognized both by the democratic' powers and the USSR. Like the Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats" hated the Tiso regime, which was thoroughly Christian and as democratic as it possibly could be under the circumstances; like the Communists they were not interested in a truly democratic Slovak State, because they knew they could never becoming ruling figures in it by the free will of the Slovak people. So, the Lettrich "Democrats" decided to go along with the Communists, proclaiming the establishment of a �SLOVAKIA 11 "new" Czecho-Slovakia as one of their chief aims, based, of course, on the spirit and the letter of the Treaty of December 12, 1943, which Benes had concluded with the Soviet Union and by which not only the Slovaks, but also the Czechs were formally sold out to the men of the Kremlin. The right of Benes to conclude such a treaty might be justly questioned, since the nations of Czecho-Slovakia had not authorized him to act in their behalf after his resignation as president in 1938, but that would be of little consequence today. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, with its political and religious leadership - the followers of Andrew Hlinka and Martin Razus - was definitely for a Christian, democratic, independent Slovak State, a Slovakia free of all foreign domination and rid of all Communists. It still is for such a State today. The Red Front Approaches Slovakia After concluding the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Husak Communists, began to discuss the matter of an armed putsch or revolt. In April, 1944, Dr. Vavro Srobar, one of the oldest and most intimate friends of Dr. Edward Benes in Slovakia, asked Benes what the Slovaks should do in the event that Hungary would quit the war and join the Allies, and/ or in the event that Germany should occupy Slovakia. Benes strongly advised an open revolt in his reply, because this, he said, would enable a speedy occupation of Slovakia by the Soviet Army. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of Slovakia, and the Slovak Government, including Slovak military leaders, had other plans. They did not want Slovakia to become an open battleground ; they tried to spare their people from the horrors of war. To avoid unnecessary bloodshed and occupation by the German and Soviet armies, they thought it best if the Slovak Army would take over the Government of Slovakia at the opportune moment. The "opportune moment" - it was understood - meant the fall of Cracow on the North, or the fall ·of Miskovec in the South. When that happened, the Slovak Army was to occupy the borders of Slovakia; �12 SLOVAKIA then the Slovak Government would step out in favor of the Army which, with the help of political parties, would form a new government, temporarily, which, in turn, would tie up with the United Nations, especially the West. Since the Slovak Government at that time had no contact with the West, thanks to Dr. Benes's refusal to deal with it, it tried to inform the West BJbout its plan through the USSR, even though it did so with great misgivings. General Augustine Malar personally contacted the Soviet Military Staff in the Ukraine, revealed the plan at least partly, and requested, in the name of the Slovak Government, that the Soviets and the Western Allies agree to this plan of action and also recognize the political independence of Slovakia. Malar, respecting the advice of the Slovak Government, wisely omitted to say anything about Slovakia's intention of joining the West. In reply, the Soviets said that they had not planned on penetrating through Slovakia; they were willing to recognize the political independence of Slovakia, as they already had in 1939, but steadfastly refused to agree on the point that military operations in Slovakia should be undertaken by the Slovak Army alone. It was quite obvious already then that the USSR wanted to occupy Slovakia for political reasons. The story of General Mala.r's contact with the Soviet Military on December 17, 1943, was told during the trial of Dr. Joseph Tiso and members of the 'Slovak Government (19461947) before the National Court in Bratislava. About the end of June the Slovak National Council decided to send a delegation to Moscow to inform Stalin of its plans and to petition the Soviets to include Slovakia in their plan of operations. Karol Schmidke and General Nicholas Ferjencik were selected to make the trip. Because of "technical" reasons, they did not undertake the trip until August 4, 1944. Ferjencik, now enjoying political asylum in America, could easily give us the details of that meeting, if he desired to do so. The partisans engaged in terroristic acts rather regularly at the end of July and the beginning of August, 1944. When they seized the command of several garrisons in �SLOVAKIA 13 central Slovakia and murdered many persons in that section of the country, General Malar, to save the situation, appealed to the Army in a radio broadcast not to be taken in by partisan rumors, not to join the partisans, because "our time has not yet arrived . . . When it does come, then we shall all pull at the same end of the rope." The terroristic acts of the partisans alarmed even Lt. Col. Golian, to whom Benes had entrusted the military preparations and operations of the "resistance" in Slovakia. G-Olian demanded that the partisans subordinate their activity to his command, the "authorized" military command of the "illegal" forces. Velicko, commander of the Soviet partisans, informed Golian that he would do so, but continued on his own any way. Angered and frustrated, Golian sent Lt. Col. Manica, August 20, 1944, with a request that Velicko order the partisans to cease their activities, otherwise the Germans would surely intervene. Velicko, however, disregarded the request and his .partisans continued to spread terror and violence in central and eastern Slovakia. The terroristic acts of the partisans created a very difficult situation for President Tiso and the Slovak Government. They did what they could to keep the German Army from occupying Slovakia. They explained that the disturbances were not widespread or "national," but local, and that the Slovak Army was capable of handling them and restoring order. The Germans, however, were reluctant to believe the Slovaks, especially after the murder of General Otto and his military mission at Banska Bystrica, August 27, 1944. Hitler's Wehrmacht began to occupy Slovakia, and the Slovaks really were in for the worst. The uprising, in which the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists collaborated fully to the joy of Moscow, was responsible for the Germans occupying Slovalkia in 1944. Why August 29, 1944? Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke Communists had told us - and are still telling us - that the Slovak uprising began on August 29, 1944. Why was that partic'ular date selected, when they knew - as we know now, �14 8LOVAKIA because even they themselves admitted it - that the partisans committed terroristic acts before that date? They selected that date as the "official" date so that they could tell the world that President Tiso and the Slovak Government called or invited the German Army to Slovakia and thus cover up the fact that the distuvbances created by the partisans were really responsible for the occupation of Slovakia by the Germans. Lettrich, Husak, N ovomesky and other "leaders" of the uprising were not even in Banska Bystrica on August 29, 1944. The Slovak National Council did not issue its declaration of the revolt until September 1, 1944. When German military units began moving into Slovakia as a result of partisan terroristic activities, the leaders of the uprising resorted to lies to gain the support of the Slovak Army and the Slovak people. They said: the Germans were coming to occupy the whole of ,Slovakia; that President Tiso was murdered; that members of the Slovak Government were seized and taken to Germany, etc. The ruse, however, even thoogh at first it deceiived many in SlovaJki:a and abroad, failed to attain its objective. What happened in Slovakia prior t,o August 29, 1944? Partisans committed terroristic acts in eastern and central Slovakia for at least three or four weeks before that date. The situation grew so tense that the Slovak Government conitem.iplated declaring Martial La,w on August 1, 1944, but did not resort to it till later. On several occasions the Germans warned Tiso and the Slovak Government that if they could not cope with the situation and keep order in Slovakia, the German Army definitely would move in to make order. Tiso and the Slovak Government did what they could under the circumstances to restore order and, thereby, keep the Germans out of Slovakia. They knew that their plans for joining with western forces of the United Nations could not be realized if the Germans occupied Slovakia. The partisans, however, taking orders from Moscow and London, were not interested in preserving order; they were only interested in preparing the ground for the Red Army: After �SLOVAKIA 15 the latter occupied 'Slovakia, they figured they would take over all power in Slovakia. And they did. After the German front collapsed in Rumania, German diplomatic personnel - some thirty persons, including women and children - were hurriedly evacuated. Communist agents already were quite active in Slovakia, creating chaos and confusion and provoking incidents with Germany. The train carrying German diplomats from Bucharest was halted on the evening of August 26, 1944, at Turciansky Svaty Martin, Slovakia, by partisans. The passengers were told rather politely that it would be impossible for them to go farther, because of engine trouble. Quarters were arranged for them in the local barracks. The next morning the entire group was ordered into the barracks square by one Major Kuchta, lined up and mowed down with machine guns. It was thus that the military mission of General Otto perished. Two days later German troops came in force into Slovakia "to restore order." The partisans, of course, told the Slovaks that the German occupation was entirely ttnprovoked and that they now had to fight for their freedom, Tiso was murdered, etc., as mentioned above. Before that time, however, on August 20, 1944, Velicko and his .partisans were busy in Turiec requisitioning autos, robbing stores and farmers. During the night of August 24 a group of German field gendarmes were taken by surprise and shot while they slept in the Hotel Slavia in Vrutky. Turiec and vicinity were also terrorized and victimized by a group led by the sadistic Lutheran preacher Vojtech HruskaTerenyi, the Communist from Hungary who already back in 1919, as a young preacher, had participated in the Red revolt of Bela Kun (Cohen). Francis Slamen, member of the Slovak Assembly and chairman of the Slovak Christian Labor Union, was among several persons murdered in Brezno Natl Hronom, August 27, 1944. On August 28, 1944, partisan officers shot Col. Zverin and Col. Kanak of the Slovak Army in Banska Bystrica. In Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas they arrested Col. Kl'ucik, of the garrison there, and Lt. Frecer; later they murdered them. �16 SLOVAKIA Let's fight to the last drop of your blood! On September 1, 1944, the Slovak National Council, headed by "Democrat" Lettrich and Communist Schmidke, met in Banska Bystrica and immediately made August 29, 1944, the "official" date of the start of the Slovak uprising. Futhermore, they issued a declaration which stated that the Council was the body supreme in Slovakia, the only representative and authorized body in Slovakia which had the right to speak in the name of the Slovak nation. The Slovak National Council was composed of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Hus a:k Communists (-50-50); Dr. Joseph Lettrich was chairman and Karol Schmidke co-chairman of the Council. On September 5, 1944, during its first "solemn" session, the so-called Slovak National Council sent two telegrams: one to Stalin, the other to Benes. The Stalin telegram read as follows (translated from the Slovak): Josip Visarionovic ,Stalin Marshal of the USSR Moscow, Kremlin The Slovak National Council sends You and the nations of the Soviet Union from its solemn session its most cordial greetings and thanks You for the understanding which You have manifested for our fight of liberation, waged against the common enemy. Glory to the victorious Red Army! Banska Bystrica, September 5, 1944 The Slovak National Council It is significant that the Council made up of Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" sent no greeting at that time either to the President of the United States or the King of England, who apparently did not rate. The Slovak National Council called in all reservists and ordered full mobilization. The response was poor; not many Slovaks answered the call voluntarily. The Council had to rest satisfied with those it could force to bear arms against their country in the area held by the partisans, a few districts in central and eastern Slovakia. A part of the Trnava garrison, led by John Benko, defected and joined the partisans; General Mala.r's divisions, however, refused to join. The German forces, led by Gen. Berger and Gen. iHoffle, soon encircled the partisan putschists. The heaviest fighting �SLOVAKIA 17 took place near Telgart, Cremosne, Dubrava and Kremnicka, during which some 4,000 were killed. The partisans, who had taken to the hills and mountains of Slovakia before the Germans moved in, soon realized that their situation was quite hopeless. They lacked men and material to cope with the situation they had created. And promised help from the USSR and from Benes in London did not materialize to any noticeaible extent. Sporadic skirmishes continued for about two months; by the end of October the Communist-inspired "national" uprising in Slovakia was completely liquidated. Of course, the press of the USSR and the "Czechoslovak Press Bureau (CTK) of Dr. Benes in London supplied the world press, including our own OWI, with sensational fabrications; reports which told of the glorious and valiant stand of the Slovak nation which fought to renew the CzechoSlovak Republic - a "new" Republic, a Czecho-.Slovakia which would be a "people's" democracy - and shed its blood so that Benes might be president again; reports which told the world that the partisans had one third, then one-half and, later, almost the whole of Slovakia under their control after a week or two of "furious" fighting. Balderdash! The partisans fought in the fashion of partisans; there were practically no open, regular battles, but only sporadic skirmishes and attacks. When the "heroic" commanders of the partisan units saw that the situation was hopeless, they flew out of Slovakia into the USSR in planes that were ready just for such an eventuality. Talsky, a Czech and commander of the "eastern front" who was supposed to join with the Red Army at the opportune moment, flew to the USSR, leaving his "army" behind; there he was promptly arrested as a deserter. Generals Golian and Viest, officers who defected from the Slovak Army and joined the partisans, were ready to leave the scene of the "glorious" revolt, when their own soldiers blew up their plane with grenades. Viest and Golian hid themselves in a certain village, but were betrayed by their own men when the Germans sought them. Captured, they were taken to Germany and later shot. �18 SLOVAKIA The charact.er of the, -si.ovak uprising The Slovak National Council was busy issuing decrees to terrorize the vast masses of the Slovak population. It decreed the dissolution of the IIlinka Slovak People's Party, the German Party, and the Magyar Christian Social Party; ecclesiastical properties and institutions were nationalized and confiscated; a concentration camp was established at Slovenska Lupca, where over 700 victims were held to await partisan "justice." Partisan "people's" courts were quickly set up at Sklabina, Kunerad and elsewhere. Thousands of Slovaks were arbitrarily convicted and jailed; hundreds were liquidated without a hearing. The 1944 uprising in Slovakia pad all the earmarks of a bolshevik rebellion: partisans w~re :r:ed kerchiefs round their necks, Lenin goatees, and a rosary of grenades around their belts. They robbed and raped, plundered and murdered wherever they went. They forced priests to act friendly towards them, bless their weapons and even read the Holy Mass for the success of their diabolical venture. If a priest hesitated or refused to follow their orders, he was beaten, threatened with shooting or actually. shot. Joseph and Andrew Kocalko from Sucany, father and son respectively, were beaten to death beyond recognition by Hruska-Terenyi and his men. The father had spent quite a number of years in America. The Communist Lutheran preacher, Vojtech Hruska-Terenyi, and Jersov, a ·Russian professor, killed 147 Slovaks and buried them in a mass grave at Sklabina. Hruska-Terenyi was judge, jury and executioner. Those whom he sentenced to death had to strip down to their underclothes and march to the foot of the forest in Sklabina. There each victim was given a spade to dig his own grave. Some of the victims cracked under the ordeal and were shot forthwith; the rest kept digging slowly until Jersov blew his whistle and machine guns mowed them down into their shallow graves. The bodies of the hopeless victims were covered with twigs and a little dirt. The mass grave at Sklabina was uncovered in November 1944. Many of the victims had a bullet hole back of the neck. �SLOVAKIA 19 Among the priests who were murdered there were: Rev. Anthony Salat, member of the Slovak Parliament and pastor of the Catholic congregation at Hajniky; Rev. Martinka of Liptovsky Svaty Michal; Rev. John Nemec of Zavadka; Rev. Sedo of Liptovsky Svaty Jan. In Povazska Bystrica, -a theologian named Milan was also murdered. I might note here for the record that the Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" joyously celebrated the "silver anniversary" of the invasion of Slovakia by the bolshevik hordes of Bela Kun from Hungary during the uprising of 1944 - the first time any one in Slovakia made a hero of the Magyar Communist revolutionary who murdered Slovaks, pillaged their lands and destroyed their homes! Need any more be said about the character of the Slovak uprising of 1944? I might add, too, that the same Slovak National Council of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Husak Communists was making extensive preparations to celebrate "Czechoslovak Independence Day" on October 28, 1944, as it never had been celebrated before, but the events that followed the terroristic acts of the partisans forestalled the celebration. Mass murders and mass graves We have heard of mass murders and mass graves· i'n Poland (Katyn Forest), the Ukraine (Vinnitsia), and elsewhere, but little or nothing about those in Slovakia. In Slovakia mass graves have been uncovered in Micinska Dolina, Sklene, Podsucha, Pusty Hrad, in the Prievidza Valley, Lucivna, Sklabina, Kunerad, L'ubietova; also in the vicinity of Kovacova, Ruzomberok, Zvolen, Humenne, Bosany, and Tri Vody. There is also a mass grave near Petrzalka, but this one came into being after the occupation of Bratislava by the Red Army in the spring of 1945. The partisans were responsible for most of the murders and mass graves. During the trial of President Tiso in 1947, the prosecution stated that some 4,316 persons were buried in mass graves and blamed Tiso and the Slovak Government for them for obvious reasons. There is, of course, no way of ascertaining whether that figure is accurate or not. A thorough investigation would probably at least double it. �20 SLOVAKIA Why the putsch failed When Generals Golian and Viest were apprehended by the Germans, after their own soldiers had betrayed their hidingplace, they declared that the "uprising" had failed, because: 1. low morale prevailed in the army; soldiers had no desire to fight for a "new" Czecho-Slovakia or the USSR; · and they did not want to destroy their own State and their own Government; 2. partisan provocateurs and saboteurs had absolutely no respect or regard for the feelings of the Slovak people; they were beyond the law, brutal and reckless; 3. the Germans sent captured soldiers home, after disarming and a hearing them; 4. the partisan army lacked capable leadership; 5. communications were bad; 6. the Slovak population was hostile to the partisans and their cause; 7. little help came from the USSR and the West (Benes); 8. the Red Army was not ready to march into Slovakia; 9. the partisans did not have sufficient food, munition, guns and planes ; 10. thousands of men deserted. Conclusions From the above it is evident that the Slovak uprising of August, 1944, was not national in character; it did not have the backing of the vast ma,sses of the Slovak population. It was Communist-inspired and led; it was engineered by the Reds in Moscow and London, with the participation of Benes, without regard to the interests of the Slovak people. The partisans, no matter what their origin, were guilty of the most horrible crimes. The Communist-inspired putsch of 1944 brought terror and chaos, destruction and death, misery and Red enslavement to Slovakia. In reality, the Slovak uprising of 1944 was a "Warsaw" in miniature. Only the Communists and Moscow profited from it. Slovak Communists, Lettrich "Democrats" and Benes Czechs profited from it, but only temporarily. Together they celebrated the "great and lasting achievements" of that massacre, glorifying Stalin, the USSR, the Red Army and Benes, until February 25, 1948. And they still celebrate it today; of course, not with the Communists, nor in the same fashion as they did �SLOVAKIA 21 prior to 1948. Those that were lucky enough to escape the hell they helped to create in Slovakia, that is. What fools they be, and what fools are we, if we continue to believe their version of the horrible massacre of the Slovak people in 1944, if we continue to trust them. The blood of thousands and thousands of innocent victims in mass graves of Slovakia cries to heaven for vengeance against them. Patriotic Slovaks everywhere do commemorate the Communist-inspired Slovak uprising of 1944, but not in the manner of the Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists. Recalling the uprising as one of the darkest chapters in their history, which brought death and destruction and Red enslavement to their country, good Slovaks bow their heads reverently in prayer for the victims of that massacre and ask the almighty and just God to speed the day of judgment for all who were responsible for it and, too, that in His mercy He might also speed the day of liberation of their nation from the Godless, ruthless rule of Moscow and from all foreign domination. I firmly believe that it is in the highest interests of America and the rest of the free world that they lend a willing ear to the story patriotic Slovaks have to tell not only about the uprising of 1944, but also about the political mess that was Czecho-Slovakia, prior to Munich and after the "liberation" in 1945. I cannot and will not believe that our State Department, the U. S. Infonnation Agency (Voice of America), other U. S. government agencies, and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) are working in the interests of America and the rest of the free world, when they serve and promote the interests of the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" who collaiborated with the Communists and the USSR as members of the National Front government of the BenesGottwald coalition. Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" - now members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" operating out of Washington and New York - are gradually coming to the point of openly admitting that collaboration �22 SLOV.AK[A with Communists does not pay, that the history of CzechoSlovakia is clear proof of what attempted co-existence with Communists leads to. But they still are loath to admit that they did colla,borate with Communists and the USSR, that they did promote the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and, hence, are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the peoples of CzechoJSlovakia. And they still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak up~ rising which was fabricated by Moscow and the LettrichSchmidke Slovak National Council. Jfow, then, can we believe that they have really broken completely with the past? • • • WHO SAID IT? "The post~war economic changes in Czechoslovakia some of them revolutionary in tiheir scope but none of them an entirely new departure in CzechoslO'Vak history - have occurred with a minimum of political friction. It seems to have been generally understood that the rebuilding of capital and the recovery of ;production were the national needs, rather than a revhnal of the conflict of ideologies which paved the way to the Second World War. For these objectives, all political parties were willing to work together. Czechoslovakia has a Communist Party which accepts joint power with non-Communist parties; its second Marxist party the Social Democrats, works ~ith non-Socialists. The other Czech parties, non-Communist but not anti-Communist, are equally willing to cooperate with the Communist Party. The Slovak Democratic Party alone contains elements of irreconcilable opposition to the Communists, with the result that it is the weatl{est linlk in the National Front. There are no deiiinitely anti-Communist parties; these were all liquidated as a result of their pre-war and wartime activities. 'I'his coHalboration of Communists, socialists and liberals in a National Front Government has boon a condition (William Diamond, Czechoslovaof post-was process." kia Between East and West, 1947, !Stevens and Sons, Ltd., London ; p. 233) . � 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 1954, Vol. 4 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 10), March 1954.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 11), June 1954.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954.</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 1954 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 THE SWVAK UPRISING OF AUGUST 1944 Philip A. Hrobak Much has been said and written about the "Slovak Uprising" of August 1944, by the Benes Czechs (Socialists), the "Czechoslovaks" (Slovaks in the pay of Benes Czechs), and the Communists. Their versions of the uprising have been widely publicized and have been accepted as true, it seems, even by our State Department (Voice of America) and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe). Of course, patriotic Slovaks also have said and written much about the uprising which brought terror and confusion, death and destruction, and the German Army to thier land. But their story of that massacre, mass murders, and mass graves, has not been given publicity and has not been accepted as true by our State Department and the Free Europe Committee. Why? It seems simply for political reasons. To me it is plainly clear that forces are at work to prevent Americans and the rest of the free world from getting the true version, all the availa;ble facts, about the Slovak uprising of August 1944. After the uprising in Slovakia got under way "officially" on August 29, 1944, Dr. Edward Benes, the Lettrich "Democrats," the Husak Communists, and Moscow - all in unison - proclaimed it a spontaneous action of the Slovak nation and labeled it as the "Slovak National Uprising," which, they said would be inscribed in the history of the Slovak people with golden letters. They told us then - and keep telling us even today - that the uprising was thoroughly planned, well-timed and perfectly executed. It is true that the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Benes Czechs have given various "modifications" of their original story about the uprising since February 25, 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic and anti-Communist," but they still have not given us the whole truth, all the facts as they know them. Since they have admitted that they organized the Slovak uprising of August 1944 with the Communists, they undoubtedly do know the facts, but for obvious reasons are not willing to reveal them even today. SLOVAKIA 5 "National Fronters" in America As late as August 29, 1954, in a letter published in the NEW YORK TIMES, recalling the "Slovak Uprising" of 1944, the signatories - Josef Lettrich, Matej Josko and Juraj Slavik (Slova:ks in the pay of Benes Czechs, regarded as traitors by all truly patriotic Slovaks), and Adolf Klimek and Peter Zenkl (Benes Czechs who promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and were members of his Communits-dominated National Front government) - tell us: 1. The Slovak people did not want to be independent; independence was forced on them by Hitler. 2. The Slova,k people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government. 3. More than 70,000 soldiers and 12,000 partisans participated in the uprising of 1944. 4. The great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their lea,dership were of democratic, Western orientation. 5. The Slovak fighters manifested by their action their "Czechoslovwk" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs. 6. Even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans. The letter proves beyond a shadow of doubt that the Benes Czechs and their Slovak stooges have not changed their program or amended their ways. They still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak uprising which was fabricated in Moscow and propagated by the Communists under Karol Schmidke and the so-called "Democrats" (formerly Agrarians) under Josef Lettrich after the uprising was under way. Ten years after the horrible massacre and betrayal of the Slovak people by the Husak Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats," and the Benes Czechs, the signers of the TIMES letter would still have Americans believe the lie that the Slovaks did not want to be free and independent, but preferred to be dominated and exploited by the Czechs and, therefore, the Slovak nation rose up spontaneously in armed 6 SLOVAKIA revolt against its own State and against its own Government. How stupid do they think Americans are? Yes, how stupid must they think we are, since our own State Department, the U. S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) still faH for their line and even help propagate the same lie? Lettrich and Josko must know the truth about the Slovak uprising, because they played an active role in it. The other three signatories did not participate actively and directly, as far as I could ascertain. All of them, however, and others of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia" which operates out of Washington and New York, do claim credit for the Communist-in spired .putsch of 1944 which they prefer to call - even as the Commu~ists do - the "Slovak National Uprising." Lettrich and Josko do not want to divulge the truth about the uprising, because they would rather not implicate themselves. But the irrefutable fact remains that they were deeply implicated in the Communist-in spired putsch which claimed the lives of some 70,000 Slovaks, resulted in mass murders and mass graves, and brought the German Army into Slovakia. Moscow Brigades in Slovakia Furthermore, it is a matter of record that up to February 25, 1948, the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" ("Czechoslova ks") celebrated the Slovak uprising annually in the same fashion as the Communists of Slovakia, glorifying the Slovak partisans under Communist Schmidke and the Soviet partisans under Velicko of the USSR, the "great and glorious achievements " of the revolt, the wisdom and leadership of Stalin, and the heroic deeds of the USSR and the Red Army, which led to the "liberation" of the Slovak nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Together with the Communists they claimed credit for the "Slovak National Uprising" - and even today claim credit for it, though not together with the Communists. And patriotic, democratic Slovaks everywhere did and still do give them full credit for all the terroristic acts, mass murders and mass graves, indescribable crimes and terror, SLOVAKIA 7 misery and Red enslavement that ensued. They hold them fully responsible for it. When the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich ",Democrats" persist in upholding the lie that the '~Slov-ak people rose in armed revolt against the German Army and against the Slovak Government," they are deliberately concealing the facts. They certainly must know that the German Army came into Slovakia only after the partisans had captured several army garrisons in central Slovakia and began terrorizing and murdering the population. And they certainly could not have forgotten the slogans used and the contents of the broadcasts made by the partisans at that time. If their memory is conveniently failing them, I might suggest that they refresh it by reading their own publications (CAS; NOVE CASY, 1944, London; PARTIZANI NA SLOVENSKU; NAD TATROU SA BL"'2'"1SKA; SLOBODNE CESKOSLOVENSKO; NARODNA OBRODA; etc.). I have it from reliable sources that no more than 35,000 sol~iers of the Slovak Army participated in the uprising the majority of whom were forced to fight on the side of the partisans against their own State and against their own government by the partisans and Red commanders of the USSR. But the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" - like the Communists - still tell us that the figure was 70,000 so that the uprising might appear as "national" in character. Furthermore, they state that 12,000 partisans participated in the Slovak uprising of 1944, in which "even French partisans fought on the side of the Slovak partisans," but conveniently omit to say that the Slovak partisans were led by the Communist Karol Schmidke, the Soviet partisans by Velicko of the USSR, while French partisans naturally were led by a French Communist. Indeed, it would not surprise me at all, if we eventually learned that other "international brigades" also participated in the 1944 putsch in Slovakia! I simply cannot believe that the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" have forgotten that various units of the rebel army were commanded by Soviet military men who were subordinate to the Soviet Chief of Staff in Kyjev, among whom were: Jegorov, Osmolov, Sukajev, Sadilenko, 8 SLOVAKIA Volkov, Smirnov, Krajuskin, Popov, Kolesnikov, Arsenev, Surkov, Solosenko, Cernogorov, Vysocky, Krasiev-Stepanov, and Poliakov. What, then, is the purpose of the balderdash that "the great majority of the fighters in this uprising and their leadership were of democratic, Western orientation"? After being accorded political asylum in America, why should Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" still want to deceive Americans in 1954? By their actions did they not then, and are they not now manifesting - like the "Slovak fighters" of the 1944 uprising - their "Czechoslovak" patriotism and "democratic" beliefs? Indeed, something that requires more looking into! Is it any wonder then that informed Americans, together with our good Slovak friends behind the Iron Curtain and in exile, are rudely shocked and thoroughly indignant, because our State Department, the U.S. Information Agency (Voice of America), and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) not only permit, but even help the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" deceive the American public and the rest of the free world? Lettrich and J osko could also tell us a bit about the background of the uprising of 1944, if they only wanted to - something of the events which preceded and the people who prepared the ground for the horrible massacre of the Slovaks in 1944, especially the agreements between the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Schmidke ...Husak Communists which were negotiated on December 25, 1943, and on June 26, 1945, and called for the closest collaboration between the parties concerned and the USSR. They negotiated and signed those agreements! The situation prior to 1944 Until about the end of 1942, there were no "illegal" groups in Slovakia, that is, active resistance groups. To the fall of Stalingrad, Slovak Communists used to meet socially with Slovak Czechs ("Czechoslovaks" - followers of Dr. Edward Benes's "one-nation" theory and his pro-Soviet policy). This was not connected with any hazards. The Slovak Government was aware of this, but did nothing to prevent SLOVAKIA 9 their social meetings. The Communist Party had been outlawed in 1938 by the autonomous Slovak Government, but individual members were not persecuted or interned just because they were Communists. Some Communists and many Lettrich "Democrats" held government positions and other well-paying jobs. In 1943, two Moscow-trained Communists, Karol Schmidke, a Silesian half-German, and the Czech Karol Bacilek, were parachuted into Slova:kia by the Soviets to organize and direct illegal activities. But it was not until the end of that year that the Slovak Communists and left-wing Agrarians began to meet regularly to discuss organizing resistance groups and planning for the future. After Dr. Edward Benes, the "resigned-and-still-president" of CzechoSlovakia, concluded the so-called "Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty" in Moscow, on December 12, 1943, the left-wing Slovak Agrarians (Lettrich's group) got together with the Slovak Communists (the Schmidke-Husak group) to conclude the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, whereby they created a "common political leadership" under the name of the "Slovak National Council" and declared "eternal friendship" for each other. The Slovak National Council, they declared, is "the one and only representative of the political will of the Slovak nation" and the "body supreme" as far as the affairs of Slovakia were concerned. These Slovak Agrarians, later re-christened to Slovak "Democrats," united with the Slovak Communists to collaborate with Moscow in the destruction of the Slovak Republic and in the establishment of a "new" Czecho-Slovak democracy, a "people's democratic State." From available accounts, it is quite evident that there were differences of opinion among the Husak Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" as far as the future of Slovakia was concerned. Slovak Communists did not care whether Slovakia became a Soviet Republic or remained within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, as a unit of a federative system, as long as it was governed by them. Lettrich's "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" - how- 10 SLOVAKIA ever, did not have a clear-cut program; at times they knew not what they wanted or where they were really going. Some were for the relationship which existed prior to Munich, 1938, while others preferred that which existed after Munich, but prior to March 14, 1939, when the Slovak parliament declared Slovakia independent. The latter were for the federative system, which T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes proposed for Czecho-Slovakia to the Allies in 1918 but never inaugurated. Communists in Slovakia were aware of the fact that the ovewhelming majority of the Slovak people resolutely opposed the conception of a "one-nation" Czecho-Slovakia, which the Benes Czechs propagated. They used this knowledge to gain supporters for their cause whenever an opportunity presented itself. It so happened when they repudiated the proclamation of the "London Government" of Dr. Edward Benes of June 30, 1943, which declared that the future of Czecho-Slovakia would rest on the conception of a "onenation" Czecho-Slovakia - a unified or united "Czechoslovak" nation. The Lettrich "Democrats" - the "Czechoslovaks" on the other hand, accepted the conception of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation of the Benes Czechs, even though they could not agree among themselves just what the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks should be like in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. After Dr. Milan Hodza, former premier of Czecho-Slovakia, parted with Benes, many of them had lost faith in the president who resigned and then made himself president again. Nevertheless, they sided with Benes, because he was recognized both by the democratic' powers and the USSR. Like the Communists, the Lettrich "Democrats" hated the Tiso regime, which was thoroughly Christian and as democratic as it possibly could be under the circumstances; like the Communists they were not interested in a truly democratic Slovak State, because they knew they could never becoming ruling figures in it by the free will of the Slovak people. So, the Lettrich "Democrats" decided to go along with the Communists, proclaiming the establishment of a SLOVAKIA 11 "new" Czecho-Slovakia as one of their chief aims, based, of course, on the spirit and the letter of the Treaty of December 12, 1943, which Benes had concluded with the Soviet Union and by which not only the Slovaks, but also the Czechs were formally sold out to the men of the Kremlin. The right of Benes to conclude such a treaty might be justly questioned, since the nations of Czecho-Slovakia had not authorized him to act in their behalf after his resignation as president in 1938, but that would be of little consequence today. The overwhelming majority of the Slovak people, with its political and religious leadership - the followers of Andrew Hlinka and Martin Razus - was definitely for a Christian, democratic, independent Slovak State, a Slovakia free of all foreign domination and rid of all Communists. It still is for such a State today. The Red Front Approaches Slovakia After concluding the "Christmas Agreement" of 1943, the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Husak Communists, began to discuss the matter of an armed putsch or revolt. In April, 1944, Dr. Vavro Srobar, one of the oldest and most intimate friends of Dr. Edward Benes in Slovakia, asked Benes what the Slovaks should do in the event that Hungary would quit the war and join the Allies, and/ or in the event that Germany should occupy Slovakia. Benes strongly advised an open revolt in his reply, because this, he said, would enable a speedy occupation of Slovakia by the Soviet Army. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of Slovakia, and the Slovak Government, including Slovak military leaders, had other plans. They did not want Slovakia to become an open battleground ; they tried to spare their people from the horrors of war. To avoid unnecessary bloodshed and occupation by the German and Soviet armies, they thought it best if the Slovak Army would take over the Government of Slovakia at the opportune moment. The "opportune moment" - it was understood - meant the fall of Cracow on the North, or the fall ·of Miskovec in the South. When that happened, the Slovak Army was to occupy the borders of Slovakia; 12 SLOVAKIA then the Slovak Government would step out in favor of the Army which, with the help of political parties, would form a new government, temporarily, which, in turn, would tie up with the United Nations, especially the West. Since the Slovak Government at that time had no contact with the West, thanks to Dr. Benes's refusal to deal with it, it tried to inform the West BJbout its plan through the USSR, even though it did so with great misgivings. General Augustine Malar personally contacted the Soviet Military Staff in the Ukraine, revealed the plan at least partly, and requested, in the name of the Slovak Government, that the Soviets and the Western Allies agree to this plan of action and also recognize the political independence of Slovakia. Malar, respecting the advice of the Slovak Government, wisely omitted to say anything about Slovakia's intention of joining the West. In reply, the Soviets said that they had not planned on penetrating through Slovakia; they were willing to recognize the political independence of Slovakia, as they already had in 1939, but steadfastly refused to agree on the point that military operations in Slovakia should be undertaken by the Slovak Army alone. It was quite obvious already then that the USSR wanted to occupy Slovakia for political reasons. The story of General Mala.r's contact with the Soviet Military on December 17, 1943, was told during the trial of Dr. Joseph Tiso and members of the 'Slovak Government (19461947) before the National Court in Bratislava. About the end of June the Slovak National Council decided to send a delegation to Moscow to inform Stalin of its plans and to petition the Soviets to include Slovakia in their plan of operations. Karol Schmidke and General Nicholas Ferjencik were selected to make the trip. Because of "technical" reasons, they did not undertake the trip until August 4, 1944. Ferjencik, now enjoying political asylum in America, could easily give us the details of that meeting, if he desired to do so. The partisans engaged in terroristic acts rather regularly at the end of July and the beginning of August, 1944. When they seized the command of several garrisons in SLOVAKIA 13 central Slovakia and murdered many persons in that section of the country, General Malar, to save the situation, appealed to the Army in a radio broadcast not to be taken in by partisan rumors, not to join the partisans, because "our time has not yet arrived . . . When it does come, then we shall all pull at the same end of the rope." The terroristic acts of the partisans alarmed even Lt. Col. Golian, to whom Benes had entrusted the military preparations and operations of the "resistance" in Slovakia. G-Olian demanded that the partisans subordinate their activity to his command, the "authorized" military command of the "illegal" forces. Velicko, commander of the Soviet partisans, informed Golian that he would do so, but continued on his own any way. Angered and frustrated, Golian sent Lt. Col. Manica, August 20, 1944, with a request that Velicko order the partisans to cease their activities, otherwise the Germans would surely intervene. Velicko, however, disregarded the request and his .partisans continued to spread terror and violence in central and eastern Slovakia. The terroristic acts of the partisans created a very difficult situation for President Tiso and the Slovak Government. They did what they could to keep the German Army from occupying Slovakia. They explained that the disturbances were not widespread or "national," but local, and that the Slovak Army was capable of handling them and restoring order. The Germans, however, were reluctant to believe the Slovaks, especially after the murder of General Otto and his military mission at Banska Bystrica, August 27, 1944. Hitler's Wehrmacht began to occupy Slovakia, and the Slovaks really were in for the worst. The uprising, in which the Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists collaborated fully to the joy of Moscow, was responsible for the Germans occupying Slovalkia in 1944. Why August 29, 1944? Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke Communists had told us - and are still telling us - that the Slovak uprising began on August 29, 1944. Why was that partic'ular date selected, when they knew - as we know now, 14 8LOVAKIA because even they themselves admitted it - that the partisans committed terroristic acts before that date? They selected that date as the "official" date so that they could tell the world that President Tiso and the Slovak Government called or invited the German Army to Slovakia and thus cover up the fact that the distuvbances created by the partisans were really responsible for the occupation of Slovakia by the Germans. Lettrich, Husak, N ovomesky and other "leaders" of the uprising were not even in Banska Bystrica on August 29, 1944. The Slovak National Council did not issue its declaration of the revolt until September 1, 1944. When German military units began moving into Slovakia as a result of partisan terroristic activities, the leaders of the uprising resorted to lies to gain the support of the Slovak Army and the Slovak people. They said: the Germans were coming to occupy the whole of ,Slovakia; that President Tiso was murdered; that members of the Slovak Government were seized and taken to Germany, etc. The ruse, however, even thoogh at first it deceiived many in SlovaJki:a and abroad, failed to attain its objective. What happened in Slovakia prior t,o August 29, 1944? Partisans committed terroristic acts in eastern and central Slovakia for at least three or four weeks before that date. The situation grew so tense that the Slovak Government conitem.iplated declaring Martial La,w on August 1, 1944, but did not resort to it till later. On several occasions the Germans warned Tiso and the Slovak Government that if they could not cope with the situation and keep order in Slovakia, the German Army definitely would move in to make order. Tiso and the Slovak Government did what they could under the circumstances to restore order and, thereby, keep the Germans out of Slovakia. They knew that their plans for joining with western forces of the United Nations could not be realized if the Germans occupied Slovakia. The partisans, however, taking orders from Moscow and London, were not interested in preserving order; they were only interested in preparing the ground for the Red Army: After SLOVAKIA 15 the latter occupied 'Slovakia, they figured they would take over all power in Slovakia. And they did. After the German front collapsed in Rumania, German diplomatic personnel - some thirty persons, including women and children - were hurriedly evacuated. Communist agents already were quite active in Slovakia, creating chaos and confusion and provoking incidents with Germany. The train carrying German diplomats from Bucharest was halted on the evening of August 26, 1944, at Turciansky Svaty Martin, Slovakia, by partisans. The passengers were told rather politely that it would be impossible for them to go farther, because of engine trouble. Quarters were arranged for them in the local barracks. The next morning the entire group was ordered into the barracks square by one Major Kuchta, lined up and mowed down with machine guns. It was thus that the military mission of General Otto perished. Two days later German troops came in force into Slovakia "to restore order." The partisans, of course, told the Slovaks that the German occupation was entirely ttnprovoked and that they now had to fight for their freedom, Tiso was murdered, etc., as mentioned above. Before that time, however, on August 20, 1944, Velicko and his .partisans were busy in Turiec requisitioning autos, robbing stores and farmers. During the night of August 24 a group of German field gendarmes were taken by surprise and shot while they slept in the Hotel Slavia in Vrutky. Turiec and vicinity were also terrorized and victimized by a group led by the sadistic Lutheran preacher Vojtech HruskaTerenyi, the Communist from Hungary who already back in 1919, as a young preacher, had participated in the Red revolt of Bela Kun (Cohen). Francis Slamen, member of the Slovak Assembly and chairman of the Slovak Christian Labor Union, was among several persons murdered in Brezno Natl Hronom, August 27, 1944. On August 28, 1944, partisan officers shot Col. Zverin and Col. Kanak of the Slovak Army in Banska Bystrica. In Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas they arrested Col. Kl'ucik, of the garrison there, and Lt. Frecer; later they murdered them. 16 SLOVAKIA Let's fight to the last drop of your blood! On September 1, 1944, the Slovak National Council, headed by "Democrat" Lettrich and Communist Schmidke, met in Banska Bystrica and immediately made August 29, 1944, the "official" date of the start of the Slovak uprising. Futhermore, they issued a declaration which stated that the Council was the body supreme in Slovakia, the only representative and authorized body in Slovakia which had the right to speak in the name of the Slovak nation. The Slovak National Council was composed of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Hus a:k Communists (-50-50); Dr. Joseph Lettrich was chairman and Karol Schmidke co-chairman of the Council. On September 5, 1944, during its first "solemn" session, the so-called Slovak National Council sent two telegrams: one to Stalin, the other to Benes. The Stalin telegram read as follows (translated from the Slovak): Josip Visarionovic ,Stalin Marshal of the USSR Moscow, Kremlin The Slovak National Council sends You and the nations of the Soviet Union from its solemn session its most cordial greetings and thanks You for the understanding which You have manifested for our fight of liberation, waged against the common enemy. Glory to the victorious Red Army! Banska Bystrica, September 5, 1944 The Slovak National Council It is significant that the Council made up of Communists and the Lettrich "Democrats" sent no greeting at that time either to the President of the United States or the King of England, who apparently did not rate. The Slovak National Council called in all reservists and ordered full mobilization. The response was poor; not many Slovaks answered the call voluntarily. The Council had to rest satisfied with those it could force to bear arms against their country in the area held by the partisans, a few districts in central and eastern Slovakia. A part of the Trnava garrison, led by John Benko, defected and joined the partisans; General Mala.r's divisions, however, refused to join. The German forces, led by Gen. Berger and Gen. iHoffle, soon encircled the partisan putschists. The heaviest fighting SLOVAKIA 17 took place near Telgart, Cremosne, Dubrava and Kremnicka, during which some 4,000 were killed. The partisans, who had taken to the hills and mountains of Slovakia before the Germans moved in, soon realized that their situation was quite hopeless. They lacked men and material to cope with the situation they had created. And promised help from the USSR and from Benes in London did not materialize to any noticeaible extent. Sporadic skirmishes continued for about two months; by the end of October the Communist-inspired "national" uprising in Slovakia was completely liquidated. Of course, the press of the USSR and the "Czechoslovak Press Bureau (CTK) of Dr. Benes in London supplied the world press, including our own OWI, with sensational fabrications; reports which told of the glorious and valiant stand of the Slovak nation which fought to renew the CzechoSlovak Republic - a "new" Republic, a Czecho-.Slovakia which would be a "people's" democracy - and shed its blood so that Benes might be president again; reports which told the world that the partisans had one third, then one-half and, later, almost the whole of Slovakia under their control after a week or two of "furious" fighting. Balderdash! The partisans fought in the fashion of partisans; there were practically no open, regular battles, but only sporadic skirmishes and attacks. When the "heroic" commanders of the partisan units saw that the situation was hopeless, they flew out of Slovakia into the USSR in planes that were ready just for such an eventuality. Talsky, a Czech and commander of the "eastern front" who was supposed to join with the Red Army at the opportune moment, flew to the USSR, leaving his "army" behind; there he was promptly arrested as a deserter. Generals Golian and Viest, officers who defected from the Slovak Army and joined the partisans, were ready to leave the scene of the "glorious" revolt, when their own soldiers blew up their plane with grenades. Viest and Golian hid themselves in a certain village, but were betrayed by their own men when the Germans sought them. Captured, they were taken to Germany and later shot. 18 SLOVAKIA The charact.er of the, -si.ovak uprising The Slovak National Council was busy issuing decrees to terrorize the vast masses of the Slovak population. It decreed the dissolution of the IIlinka Slovak People's Party, the German Party, and the Magyar Christian Social Party; ecclesiastical properties and institutions were nationalized and confiscated; a concentration camp was established at Slovenska Lupca, where over 700 victims were held to await partisan "justice." Partisan "people's" courts were quickly set up at Sklabina, Kunerad and elsewhere. Thousands of Slovaks were arbitrarily convicted and jailed; hundreds were liquidated without a hearing. The 1944 uprising in Slovakia pad all the earmarks of a bolshevik rebellion: partisans w~re :r:ed kerchiefs round their necks, Lenin goatees, and a rosary of grenades around their belts. They robbed and raped, plundered and murdered wherever they went. They forced priests to act friendly towards them, bless their weapons and even read the Holy Mass for the success of their diabolical venture. If a priest hesitated or refused to follow their orders, he was beaten, threatened with shooting or actually. shot. Joseph and Andrew Kocalko from Sucany, father and son respectively, were beaten to death beyond recognition by Hruska-Terenyi and his men. The father had spent quite a number of years in America. The Communist Lutheran preacher, Vojtech Hruska-Terenyi, and Jersov, a ·Russian professor, killed 147 Slovaks and buried them in a mass grave at Sklabina. Hruska-Terenyi was judge, jury and executioner. Those whom he sentenced to death had to strip down to their underclothes and march to the foot of the forest in Sklabina. There each victim was given a spade to dig his own grave. Some of the victims cracked under the ordeal and were shot forthwith; the rest kept digging slowly until Jersov blew his whistle and machine guns mowed them down into their shallow graves. The bodies of the hopeless victims were covered with twigs and a little dirt. The mass grave at Sklabina was uncovered in November 1944. Many of the victims had a bullet hole back of the neck. SLOVAKIA 19 Among the priests who were murdered there were: Rev. Anthony Salat, member of the Slovak Parliament and pastor of the Catholic congregation at Hajniky; Rev. Martinka of Liptovsky Svaty Michal; Rev. John Nemec of Zavadka; Rev. Sedo of Liptovsky Svaty Jan. In Povazska Bystrica, -a theologian named Milan was also murdered. I might note here for the record that the Communists and Lettrich "Democrats" joyously celebrated the "silver anniversary" of the invasion of Slovakia by the bolshevik hordes of Bela Kun from Hungary during the uprising of 1944 - the first time any one in Slovakia made a hero of the Magyar Communist revolutionary who murdered Slovaks, pillaged their lands and destroyed their homes! Need any more be said about the character of the Slovak uprising of 1944? I might add, too, that the same Slovak National Council of Lettrich "Democrats" and Schmidke-Husak Communists was making extensive preparations to celebrate "Czechoslovak Independence Day" on October 28, 1944, as it never had been celebrated before, but the events that followed the terroristic acts of the partisans forestalled the celebration. Mass murders and mass graves We have heard of mass murders and mass graves· i'n Poland (Katyn Forest), the Ukraine (Vinnitsia), and elsewhere, but little or nothing about those in Slovakia. In Slovakia mass graves have been uncovered in Micinska Dolina, Sklene, Podsucha, Pusty Hrad, in the Prievidza Valley, Lucivna, Sklabina, Kunerad, L'ubietova; also in the vicinity of Kovacova, Ruzomberok, Zvolen, Humenne, Bosany, and Tri Vody. There is also a mass grave near Petrzalka, but this one came into being after the occupation of Bratislava by the Red Army in the spring of 1945. The partisans were responsible for most of the murders and mass graves. During the trial of President Tiso in 1947, the prosecution stated that some 4,316 persons were buried in mass graves and blamed Tiso and the Slovak Government for them for obvious reasons. There is, of course, no way of ascertaining whether that figure is accurate or not. A thorough investigation would probably at least double it. 20 SLOVAKIA Why the putsch failed When Generals Golian and Viest were apprehended by the Germans, after their own soldiers had betrayed their hidingplace, they declared that the "uprising" had failed, because: 1. low morale prevailed in the army; soldiers had no desire to fight for a "new" Czecho-Slovakia or the USSR; · and they did not want to destroy their own State and their own Government; 2. partisan provocateurs and saboteurs had absolutely no respect or regard for the feelings of the Slovak people; they were beyond the law, brutal and reckless; 3. the Germans sent captured soldiers home, after disarming and a hearing them; 4. the partisan army lacked capable leadership; 5. communications were bad; 6. the Slovak population was hostile to the partisans and their cause; 7. little help came from the USSR and the West (Benes); 8. the Red Army was not ready to march into Slovakia; 9. the partisans did not have sufficient food, munition, guns and planes ; 10. thousands of men deserted. Conclusions From the above it is evident that the Slovak uprising of August, 1944, was not national in character; it did not have the backing of the vast ma,sses of the Slovak population. It was Communist-inspired and led; it was engineered by the Reds in Moscow and London, with the participation of Benes, without regard to the interests of the Slovak people. The partisans, no matter what their origin, were guilty of the most horrible crimes. The Communist-inspired putsch of 1944 brought terror and chaos, destruction and death, misery and Red enslavement to Slovakia. In reality, the Slovak uprising of 1944 was a "Warsaw" in miniature. Only the Communists and Moscow profited from it. Slovak Communists, Lettrich "Democrats" and Benes Czechs profited from it, but only temporarily. Together they celebrated the "great and lasting achievements" of that massacre, glorifying Stalin, the USSR, the Red Army and Benes, until February 25, 1948. And they still celebrate it today; of course, not with the Communists, nor in the same fashion as they did SLOVAKIA 21 prior to 1948. Those that were lucky enough to escape the hell they helped to create in Slovakia, that is. What fools they be, and what fools are we, if we continue to believe their version of the horrible massacre of the Slovak people in 1944, if we continue to trust them. The blood of thousands and thousands of innocent victims in mass graves of Slovakia cries to heaven for vengeance against them. Patriotic Slovaks everywhere do commemorate the Communist-inspired Slovak uprising of 1944, but not in the manner of the Benes Czechs, Lettrich "Democrats" and the Communists. Recalling the uprising as one of the darkest chapters in their history, which brought death and destruction and Red enslavement to their country, good Slovaks bow their heads reverently in prayer for the victims of that massacre and ask the almighty and just God to speed the day of judgment for all who were responsible for it and, too, that in His mercy He might also speed the day of liberation of their nation from the Godless, ruthless rule of Moscow and from all foreign domination. I firmly believe that it is in the highest interests of America and the rest of the free world that they lend a willing ear to the story patriotic Slovaks have to tell not only about the uprising of 1944, but also about the political mess that was Czecho-Slovakia, prior to Munich and after the "liberation" in 1945. I cannot and will not believe that our State Department, the U. S. Infonnation Agency (Voice of America), other U. S. government agencies, and the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe) are working in the interests of America and the rest of the free world, when they serve and promote the interests of the Benes Czechs and the Lettrich "Democrats" who collaiborated with the Communists and the USSR as members of the National Front government of the BenesGottwald coalition. Benes Czechs and Lettrich "Democrats" - now members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" operating out of Washington and New York - are gradually coming to the point of openly admitting that collaboration 22 SLOV.AK[A with Communists does not pay, that the history of CzechoSlovakia is clear proof of what attempted co-existence with Communists leads to. But they still are loath to admit that they did colla,borate with Communists and the USSR, that they did promote the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and, hence, are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the peoples of CzechoJSlovakia. And they still insist on spreading the legend about the Slovak up~ rising which was fabricated by Moscow and the LettrichSchmidke Slovak National Council. Jfow, then, can we believe that they have really broken completely with the past? • • • WHO SAID IT? "The post~war economic changes in Czechoslovakia some of them revolutionary in tiheir scope but none of them an entirely new departure in CzechoslO'Vak history - have occurred with a minimum of political friction. It seems to have been generally understood that the rebuilding of capital and the recovery of ;production were the national needs, rather than a revhnal of the conflict of ideologies which paved the way to the Second World War. For these objectives, all political parties were willing to work together. Czechoslovakia has a Communist Party which accepts joint power with non-Communist parties; its second Marxist party the Social Democrats, works ~ith non-Socialists. The other Czech parties, non-Communist but not anti-Communist, are equally willing to cooperate with the Communist Party. The Slovak Democratic Party alone contains elements of irreconcilable opposition to the Communists, with the result that it is the weatl{est linlk in the National Front. There are no deiiinitely anti-Communist parties; these were all liquidated as a result of their pre-war and wartime activities. 'I'his coHalboration of Communists, socialists and liberals in a National Front Government has boon a condition (William Diamond, Czechoslovaof post-was process." kia Between East and West, 1947, !Stevens and Sons, Ltd., London ; p. 233) .  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 Slovak Uprising of August 1944 Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 3-4 (12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954 pp. 4-22 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 Sept.-Dec. 1954 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/17b2ba5de24fde8f10d68ec6e9dabd71.pdf 987bd22423ada38132070f099872cd75 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 35 Jozef Pauco, Vojtech Balaz, Frank Deviatka, Method M. Balco, Juraj Getlik, Anton Moravcik, Otto Klement, Mike Soyka Sr., Joseph Stanek, Dr. Rudolph Medlen, Mary Student, Stephen Student, Gabriel Lantos, Andrew Welchek, Simon Siranec, Blase Dvorsky, Michal Rak, Veronica Janci, Anna M. Kocur, Irene F. Kocur, Anna V. Kocur, Mary Welchek, Irene Halac, Terezia Ondriska, Anna Vizza, Susanna K.lucar, Veronica Patala, Julia P. Benya. • • • ADDRESS OF PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, DELIVERED AT THE INFORMAL DINNER OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICANS OF SLOVAK DESCENT, WASHINGTON HOTEL, MAY 24, 1954 As citizens of the United States of America we firmly hold to the belief that all nations without exception have the inherent, God-given right to freedom and independence, the right to establish their own political state and to freely elect a govern.men t of their own choice. On March 14, 1939, after over ten centuries of alien domination, the Slovak nation exercised its inherent right when its duly elected representatives in the Bratislava Assembly of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of the land the Slovaks had occupied for 1500 years and established the Republic of Slovakia. Of course, certain people in America present this historical fact in a false light and attempt to debase and vilify everything connected with it. But the utterly simple historical truth is that the Slovak Assembly unanimously declared the land of the Slovaks an independent republic. Independent Slovakia, the dream of Slova;k generations, did become a reality and was thoroughly enjoyed by the Slovak people, even though it was short-lived (1939-1945). And it is significant even today that the Slovak Republic was recognized by twenty-seven countries, includmg Great Britain, France, Japan, and even the Soviet Union. Natu- �36 SLOVAKTA rally, the· enemies of S1ovak freedom and independence; the exploiters of the Slovak nation, furiously opposed the independence of Slovakia. Raving over the circumstances und.e r w}:iich the Slovaks· gained their independence, the foJlowen; of . Dr. E9,war4 Benes - the so-called Benes Czechs (Socialists) and "Czecho: slovaks" (Slovak Judases_ in the pay· of the Benes Cze.chs) - smeared and crucified true Slovak ·pa.triots who dared fo speak up for what their nation rightfully entitled· tci:' But no matter what the circumstances under which the nation we are descended from gained its independence, we as Americans declar_e unequiv<><;:ally tha,t the Repuplic of Slovakia should not have been destroyed against the will of the Slovak nationt · · ' · " -' · , · ·: ·' ·· ,,- ' was ._ ' /-: ·.• :·. :~-,:.,~• : l,. ·'· • ~. • •·: " ~ 1 • • · ;• • i '""•·t, ·~ · ·:.,;:· By what ·law of · God · ot man·· Wli.s i-ndepehderut ··s1ovakia destroyed? Its wanton destructiori" cannot be reconciled with our political beliefs; it was contrary to all Christian and democratic principles, in short, the destruction of Slovaikia in l945 was criminal. And_the eternal shame of it all is that Slovakia was destroyed by the victorious United Nations under the guise of liberation! . The present terri_ble plight of the Slovak nation, like that of th_e other naµo~s of Central Europe which had been "liberJLte.d " in 1945, can be trace<} to th~ blundering, undemocratic policy pursued and the secret agreements negotiated in the name of expediency by m~n in democratic government~. We are _all, therefore, res,po_n sible, more or less, for the Red enslavement of the nations behind the Iron Curtain and the iphu:manities suffered by .them. Defi~itely, we. should do . $Omething about it. Let at least be honest with ourselve-s and the rest of the wi:>-rld and admit .that it was morally wrong and contrary· to every democratic and Christian principle to surrender the Slovak nation and the other nations of Central and Eastern Europe to the ruthless men of the· K;remlin: Then; let us repudiate the treaties and secret agreements iby which these nations were enslaved by the USSR and immediately proceed in earnest with the task of real· liberation of all nations from all tyranny. · • . The struggle against tyranny· is nothing new to the Slo.. µs �SLOVAKIA 37 vaks. The history of the Slovak nation is a history of thraldom and exploitation. For over' ten centuries the Slovak nation -'-- one of the oldest Christian nations in Central :IDurope --'- has been but a pawn in the hands of alien rulers. Its freedom, security, economy and territorial integrity have always been determined by foreigners. The Slovaks have suffered longer under alien domination than any other nation of Europe. No other nation has been so thoroughly misundeI'.stood, misrepresented, degraded, maligned and vilified even by the very people who claimed to represent it and protect its national interests, by men who professed to be and were glorified as the very epitome of the democratic way of life. Many of us believed, as did many Slovaks at home, that the trials and tribulations of the Slovak nation were ended and its national existence safeguarded with the establishment of .the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, which the Slovaks and the Czechs were supposed to govern as equal partners and in which the Czechs were to be masters of their own household and the Slovaks were to enjoy States' Rights according to the principle of self-determination. But we were mistaken, badly mistaken. We did not see the job through ; Czecho-Slovakia was not set up as a federation. It soon becanie evident that the Prague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, did not regard the Slovaks as equal partners, but only as a colony to be exploited by the Czechs. · The Slovaks s9on realized that Czecho-Slcwakia ~imply meant an exchange of rulers: they were rid of the Magyar tyrant only to be placed under the Czech despot, ~ho also sought to destroy them eventuaily as a nation. They protested, but in vain. Andrew Hlinka, champion of Slovak freedom , went to Paris to attend the Peace Conference in 1919, but was promptly arrested by the French police, at the instigation of Dr. Edward Benes, and ordered o'ut of France. For this the Prague Government later hacf Hlinka jailed . . The Slovaks, however, ·outlived the tyranny of the past and today are determined to outlive the present scourge of Czecho-Co:tnmunist terror and violence and to continue in their march to complete political freedom and fndependen ce. �38 SLOVAKIA But what after Communism? Shall the Slovaks be surrendered to another tyrant? Are they willing to be exploited by another form of Czecho~Slovakfa? Certainly not! The Slovaks want only what rightfully belongs to them - no more no less. They want the United States of America and the rest of the free world to recognize and respect their inherent right to freedom and independence. The Slovaks, however , despite the many bitter memor ies of injustices suffered from ruling groups of neighboring nations, some of which blatantly claimed to be exemplary democracies - are fully aware of the fact that a free Ukraine, a free Poland, Bohemia, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and even a free Russia are also nece&sary to form a better, free and more just order in Europe. The Slovaks well know that the struggle for freedom and independence camiot and must not be waged in isolation, that the goal of liberation from communist tyranny and all foreign domination must be the unified aim of all enslaved nations and of all friends of all the oppressed peoples. It is a matter of record that the Slovak nation fought Communism, the implacable foe of all free countries, in and out of season. Americans of Slovak descent can proudly stress the fact that their forefathers fought the plague of materialistic Communism consistently and resolutely for over a hundred years. Slovak history tells us that Louis Stur, champion of Slovak freedom, repudiated the Godless philosophy of Marx in 1849; at its very first session, in 1905, the political party of Andrew IIlinka, the Slova,k Populist Party, did not hesitate to condemn Communism; fourteen years later, in 1919, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia, warned T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes to make no compromises with Bolshevism ; finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, the first president of the Slovak Republic, appealed to his people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to his death on the gallows by order of the Communist-dominated National Front Government of Dr. Edward Benes on April 18, 1947. And, today, the sons of Slovakia, wherever they might be, �SLOVAKIA 39 are more determined than ever to fight Communist tyranny until it is completely eradicated from the face of the earth. The Slovaks seek the opportunity to play a useful role in the struggle for freedom and, they believe, it is the responsibility of the free democratic world to afford them this opportunity. At the same time, however, they wish to make it perfectly clear that they do not intend to surrender their inherent right to freedom and independence under any circumstances. They do not beHeve the Soviet propaganda that the free democratic world wants the Slovak nation to commit national suicide. The Slovaks want the free nations of the world to recognize at long last a simple truth which the Slovaks and the Czechs have known for many centuTies past, that is, that the Czechs are not and do not desire to be Slovaks, and the Slovaks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks recognize and respect the right of the Czech nation to complete freedom and political independence, but they also expect the leaders of the Czech nation to realize that the Slovak nation, too, has the inherent right to freedom and political independence. And in the struggle against Communism, the Slovaks want to be united with all free nations and not es,p ecially with and only with the Czech natioo. They want it clearly understood that they are not fighting Communism for the sake of a free or any other kind of Czecho-Slovakia. They were definitely through with the political monstrosity known as Czecho-Slovakia in 1939, when the Assembly of autonomous Slovakia declared the independence of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks subscribe wholeheartedly to the idea of a federation of Central Europe, or even a federation of the whole of Europe, in which all nations would be equal and none would be dominated and exploited by the others. The Slovaks do not want anything that they are not rightfully entitled to; they make no claims to Czech history, national traditions and customs, or the material, spiritual and cultural wealth of the Czech nation; and they do not covet Czech territory. The Slovaks do not want or request the Czechs to represent them in the field of human endeavor, whether cultural. political, or spiritual. �40 SLOVAKJ4 And, of course, the Slovaks do not want to be credited with the criminal acts committed by the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. IDdward Benes and Clement Gottwald. The Slovak nation had nothing to do with the criminal expulsion of Germans and Magyars from Czecho-Slovakia, or the brutal persecution and suppression of religion and of all anti-Communist opposition in that hapless country. For the betrayal of Czecho-Slovakia - the Czech and Slovak nations - to the Communists and the Soviet Union, the Slovaks give full credit to Dr. Edward Be.nes and his socialist followers, who consistently promoted proSoviet policy. Slovak political, cultural and religious leaders did not betray the Czechs, but the "Benes Czechs" betrayed not only the Slovaks, but the entire Ozech nation as well. Today, in America and elsewhere, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings - the apostles of "Czechoslovak" democracy .- are organized in various Czech and "Czechoslovak" organizations, the "American Fund fo,r Czechoslovak Refugees, Inc.," and the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" among them, which profess to be organizations of "anti-Communist, democratic exiles" from Czecho-Slovakia. In fact, however, they are controlled by the Benes Czechs, the Cze<:h National Socialists and former members of the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. Edward Be.n.es and Clement Gottwald, which collaborated closely with the Soviet Union and outlawed all anti-socialistic and anti-communistic parties in Czecho-Slovakia in 1945. These "National Fronters," who claim they control the employees of RADIO FREE EUROPE and the VOICE OF AMERICA, never did and never will re-p resent the political will of the SlovaJk naiti01I1, and therefore, hruve no authority to speak for the Slovaks anywhere. Furthermore, they do not represent the anti-socialistic and anti-communistic Czechs. They should be recognized for what they really were in their homeland: promoters of the pro-Soviet policy of the Czech Socialists and Communists. And they should be treated accordingly. Under their leadership the so-called "Czechoslovak democracy" had practically no trouble at all in converting to a "people's democracy" after World ·War II. Americans of Slovak descent -consider it their sacred �SLOVAKIA 41 duty to unmask and embarrass all such pseudodemocratic Elements and to disarm them completely, because the enemies of Slovak freedom and independence are, in fact, the enemies of the American democratic way of life itself. Imagine then, if you will, our surprise and consternation when we learned as late as February 26, 1954, that our State Department still "considers the Council of Free Czechoslovakia to be an organization of leading anti-Communist political refugees from Czechoslovakia working for the liberation of that country from Communist domination." Rightfully we ask: "What goes on in official Washington?" ln our opinion, to defend an indefensible group of foreign politicians, who peddled the Moscow line for years, is today not only inexcusable but highly reprehensible. And more so in the case of a government official. We must not be confused by the propagators of the "new look" of the Soviet Union. Let us remember that such a "new look" had deceived intelligent statesmen and wary diplomats during the last war. Just ten yeaJrs ago today, May 24, 1944, the Hon. Winston Churchill said in the Commons: " Profound changes have taken place in Soviet Russia. The Trotskyite form of communism has been completely wiped out. The victories of the Russian armies have been attended by a great rise in strength of the Russian state and a remarkable broadening of its views. The religious side of Russian life has had a wonderful rebirth. The discipline and military etiquette of the Russian armies are unsurpassed. There is a new national anthem. The Comintern has been abolished." The Slovak nation was not deceived by the Soviet chamelon in 1938, or in 1944, and it will not be deceived by it now. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that the world cannot exist in peace half-slave and half-free; there can be no compromise between the forces of freedom and the forces of slavery. History has taught us one great lesson: no nation can have a monopoly on freedom and remain free. Freedom is the grandest of all of God's gifts to mankind ; freedom is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we promote �42 SLOVAKIA and share it, the more abundant and lasting are its fruits. Peace without freedom is unthinkable. If we are truly int erested in a permanent and just peace, let us not deny freedom to any nation - not even the Slo,v ak nation . • MARCH 14 - • • SLOVAK INDEPENDENOE DAY1 ( Address of the Hon. Michael A. Feighan, 20th District, Ohio, delivered on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the Slovak Declaration of Independence at a meeting sponsored by the Slovak League of America and the Catholic Slovak Federation of America, at the Benedictine High School Auditorium, Cleveland, March 13, 1954, on "National Sovereignty Against World Socialism.") It is an honor for me to be here with you this evening and to join with you in commemorating the love of Slovak people everywhere in the world for God, freedom, and individual liberty. Anyone who has taken the time to study the history of the Slovak people, or to acquaint themselves with the traditions of Slovaks in America, will immediately recognize my point of associating God with human freedom. Like the Irish , their slogan is and has always been for God and country. Some years ago, when the storm clouds of World War II were gathering over the skies of Europe, I became intense1y interested in the cause of nations which were then hanging in the balance. On the one hand, we, the people of the free world, were confronted with the menace of national socialism as represented by Hitler, and on the other hand, the menace of international socialism as represented by Stalin, the czar of Russian communism. It was then clear to me that the tyrants, Stalin and Hitler, had a common purpose - to dominate the world. It was therefore no shock to me when the Hitler-Stalin Pact was announced to the world in 1939. It was, however, a tremendous shock to the unprepared homegrown Communists and fellow travelers in the United States and their fellow conspirators in other parts of the world. � SLOVAKIA 35 Jozef Pauco, Vojtech Balaz, Frank Deviatka, Method M. Balco, Juraj Getlik, Anton Moravcik, Otto Klement, Mike Soyka Sr., Joseph Stanek, Dr. Rudolph Medlen, Mary Student, Stephen Student, Gabriel Lantos, Andrew Welchek, Simon Siranec, Blase Dvorsky, Michal Rak, Veronica Janci, Anna M. Kocur, Irene F. Kocur, Anna V. Kocur, Mary Welchek, Irene Halac, Terezia Ondriska, Anna Vizza, Susanna K.lucar, Veronica Patala, Julia P. Benya. • • • ADDRESS OF PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, DELIVERED AT THE INFORMAL DINNER OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICANS OF SLOVAK DESCENT, WASHINGTON HOTEL, MAY 24, 1954 As citizens of the United States of America we firmly hold to the belief that all nations without exception have the inherent, God-given right to freedom and independence, the right to establish their own political state and to freely elect a govern.men t of their own choice. On March 14, 1939, after over ten centuries of alien domination, the Slovak nation exercised its inherent right when its duly elected representatives in the Bratislava Assembly of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of the land the Slovaks had occupied for 1500 years and established the Republic of Slovakia. Of course, certain people in America present this historical fact in a false light and attempt to debase and vilify everything connected with it. But the utterly simple historical truth is that the Slovak Assembly unanimously declared the land of the Slovaks an independent republic. Independent Slovakia, the dream of Slova;k generations, did become a reality and was thoroughly enjoyed by the Slovak people, even though it was short-lived (1939-1945). And it is significant even today that the Slovak Republic was recognized by twenty-seven countries, includmg Great Britain, France, Japan, and even the Soviet Union. Natu- �36 SLOVAKTA rally, the· enemies of S1ovak freedom and independence; the exploiters of the Slovak nation, furiously opposed the independence of Slovakia. Raving over the circumstances und.e r w}:iich the Slovaks· gained their independence, the foJlowen; of . Dr. E9,war4 Benes - the so-called Benes Czechs (Socialists) and "Czecho: slovaks" (Slovak Judases_ in the pay· of the Benes Cze.chs) - smeared and crucified true Slovak ·pa.triots who dared fo speak up for what their nation rightfully entitled· tci:' But no matter what the circumstances under which the nation we are descended from gained its independence, we as Americans declar_e unequiv<><;:ally tha,t the Repuplic of Slovakia should not have been destroyed against the will of the Slovak nationt · · ' · " -' · , · ·: ·' ·· ,,- ' was ._ ' /-: ·.• :·. :~-,:.,~• : l,. ·'· • ~. • •·: " ~ 1 • • · ;• • i '""•·t, ·~ · ·:.,;:· By what ·law of · God · ot man·· Wli.s i-ndepehderut ··s1ovakia destroyed? Its wanton destructiori" cannot be reconciled with our political beliefs; it was contrary to all Christian and democratic principles, in short, the destruction of Slovaikia in l945 was criminal. And_the eternal shame of it all is that Slovakia was destroyed by the victorious United Nations under the guise of liberation! . The present terri_ble plight of the Slovak nation, like that of th_e other naµo~s of Central Europe which had been "liberJLte.d " in 1945, can be trace<} to th~ blundering, undemocratic policy pursued and the secret agreements negotiated in the name of expediency by m~n in democratic government~. We are _all, therefore, res,po_n sible, more or less, for the Red enslavement of the nations behind the Iron Curtain and the iphu:manities suffered by .them. Defi~itely, we. should do . $Omething about it. Let at least be honest with ourselve-s and the rest of the wi:>-rld and admit .that it was morally wrong and contrary· to every democratic and Christian principle to surrender the Slovak nation and the other nations of Central and Eastern Europe to the ruthless men of the· K;remlin: Then; let us repudiate the treaties and secret agreements iby which these nations were enslaved by the USSR and immediately proceed in earnest with the task of real· liberation of all nations from all tyranny. · • . The struggle against tyranny· is nothing new to the Slo.. µs �SLOVAKIA 37 vaks. The history of the Slovak nation is a history of thraldom and exploitation. For over' ten centuries the Slovak nation -'-- one of the oldest Christian nations in Central :IDurope --'- has been but a pawn in the hands of alien rulers. Its freedom, security, economy and territorial integrity have always been determined by foreigners. The Slovaks have suffered longer under alien domination than any other nation of Europe. No other nation has been so thoroughly misundeI'.stood, misrepresented, degraded, maligned and vilified even by the very people who claimed to represent it and protect its national interests, by men who professed to be and were glorified as the very epitome of the democratic way of life. Many of us believed, as did many Slovaks at home, that the trials and tribulations of the Slovak nation were ended and its national existence safeguarded with the establishment of .the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, which the Slovaks and the Czechs were supposed to govern as equal partners and in which the Czechs were to be masters of their own household and the Slovaks were to enjoy States' Rights according to the principle of self-determination. But we were mistaken, badly mistaken. We did not see the job through ; Czecho-Slovakia was not set up as a federation. It soon becanie evident that the Prague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, did not regard the Slovaks as equal partners, but only as a colony to be exploited by the Czechs. · The Slovaks s9on realized that Czecho-Slcwakia ~imply meant an exchange of rulers: they were rid of the Magyar tyrant only to be placed under the Czech despot, ~ho also sought to destroy them eventuaily as a nation. They protested, but in vain. Andrew Hlinka, champion of Slovak freedom , went to Paris to attend the Peace Conference in 1919, but was promptly arrested by the French police, at the instigation of Dr. Edward Benes, and ordered o'ut of France. For this the Prague Government later hacf Hlinka jailed . . The Slovaks, however, ·outlived the tyranny of the past and today are determined to outlive the present scourge of Czecho-Co:tnmunist terror and violence and to continue in their march to complete political freedom and fndependen ce. �38 SLOVAKIA But what after Communism? Shall the Slovaks be surrendered to another tyrant? Are they willing to be exploited by another form of Czecho~Slovakfa? Certainly not! The Slovaks want only what rightfully belongs to them - no more no less. They want the United States of America and the rest of the free world to recognize and respect their inherent right to freedom and independence. The Slovaks, however , despite the many bitter memor ies of injustices suffered from ruling groups of neighboring nations, some of which blatantly claimed to be exemplary democracies - are fully aware of the fact that a free Ukraine, a free Poland, Bohemia, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and even a free Russia are also nece&sary to form a better, free and more just order in Europe. The Slovaks well know that the struggle for freedom and independence camiot and must not be waged in isolation, that the goal of liberation from communist tyranny and all foreign domination must be the unified aim of all enslaved nations and of all friends of all the oppressed peoples. It is a matter of record that the Slovak nation fought Communism, the implacable foe of all free countries, in and out of season. Americans of Slovak descent can proudly stress the fact that their forefathers fought the plague of materialistic Communism consistently and resolutely for over a hundred years. Slovak history tells us that Louis Stur, champion of Slovak freedom, repudiated the Godless philosophy of Marx in 1849; at its very first session, in 1905, the political party of Andrew IIlinka, the Slova,k Populist Party, did not hesitate to condemn Communism; fourteen years later, in 1919, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia, warned T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes to make no compromises with Bolshevism ; finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, the first president of the Slovak Republic, appealed to his people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to his death on the gallows by order of the Communist-dominated National Front Government of Dr. Edward Benes on April 18, 1947. And, today, the sons of Slovakia, wherever they might be, �SLOVAKIA 39 are more determined than ever to fight Communist tyranny until it is completely eradicated from the face of the earth. The Slovaks seek the opportunity to play a useful role in the struggle for freedom and, they believe, it is the responsibility of the free democratic world to afford them this opportunity. At the same time, however, they wish to make it perfectly clear that they do not intend to surrender their inherent right to freedom and independence under any circumstances. They do not beHeve the Soviet propaganda that the free democratic world wants the Slovak nation to commit national suicide. The Slovaks want the free nations of the world to recognize at long last a simple truth which the Slovaks and the Czechs have known for many centuTies past, that is, that the Czechs are not and do not desire to be Slovaks, and the Slovaks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks recognize and respect the right of the Czech nation to complete freedom and political independence, but they also expect the leaders of the Czech nation to realize that the Slovak nation, too, has the inherent right to freedom and political independence. And in the struggle against Communism, the Slovaks want to be united with all free nations and not es,p ecially with and only with the Czech natioo. They want it clearly understood that they are not fighting Communism for the sake of a free or any other kind of Czecho-Slovakia. They were definitely through with the political monstrosity known as Czecho-Slovakia in 1939, when the Assembly of autonomous Slovakia declared the independence of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks subscribe wholeheartedly to the idea of a federation of Central Europe, or even a federation of the whole of Europe, in which all nations would be equal and none would be dominated and exploited by the others. The Slovaks do not want anything that they are not rightfully entitled to; they make no claims to Czech history, national traditions and customs, or the material, spiritual and cultural wealth of the Czech nation; and they do not covet Czech territory. The Slovaks do not want or request the Czechs to represent them in the field of human endeavor, whether cultural. political, or spiritual. �40 SLOVAKJ4 And, of course, the Slovaks do not want to be credited with the criminal acts committed by the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. IDdward Benes and Clement Gottwald. The Slovak nation had nothing to do with the criminal expulsion of Germans and Magyars from Czecho-Slovakia, or the brutal persecution and suppression of religion and of all anti-Communist opposition in that hapless country. For the betrayal of Czecho-Slovakia - the Czech and Slovak nations - to the Communists and the Soviet Union, the Slovaks give full credit to Dr. Edward Be.nes and his socialist followers, who consistently promoted proSoviet policy. Slovak political, cultural and religious leaders did not betray the Czechs, but the "Benes Czechs" betrayed not only the Slovaks, but the entire Ozech nation as well. Today, in America and elsewhere, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings - the apostles of "Czechoslovak" democracy .- are organized in various Czech and "Czechoslovak" organizations, the "American Fund fo,r Czechoslovak Refugees, Inc.," and the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" among them, which profess to be organizations of "anti-Communist, democratic exiles" from Czecho-Slovakia. In fact, however, they are controlled by the Benes Czechs, the Cze<:h National Socialists and former members of the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. Edward Be.n.es and Clement Gottwald, which collaborated closely with the Soviet Union and outlawed all anti-socialistic and anti-communistic parties in Czecho-Slovakia in 1945. These "National Fronters," who claim they control the employees of RADIO FREE EUROPE and the VOICE OF AMERICA, never did and never will re-p resent the political will of the SlovaJk naiti01I1, and therefore, hruve no authority to speak for the Slovaks anywhere. Furthermore, they do not represent the anti-socialistic and anti-communistic Czechs. They should be recognized for what they really were in their homeland: promoters of the pro-Soviet policy of the Czech Socialists and Communists. And they should be treated accordingly. Under their leadership the so-called "Czechoslovak democracy" had practically no trouble at all in converting to a "people's democracy" after World ·War II. Americans of Slovak descent -consider it their sacred �SLOVAKIA 41 duty to unmask and embarrass all such pseudodemocratic Elements and to disarm them completely, because the enemies of Slovak freedom and independence are, in fact, the enemies of the American democratic way of life itself. Imagine then, if you will, our surprise and consternation when we learned as late as February 26, 1954, that our State Department still "considers the Council of Free Czechoslovakia to be an organization of leading anti-Communist political refugees from Czechoslovakia working for the liberation of that country from Communist domination." Rightfully we ask: "What goes on in official Washington?" ln our opinion, to defend an indefensible group of foreign politicians, who peddled the Moscow line for years, is today not only inexcusable but highly reprehensible. And more so in the case of a government official. We must not be confused by the propagators of the "new look" of the Soviet Union. Let us remember that such a "new look" had deceived intelligent statesmen and wary diplomats during the last war. Just ten yeaJrs ago today, May 24, 1944, the Hon. Winston Churchill said in the Commons: " Profound changes have taken place in Soviet Russia. The Trotskyite form of communism has been completely wiped out. The victories of the Russian armies have been attended by a great rise in strength of the Russian state and a remarkable broadening of its views. The religious side of Russian life has had a wonderful rebirth. The discipline and military etiquette of the Russian armies are unsurpassed. There is a new national anthem. The Comintern has been abolished." The Slovak nation was not deceived by the Soviet chamelon in 1938, or in 1944, and it will not be deceived by it now. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that the world cannot exist in peace half-slave and half-free; there can be no compromise between the forces of freedom and the forces of slavery. History has taught us one great lesson: no nation can have a monopoly on freedom and remain free. Freedom is the grandest of all of God's gifts to mankind ; freedom is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we promote �42 SLOVAKIA and share it, the more abundant and lasting are its fruits. Peace without freedom is unthinkable. If we are truly int erested in a permanent and just peace, let us not deny freedom to any nation - not even the Slo,v ak nation . • MARCH 14 - • • SLOVAK INDEPENDENOE DAY1 ( Address of the Hon. Michael A. Feighan, 20th District, Ohio, delivered on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the Slovak Declaration of Independence at a meeting sponsored by the Slovak League of America and the Catholic Slovak Federation of America, at the Benedictine High School Auditorium, Cleveland, March 13, 1954, on "National Sovereignty Against World Socialism.") It is an honor for me to be here with you this evening and to join with you in commemorating the love of Slovak people everywhere in the world for God, freedom, and individual liberty. Anyone who has taken the time to study the history of the Slovak people, or to acquaint themselves with the traditions of Slovaks in America, will immediately recognize my point of associating God with human freedom. Like the Irish , their slogan is and has always been for God and country. Some years ago, when the storm clouds of World War II were gathering over the skies of Europe, I became intense1y interested in the cause of nations which were then hanging in the balance. On the one hand, we, the people of the free world, were confronted with the menace of national socialism as represented by Hitler, and on the other hand, the menace of international socialism as represented by Stalin, the czar of Russian communism. It was then clear to me that the tyrants, Stalin and Hitler, had a common purpose - to dominate the world. It was therefore no shock to me when the Hitler-Stalin Pact was announced to the world in 1939. It was, however, a tremendous shock to the unprepared homegrown Communists and fellow travelers in the United States and their fellow conspirators in other parts of the world. � 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 1954, Vol. 4 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 10), March 1954.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 11), June 1954.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 12-13), Sept.-Dec. 1954.</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 1954 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 35 Jozef Pauco, Vojtech Balaz, Frank Deviatka, Method M. Balco, Juraj Getlik, Anton Moravcik, Otto Klement, Mike Soyka Sr., Joseph Stanek, Dr. Rudolph Medlen, Mary Student, Stephen Student, Gabriel Lantos, Andrew Welchek, Simon Siranec, Blase Dvorsky, Michal Rak, Veronica Janci, Anna M. Kocur, Irene F. Kocur, Anna V. Kocur, Mary Welchek, Irene Halac, Terezia Ondriska, Anna Vizza, Susanna K.lucar, Veronica Patala, Julia P. Benya. • • • ADDRESS OF PHILIP A. HROBAK, PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, DELIVERED AT THE INFORMAL DINNER OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICANS OF SLOVAK DESCENT, WASHINGTON HOTEL, MAY 24, 1954 As citizens of the United States of America we firmly hold to the belief that all nations without exception have the inherent, God-given right to freedom and independence, the right to establish their own political state and to freely elect a govern.men t of their own choice. On March 14, 1939, after over ten centuries of alien domination, the Slovak nation exercised its inherent right when its duly elected representatives in the Bratislava Assembly of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of the land the Slovaks had occupied for 1500 years and established the Republic of Slovakia. Of course, certain people in America present this historical fact in a false light and attempt to debase and vilify everything connected with it. But the utterly simple historical truth is that the Slovak Assembly unanimously declared the land of the Slovaks an independent republic. Independent Slovakia, the dream of Slova;k generations, did become a reality and was thoroughly enjoyed by the Slovak people, even though it was short-lived (1939-1945). And it is significant even today that the Slovak Republic was recognized by twenty-seven countries, includmg Great Britain, France, Japan, and even the Soviet Union. Natu- 36 SLOVAKTA rally, the· enemies of S1ovak freedom and independence; the exploiters of the Slovak nation, furiously opposed the independence of Slovakia. Raving over the circumstances und.e r w}:iich the Slovaks· gained their independence, the foJlowen; of . Dr. E9,war4 Benes - the so-called Benes Czechs (Socialists) and "Czecho: slovaks" (Slovak Judases_ in the pay· of the Benes Cze.chs) - smeared and crucified true Slovak ·pa.triots who dared fo speak up for what their nation rightfully entitled· tci:' But no matter what the circumstances under which the nation we are descended from gained its independence, we as Americans declar_e unequiv<><;:ally tha,t the Repuplic of Slovakia should not have been destroyed against the will of the Slovak nationt · · ' · " -' · , · ·: ·' ·· ,,- ' was ._ ' /-: ·.• :·. :~-,:.,~• : l,. ·'· • ~. • •·: " ~ 1 • • · ;• • i '""•·t, ·~ · ·:.,;:· By what ·law of · God · ot man·· Wli.s i-ndepehderut ··s1ovakia destroyed? Its wanton destructiori" cannot be reconciled with our political beliefs; it was contrary to all Christian and democratic principles, in short, the destruction of Slovaikia in l945 was criminal. And_the eternal shame of it all is that Slovakia was destroyed by the victorious United Nations under the guise of liberation! . The present terri_ble plight of the Slovak nation, like that of th_e other naµo~s of Central Europe which had been "liberJLte.d " in 1945, can be trace<} to th~ blundering, undemocratic policy pursued and the secret agreements negotiated in the name of expediency by m~n in democratic government~. We are _all, therefore, res,po_n sible, more or less, for the Red enslavement of the nations behind the Iron Curtain and the iphu:manities suffered by .them. Defi~itely, we. should do . $Omething about it. Let at least be honest with ourselve-s and the rest of the wi:>-rld and admit .that it was morally wrong and contrary· to every democratic and Christian principle to surrender the Slovak nation and the other nations of Central and Eastern Europe to the ruthless men of the· K;remlin: Then; let us repudiate the treaties and secret agreements iby which these nations were enslaved by the USSR and immediately proceed in earnest with the task of real· liberation of all nations from all tyranny. · • . The struggle against tyranny· is nothing new to the Slo.. µs SLOVAKIA 37 vaks. The history of the Slovak nation is a history of thraldom and exploitation. For over' ten centuries the Slovak nation -'-- one of the oldest Christian nations in Central :IDurope --'- has been but a pawn in the hands of alien rulers. Its freedom, security, economy and territorial integrity have always been determined by foreigners. The Slovaks have suffered longer under alien domination than any other nation of Europe. No other nation has been so thoroughly misundeI'.stood, misrepresented, degraded, maligned and vilified even by the very people who claimed to represent it and protect its national interests, by men who professed to be and were glorified as the very epitome of the democratic way of life. Many of us believed, as did many Slovaks at home, that the trials and tribulations of the Slovak nation were ended and its national existence safeguarded with the establishment of .the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, which the Slovaks and the Czechs were supposed to govern as equal partners and in which the Czechs were to be masters of their own household and the Slovaks were to enjoy States' Rights according to the principle of self-determination. But we were mistaken, badly mistaken. We did not see the job through ; Czecho-Slovakia was not set up as a federation. It soon becanie evident that the Prague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, did not regard the Slovaks as equal partners, but only as a colony to be exploited by the Czechs. · The Slovaks s9on realized that Czecho-Slcwakia ~imply meant an exchange of rulers: they were rid of the Magyar tyrant only to be placed under the Czech despot, ~ho also sought to destroy them eventuaily as a nation. They protested, but in vain. Andrew Hlinka, champion of Slovak freedom , went to Paris to attend the Peace Conference in 1919, but was promptly arrested by the French police, at the instigation of Dr. Edward Benes, and ordered o'ut of France. For this the Prague Government later hacf Hlinka jailed . . The Slovaks, however, ·outlived the tyranny of the past and today are determined to outlive the present scourge of Czecho-Co:tnmunist terror and violence and to continue in their march to complete political freedom and fndependen ce. 38 SLOVAKIA But what after Communism? Shall the Slovaks be surrendered to another tyrant? Are they willing to be exploited by another form of Czecho~Slovakfa? Certainly not! The Slovaks want only what rightfully belongs to them - no more no less. They want the United States of America and the rest of the free world to recognize and respect their inherent right to freedom and independence. The Slovaks, however , despite the many bitter memor ies of injustices suffered from ruling groups of neighboring nations, some of which blatantly claimed to be exemplary democracies - are fully aware of the fact that a free Ukraine, a free Poland, Bohemia, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and even a free Russia are also nece&sary to form a better, free and more just order in Europe. The Slovaks well know that the struggle for freedom and independence camiot and must not be waged in isolation, that the goal of liberation from communist tyranny and all foreign domination must be the unified aim of all enslaved nations and of all friends of all the oppressed peoples. It is a matter of record that the Slovak nation fought Communism, the implacable foe of all free countries, in and out of season. Americans of Slovak descent can proudly stress the fact that their forefathers fought the plague of materialistic Communism consistently and resolutely for over a hundred years. Slovak history tells us that Louis Stur, champion of Slovak freedom, repudiated the Godless philosophy of Marx in 1849; at its very first session, in 1905, the political party of Andrew IIlinka, the Slova,k Populist Party, did not hesitate to condemn Communism; fourteen years later, in 1919, General Milan R. Stefanik, Slovak hero of World War I and one of the founders of Czecho-Slovakia, warned T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes to make no compromises with Bolshevism ; finally, Dr. Joseph Tiso, the first president of the Slovak Republic, appealed to his people to persevere in its fight against the dread plague of Communism even as he was being led to his death on the gallows by order of the Communist-dominated National Front Government of Dr. Edward Benes on April 18, 1947. And, today, the sons of Slovakia, wherever they might be, SLOVAKIA 39 are more determined than ever to fight Communist tyranny until it is completely eradicated from the face of the earth. The Slovaks seek the opportunity to play a useful role in the struggle for freedom and, they believe, it is the responsibility of the free democratic world to afford them this opportunity. At the same time, however, they wish to make it perfectly clear that they do not intend to surrender their inherent right to freedom and independence under any circumstances. They do not beHeve the Soviet propaganda that the free democratic world wants the Slovak nation to commit national suicide. The Slovaks want the free nations of the world to recognize at long last a simple truth which the Slovaks and the Czechs have known for many centuTies past, that is, that the Czechs are not and do not desire to be Slovaks, and the Slovaks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks recognize and respect the right of the Czech nation to complete freedom and political independence, but they also expect the leaders of the Czech nation to realize that the Slovak nation, too, has the inherent right to freedom and political independence. And in the struggle against Communism, the Slovaks want to be united with all free nations and not es,p ecially with and only with the Czech natioo. They want it clearly understood that they are not fighting Communism for the sake of a free or any other kind of Czecho-Slovakia. They were definitely through with the political monstrosity known as Czecho-Slovakia in 1939, when the Assembly of autonomous Slovakia declared the independence of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks subscribe wholeheartedly to the idea of a federation of Central Europe, or even a federation of the whole of Europe, in which all nations would be equal and none would be dominated and exploited by the others. The Slovaks do not want anything that they are not rightfully entitled to; they make no claims to Czech history, national traditions and customs, or the material, spiritual and cultural wealth of the Czech nation; and they do not covet Czech territory. The Slovaks do not want or request the Czechs to represent them in the field of human endeavor, whether cultural. political, or spiritual. 40 SLOVAKJ4 And, of course, the Slovaks do not want to be credited with the criminal acts committed by the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. IDdward Benes and Clement Gottwald. The Slovak nation had nothing to do with the criminal expulsion of Germans and Magyars from Czecho-Slovakia, or the brutal persecution and suppression of religion and of all anti-Communist opposition in that hapless country. For the betrayal of Czecho-Slovakia - the Czech and Slovak nations - to the Communists and the Soviet Union, the Slovaks give full credit to Dr. Edward Be.nes and his socialist followers, who consistently promoted proSoviet policy. Slovak political, cultural and religious leaders did not betray the Czechs, but the "Benes Czechs" betrayed not only the Slovaks, but the entire Ozech nation as well. Today, in America and elsewhere, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings - the apostles of "Czechoslovak" democracy .- are organized in various Czech and "Czechoslovak" organizations, the "American Fund fo,r Czechoslovak Refugees, Inc.," and the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" among them, which profess to be organizations of "anti-Communist, democratic exiles" from Czecho-Slovakia. In fact, however, they are controlled by the Benes Czechs, the Cze<:h National Socialists and former members of the Communist-dominated "National Front" Government of Dr. Edward Be.n.es and Clement Gottwald, which collaborated closely with the Soviet Union and outlawed all anti-socialistic and anti-communistic parties in Czecho-Slovakia in 1945. These "National Fronters," who claim they control the employees of RADIO FREE EUROPE and the VOICE OF AMERICA, never did and never will re-p resent the political will of the SlovaJk naiti01I1, and therefore, hruve no authority to speak for the Slovaks anywhere. Furthermore, they do not represent the anti-socialistic and anti-communistic Czechs. They should be recognized for what they really were in their homeland: promoters of the pro-Soviet policy of the Czech Socialists and Communists. And they should be treated accordingly. Under their leadership the so-called "Czechoslovak democracy" had practically no trouble at all in converting to a "people's democracy" after World ·War II. Americans of Slovak descent -consider it their sacred SLOVAKIA 41 duty to unmask and embarrass all such pseudodemocratic Elements and to disarm them completely, because the enemies of Slovak freedom and independence are, in fact, the enemies of the American democratic way of life itself. Imagine then, if you will, our surprise and consternation when we learned as late as February 26, 1954, that our State Department still "considers the Council of Free Czechoslovakia to be an organization of leading anti-Communist political refugees from Czechoslovakia working for the liberation of that country from Communist domination." Rightfully we ask: "What goes on in official Washington?" ln our opinion, to defend an indefensible group of foreign politicians, who peddled the Moscow line for years, is today not only inexcusable but highly reprehensible. And more so in the case of a government official. We must not be confused by the propagators of the "new look" of the Soviet Union. Let us remember that such a "new look" had deceived intelligent statesmen and wary diplomats during the last war. Just ten yeaJrs ago today, May 24, 1944, the Hon. Winston Churchill said in the Commons: " Profound changes have taken place in Soviet Russia. The Trotskyite form of communism has been completely wiped out. The victories of the Russian armies have been attended by a great rise in strength of the Russian state and a remarkable broadening of its views. The religious side of Russian life has had a wonderful rebirth. The discipline and military etiquette of the Russian armies are unsurpassed. There is a new national anthem. The Comintern has been abolished." The Slovak nation was not deceived by the Soviet chamelon in 1938, or in 1944, and it will not be deceived by it now. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that the world cannot exist in peace half-slave and half-free; there can be no compromise between the forces of freedom and the forces of slavery. History has taught us one great lesson: no nation can have a monopoly on freedom and remain free. Freedom is the grandest of all of God's gifts to mankind ; freedom is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we promote 42 SLOVAKIA and share it, the more abundant and lasting are its fruits. Peace without freedom is unthinkable. If we are truly int erested in a permanent and just peace, let us not deny freedom to any nation - not even the Slo,v ak nation . • MARCH 14 - • • SLOVAK INDEPENDENOE DAY1 ( Address of the Hon. Michael A. Feighan, 20th District, Ohio, delivered on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the Slovak Declaration of Independence at a meeting sponsored by the Slovak League of America and the Catholic Slovak Federation of America, at the Benedictine High School Auditorium, Cleveland, March 13, 1954, on "National Sovereignty Against World Socialism.") It is an honor for me to be here with you this evening and to join with you in commemorating the love of Slovak people everywhere in the world for God, freedom, and individual liberty. Anyone who has taken the time to study the history of the Slovak people, or to acquaint themselves with the traditions of Slovaks in America, will immediately recognize my point of associating God with human freedom. Like the Irish , their slogan is and has always been for God and country. Some years ago, when the storm clouds of World War II were gathering over the skies of Europe, I became intense1y interested in the cause of nations which were then hanging in the balance. On the one hand, we, the people of the free world, were confronted with the menace of national socialism as represented by Hitler, and on the other hand, the menace of international socialism as represented by Stalin, the czar of Russian communism. It was then clear to me that the tyrants, Stalin and Hitler, had a common purpose - to dominate the world. It was therefore no shock to me when the Hitler-Stalin Pact was announced to the world in 1939. It was, however, a tremendous shock to the unprepared homegrown Communists and fellow travelers in the United States and their fellow conspirators in other parts of the world.  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 Address of Philip A. Hrobak, President of the Slovak League of America Description An account of the resource Delivered at the informal dinner of the National Conference of Americans of Slovak Descent, Washington Hotel, May 24, 1954 Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 2 (10), June 1954 pp. 35-42 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 1954 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/108886e603427dc15d464e5d907bb6dc.pdf e015e64f1ff9a2b6b9129d0ca848f992 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 55 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK ORAPTER V - "What Woodrow Wilson and America Meant to Czechoslovakia" - rb y Her:bert Adolphus Miller, .Ph.D., "Lecturer on Social Economy, Bryn Mawr College; Professor of Sociology; Oberlin College (1'914-1925), and Ohio State Universi,ty (1924-,1931) ; chief, Division of Immigrant !Heritages, Carnegie Cor,poration; director, MidEuropean Union; president, Masaryk Institut,e," etc. •~in the year 1914 the number of non-Czech and non-Slovak Americans who had intimate know,l edge of the Czechoslova,ks and their aspirations could almost 1h,ave been counted on the fingers or one hMlld. ,E ven up to 1M,ay, 1918, iwhen Thomas Garrigue !Masaryk came to Amer.lea, the New York Times •h ad not carried a single serious editorial on the Czec•hoslov,aks. When he left in December of that year, he was one of the acknowledged g;reat men of the war period and also president-e,l ect of a country soon to become of recognized importance in the family of nations" (p. 71). "lln the face of such ,a complete la,ck of information it waa imposs.ilble for the Ameri= people to give any help to a nationa:l cause. There w,as a traditional predisposition for Americans to be interested in ,freedom but it was necessary for the Czechs and Slovaks in the United States to estahlish their rigiht to freedom" (p. 72). This chapter confirms the story that "Czecho-Slovakia" was a state 'born out of propaganda. Masaryk, the un. known "even up to May 1918," became a celebrated rpoJitical figure 1by DecemJber 1918. it all happened !because Masaryk got to know the "right" people, who in turn got the U. 1S. Army, the YlMCA and the YWCA, the New York 'l'imes, Woodrow Wilson, the ivarious sectarian churches, etc., to push the estrublishment of the state proposed by Masaryk ,a nd Benes. lgnorance of the facts, as usual in such cases, ,p layed a very, if not the most important role. "As often hruppens in such cases, the less knowledge, the greater the enthusioom," M:asary,k himself wrote in his "The M81king of a 1State" (rS vetova revoluce). Professor Miller unlblu:.shingly describes the role he played to put Masaryk's ideas across to the American pulblic and the American Government. �56 SLOVAKIA This chapter should have been titled "What Woodro,w Wilson and America Meant to· Masaryk, Benes and the Czechs." True, without Wilson and America Ozecho-Sloivakia would not have been born, lbut the fact nevertheless is that Ozecho-Slo,vaikia served the interests of the Masaryik and Benes Ozechs more than it did the interests of the vast mrujority of the population of that Republic. When MajooGenera1 E. F. Glenn, commander of the iDivision invited Mr. iMiHer "again to discuss what oould be done rubout reestablishing an eastern front through revolutionary activity," Mr. Miller arranged 1a meeting of the "leaders of the various g;roups of central Europe' (p. 76). And who, do you suppose, represented the .Slovaiks? '.Dwo Ozechs to whom Mr. 'Miller does not refer as Czechs, lbut simply states: "Charles Pergler and Professor Pisecky reipresented the Czecho-1Slovaik1s." With Miller, much like most of the other writers on Czecho-:Slovakia, just albout everything is "Czech," and "Slovak" is only casually mentioned. An illustration: "Att·ention then was turn-ed to the education of public opinion. The story was told to the !Committee on 'Public ,Information, and immediately the national aspirations of the Czechs, Poles, and Jugoslavs began to get space in the new,s,papers. . . Americ,a n public opiruion wa;s stimulated, first, by what the Czechs themselves did in America fr.om the very beginning of the war, ,a nd then later in Europe; and, secondly, through the immediate acceptance of Professor Masaryk (pp. 76-77) . . . . The ,Czech colonies in Chicago, Cle~land, Cedar Rap'ids, and many other pl:aces had Jon,g b een organized and respected. At the outbreak of the war they got into action. The Czech National Alliance w,as formed on August 18, 1914, with the purpos-e of informing the people of America and Europe of the just demands of the Czech nation for independence. Very soon the conflicting elements of ,Oa;tholics and anti-Catholics that had long divided the Czechs wer,e ,brought together, and soon afterwards the Slovaks came in" (p. 73). The :Slovak League of America, which rp layed just as active, if not a more active part than the Czech organizations for the estaJblishment of the Ozecho-SloivaJk (Republic, simply was ignored by 'M;r. Miller. Slovak colonies and the Slovak organi,z ations a:fifiliated with the iSlovak Lea,gue of America meant nothing to Mr. Miller. The tendency is only too obvious. Then, too,. Mr. Miller would have us believe that Masaryk was spontaneously a:cclaimed and "immediaite1y �57 SLOVAKIA accepted" 1by Slovaks and Czechs everywhere in America. The fact is that he was not. Czech and Slovruk Catholic leader~ in America knew how Masaryk felt aibout Catholicism (Rome must lbe tried and convicted! Away f:rom Rome!) and <killed him at length about the status of religion in the !proposed Czecho-:Slovak Republic. The Slovaks were not satisfied with Masarylk's oral picture of the status of ·Slovakia within the iRepulblic ; to win them over he met with them, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement, !May 30, 1918, which ,g uaranteed the SlOIVaks autonomy (IState.s' rights) ,w ithin the framework o,f OzechoSlova!kia. The artificial sibate, created by ipropaganda, fell apart li:ke a house .o f cards when it faced its fkst crisis. Miller and others, who rpushed the principles. of self-<letermination for the Ozechs, did not follow through to apply the principle to other nations. What followed was inevitable. OH.APTER VI - "The Historical Roots of Czech Democracy" - /by Hans Kohn, J.D. , "professo;z- of Modern European History, Smith College; J.D., German University of Prague; visiting Lecturer on Internationia;l Relations, Harvard University (19317-1938) ; Guggenheim ·F ellow (19401941); author of numerous 'boo~s and articles, among them: A History of NaJtionalisim in the East (192,9); Na-tiona:lism and Imperialism in the Hither East (1932); Na-, tionalism in the !Soviet Union (1933) ; Orient and Occident (1934); West(ern Civilization in the Near East (1936); iForce of Reason (1937); Revolutions and -DictaJtorships (1939) ." This is strictly another Czech chapter. In it Professor Kohn does not concern himself with the "historical roots of 'SlovaJk [)emocracy." How this cha,pter lbecaime a 1part of the history of Ozecho-Slovakia, without a corresponding Slovak cha!pter might best be expf.ained by Kerner, who sought out the authors of the chapters of the lbook he edited and published. Kerner ,p robably could not find a Czech to do it. The whole narrative rrevol,ves around 1F rantisek P,a l,a cky, "who was much more than the first great Czech historian." PalMky, "the father of modern Czech nationalism," gave to the Czechs the "sense of a mission, a raison d'etre 1 �58 SLOVAKIA for the aspiration to take anew their place o,n the field of history"; his interpretat ion of the Czech i)ast "created the secure foundation for Czech democracy " and became a "living intellectual tradition, ,v italizing all manifestati ons. of Czech life." 'Palaoky "deeply steeped in the moral philosoiphy of Kant," set himself to the task of "reinterpre ting" Czech history, so that he might make "the Czech Reformatio n the culminatio n and the meaning of Czech history, the decisive .period of which ,b egan with Jan Hus and the Hussite movement and experience d its last and most sUJblime flowering on the Czech Brethren." T. G. Masaryk, Palacky's "great disciple," Mr. Kohn tells us, "saw rightly not only that Palacky had educated the Czech people .to democracy , but that he had established in the eyes of Europe the Hussite refonnatio n as the most valid Czech title to recognition" (p. 104). But he tells us that "T. G. Masaryk points out rightly in his Palackeho idea naroda ceskeho (Prague, 1926; pp. 42 f.) 'the conviction that the Czech people cannot become politically independent is one of the fundament al political conceptions of Palacky'." The Palacky-Ma sary;k conception of Czech history is adhered to lby Mr. Kohn, even though it was criticized by the eminent Czech historian, Josef 'Pekar, as a falsificatio n of Czech history. The chapter by Mr. Kohn he1ps prove that Czecho-Slo vakia was a political mon_, strosity. OHA!PTER V!III - "Constitutional and Political Structure" - By iMalbone W. Graham, Ph.D., "Professor of Political :Science, University of California, Los Angeles; member, Advisory Committee, Institute of Czechoslovak Studies, Columbia University (1925); member, European Con• ference of American tProfessors of Internation al Law and Relations (1926); member of numecrous American learned societies; author of New Governmen ts of Central :Eiurope (1924) ; New Governmen ts of Eastern Europe (1927) ; The Soviet 1S ecurity System (1929); The League of Nations and the Recognitio n of States (1933); In Quest of a Law of Recognitio n (1933); The Soviet Union and Peace (1935) ," etc. �SLOVAKIA 59 "The medieval Bohemian State, whose overthrow at the hands of the iHabsburgs closed a long chapter in Czechoslovak national development and opened a darker one of subjugation, was, if only by (p. 106). its historical origins, essenti-ally a feudal structure" - The very first sentence of Mr. Graham's chapter reveals what is coming. What is the connection !between the "Bohemian" State and the ISlava:ks? 1Since there is none, how could the destruction o,f the "Bohemian" !State close "a long ,c hapter in CZECHOSLOVAK national development"? ·F or what purpo,s e did Mr. Graham resort to this falsification of history? To us it is quite obvious that here "Czechoslova k" means "Czech." 'But, Mr. Graham, apparently was more interested in building up the "antiquity" of the "Czechoslovak " business of chauvinistic ~echs (political reconstruction of the Czechoslo:vak State) than he was in relating historical facts. "In its ent from its strument of constituent • genesis, the Constitution of Czochoslovakia was differcompeers of the postwar period. Whereas every other ingovernment was the -product of a democratically elected assembly, the Czechoslovak Constitution was brought into being without elections, by a strictly national assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process. This apparently anti-democratic procedure was occasioned by the necessity of having availab le for the country from the outset a body with plen,a ry authority and full responsibility for its actions. At the moment the future boundaries of the new state were undecided, and elections could not be held lawfully in unassigned territory. Moreover, the institutional flux accompanying the wholesale liquidation of the Habsburg Monarchy ,c alled for the prompt creation of _a. substitute authority - stable, definite and unchallenged. This the Czechoslovak National Assembly supplied. It was a unicameral ·body made up of the Reichsrat representatives from the Bohemian, Moravian, and .Silesian Crown Lands, ai;; .el ected in 1911. Taking this prewar standard of political normalcy as a point of departure, in accordance with the prescriptions of Emperor Oharles's Federalization Manifesto of October 10, 1938, the Czech leaders awaited the formal adhesion of the Slovaks to tire new state, by the [)oclaration of Turciansky Sv. Martin of October 31, 1918, then coopted a bloc of fifty-five Slovaks into the body to give fundamental represe<ntation to that part of the Czechoslovak nation which, under Hungarian rule, had been deprived of virtually all means of political self-exvression. Later, when the definite boundaries of the country had been laid down in the draft treaty of Trianon with Hungary, addit'ional representatives were allotted to Slovakia" - (p. 109). Simple was it not? The "democracy" of Masaryk and Benes was given a Constitution about which the peoples of �60 SLOVAKIA Czecho ..Slova:kia had nothing to say. The new "democratic" State was just ,b orn and already "undemocratic" methods were resorted to. It is significant .that Professor Graham should try to excuse it or act as an apologist for it. That is not the task of a true historian. What does he mean by saying that the Czecho-1Slova:k Constitution was brought into being "by a strictly natlonal assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process"? I,f Mr. Graham did not know the details of how the Czecho-SlovaJk Constitution was brought into 1b eing, why did he attempt to write about it? Who were the Slovaks coopted by the Czech leaders into the "Czechoslovak National Assembly" to give fundamental representation TO THE PART OF THE CZECHOSLOVAK Nation ... m:ider Hungarian rule"? Did not Mr. G:mhaim 1know that Benes and other Czechs presumed to represent the Slovaks? It should ibe significant, too, that the Slovaks declared their "formal adhesion to the new State" on October 31, 1918, that is, three days after the independence of Czecho-Slovakia was proclaimed, by the Czech •Mruffia in Prague. There was no "Czechoslo,vaik nation" - ethnically or politically s:peaking - before the b.irth of Ozecho-:Slorvaikia, so how could the Slo,va!ks be a part of it? The implication seems to be that the run.democratic "Czechoslo1vaJk Constitution" created such a nation. "AH formal aspects aside, however," continues Mr. Graham (,p. 11), "the assemlbly which adopted lboth the provisional and deifinibve constitutions for the Czechoslovak StaJte was decidedly national, that is, fully representative of the political currents at work in the prewar life of the nation . .." But the historical fact is that the "lawful" represen. tatives, who prepared. and voted the Czecho-'Slova:k Constitution, were anything but lawful. We know that the members of the National Assembly, the first Czecho-Slovak Parliament, were not elected, but handpicked by the political clique headed lby Masaryk and Benes, who came into po:wer only with the help of the AHies. When the Constitution of Czecho ..SlovaJkia was approved on February 29, 1920, Slovakia was occupied by the Czech army and Andrew HJinka, leader of the Slovaks in their fight for freedom and inde- �SLOVAKIA 61 pendence, was still in a Czech prison at Mirov in -Moraivia. The Germans and Hungarians, as well as people of other nations in the new Czecho-!Slovak State, did not haive a single representative in this ',undemocratic" National Assemlbly, the Masaryk and Benes Ozechs ignoring all claims on their ibehalf. Furthermore, so that no aimendrments might be made to the Constitution against the will o.f the Ozechs, it was decreed that a two-thirds majority would be required to amend it. After the National Assemfbly, picked lby Masaryk and Benes, ,r atified the Constitution, the .A!ssembly was <lissolved, ,a nd four weeks Jater new parliaimentary elections were held. Hlinka was elected while he was stiH in prison; after his election he was released. At the first session Hilir.uka and other Slovaik members of Parliament de-· mantled the implemtcntation of the Pittsburgh Pact, but were told that it was contrary to the Ozecho-S'lovak Constitution. Masaryk and Benes had control of everything. The few !Slovaks who went along with them - called Judas Slovaks ~v 'Slova;k patriots - were given highly paid po-· sitions in the !State administration, and the fiction of "Czechoslovak" unity was 1pushed in all corners of the earth . • Stating that "it is unnecessary to recount the details of the actual enactment of the Constitution," because today its temporary or transitional stipulations have lost their significance and do not require consideration," !Mr. Gra-· ham says (p. 114) : "Rather is it of interest to discern how the basic ideolo,gy underlying the repubHcan. regime was translated into fundamental law." And that ideology, continues Mr. Graham, "is admirably eX!pressed in the preamble of the Constitution, whose phraseology, strongly redolent of that of the .A!rnerican Constitution, is also in itself a synthesis of the political philosophy of Masaryk and Benes." Be that as- Mr. Graham says it is, hut it certainly is not a synthesis of the ,political philosophy of the Czech and 'Slovak nations. The preamble to the OzechoSlova'k Constitution reads: "We, the Czechoslovak nation, desiring to consolidate the perfect unity of our people, to establish t,he reign of justi ce in the Republic, �SLOVAKIA 62 to assure the peac,e ful development of our native Czechoslovak land, to con tribute to the common welfare of all citizens of this State, and to secure the blessings of. freedom to coming generations, have in our National A,ssembly adopted the following Cons titution for the Czechoslovak Republic and in doing so we decla.re that it will be our endeavor to s ee that this Constitution, to·g et•h er with all the laiws of our land, be carried out in the spirit of our history, as well as in the spkit of those modern principles embodied in the idea of selfdetermination, for we desir.e to take our place in the Family of Nations as a member at once cultured, peace-loving, democratic and progressive." To compare the "eX!act degree of American influence on the ideology," expressed in the foggy, intellectual tripe above, Mr. Graham footnotes the American preamble, which reads as follows: "WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, i n order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, -insure domestic tranquility, p:rovide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessirngs of Liberty to ourselves ·a nd our Posterity, do ordain and establish this ,Constitution for the United States of America." Now, the American preamble makes sense and reads like a song, but not so the Czecho-Slovak preamible. What is "perfect unity" if not perfect consolidation? And why should "We, the Czechoslovak nation" mean anything lbut "our people"? Or did the handpicked National Asse:mibly presume its.elf, and not "our people," to be the "Czechoslovalk nation"? It is significant that the Masaryk-B~nes constitution makers did not start the preamlble with "'WE THE PEOBLE oif the Czech0-:Sio,v ak 'State," or with "We the 1people of the Bohemian Crown Lands and 1Slo'Vakia," instead of with :the fiction "We, the OzechosloJVak nation"! Mr. Graham explains the Czecho-'Slovak preamlble in this manner: "The primorcliat principle enunciated is that of the unity of the nation, not as a goal to be attained, and therefore executory, but, so far as the Czechs ,and Slovaks were concerned, as an achievement to be consolidated. W•hat is important in this affirmation o.f achieved constitutional ml'ity is not only its validation of the acts of th€ October revolution . . . but particularly its absolute rejection of all separatist tendencies (,p. 115) __ . '1t w,a s not the, intent of the Czechoslovak founding fathers to create legal pediments for future racist or separatist movements by conceding to the inha:bitants of various p.rurts of the country dlifferential status" (p. 116). Mr. Graham somehow conveniently forgot that Cze- �SLOVAKIA 63 cho--Slovia;kia was supposed to be a federation, patterned after the United States or Switzerland. Nevertheless, he knew the "intent" of the "Czechoslorvak" founding fathers! Mr. Graham fouled UJP on the false premise of "unity" of the "Ozechoslovak" nation, which his fertile imagination traced all the way ibaok to the "medieval Bohemian State." (More Coming) • • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIIA THE NEW CASTLE OF LIPTOV Beneath the Slovak Tatras, under the ibowed head of Krivaii, in the valley of the serpentine Vah river, lies the hidden town of Liiptovsky Hradok (the Little Castle of Lipto,v) . :Lt is oompletely encircled by mountains and the red roofs of the dwellings are shariply contrasted iby the fresh green of the surrounding forests. The town has its name from the castle there which today is in ruins, its walls increasing the romanticism of the reigion. The fortress, situated on a plain and surrounded 1by a moat, was built by Magistrate Done, son of iDominic, at the ibeginning of the 14th century. It took twenty years to build. Novy Hrad (New Castle), as Liptovsky Hradok is called, is near the river Bela and behind it rises the cliff Skalka. The vicinity of Hradok was once an ancient forest; even today many forests exist there, the source of much of the wood which can be seen on rafts ,p lying the Vah during most of the year. The castle itself was a twowinged affair with a small courtyard with a well. The center of the northern wall is ,completely demolished; the western part resembles a wide bastion in which is pre~ served a vaulted room. Done, the original occwpant of the castle, did not enjoy it very long; he was followed hy many others. In 1398, the Moravian warrior Procopius s'eiized it and held it for a · short time; in 143·3 L:iiptovs:ky Hradok was ta:ken by the Hussites and held several months. When they were evicted in 141,1, the management of the castle was taken over 'by magistrate Ladislaus z .u:baie Riikolf; the latter had � SLOVAKIA 55 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK ORAPTER V - "What Woodrow Wilson and America Meant to Czechoslovakia" - rb y Her:bert Adolphus Miller, .Ph.D., "Lecturer on Social Economy, Bryn Mawr College; Professor of Sociology; Oberlin College (1'914-1925), and Ohio State Universi,ty (1924-,1931) ; chief, Division of Immigrant !Heritages, Carnegie Cor,poration; director, MidEuropean Union; president, Masaryk Institut,e," etc. •~in the year 1914 the number of non-Czech and non-Slovak Americans who had intimate know,l edge of the Czechoslova,ks and their aspirations could almost 1h,ave been counted on the fingers or one hMlld. ,E ven up to 1M,ay, 1918, iwhen Thomas Garrigue !Masaryk came to Amer.lea, the New York Times •h ad not carried a single serious editorial on the Czec•hoslov,aks. When he left in December of that year, he was one of the acknowledged g;reat men of the war period and also president-e,l ect of a country soon to become of recognized importance in the family of nations" (p. 71). "lln the face of such ,a complete la,ck of information it waa imposs.ilble for the Ameri= people to give any help to a nationa:l cause. There w,as a traditional predisposition for Americans to be interested in ,freedom but it was necessary for the Czechs and Slovaks in the United States to estahlish their rigiht to freedom" (p. 72). This chapter confirms the story that "Czecho-Slovakia" was a state 'born out of propaganda. Masaryk, the un. known "even up to May 1918," became a celebrated rpoJitical figure 1by DecemJber 1918. it all happened !because Masaryk got to know the "right" people, who in turn got the U. 1S. Army, the YlMCA and the YWCA, the New York 'l'imes, Woodrow Wilson, the ivarious sectarian churches, etc., to push the estrublishment of the state proposed by Masaryk ,a nd Benes. lgnorance of the facts, as usual in such cases, ,p layed a very, if not the most important role. "As often hruppens in such cases, the less knowledge, the greater the enthusioom," M:asary,k himself wrote in his "The M81king of a 1State" (rS vetova revoluce). Professor Miller unlblu:.shingly describes the role he played to put Masaryk's ideas across to the American pulblic and the American Government. �56 SLOVAKIA This chapter should have been titled "What Woodro,w Wilson and America Meant to· Masaryk, Benes and the Czechs." True, without Wilson and America Ozecho-Sloivakia would not have been born, lbut the fact nevertheless is that Ozecho-Slo,vaikia served the interests of the Masaryik and Benes Ozechs more than it did the interests of the vast mrujority of the population of that Republic. When MajooGenera1 E. F. Glenn, commander of the iDivision invited Mr. iMiHer "again to discuss what oould be done rubout reestablishing an eastern front through revolutionary activity," Mr. Miller arranged 1a meeting of the "leaders of the various g;roups of central Europe' (p. 76). And who, do you suppose, represented the .Slovaiks? '.Dwo Ozechs to whom Mr. 'Miller does not refer as Czechs, lbut simply states: "Charles Pergler and Professor Pisecky reipresented the Czecho-1Slovaik1s." With Miller, much like most of the other writers on Czecho-:Slovakia, just albout everything is "Czech," and "Slovak" is only casually mentioned. An illustration: "Att·ention then was turn-ed to the education of public opinion. The story was told to the !Committee on 'Public ,Information, and immediately the national aspirations of the Czechs, Poles, and Jugoslavs began to get space in the new,s,papers. . . Americ,a n public opiruion wa;s stimulated, first, by what the Czechs themselves did in America fr.om the very beginning of the war, ,a nd then later in Europe; and, secondly, through the immediate acceptance of Professor Masaryk (pp. 76-77) . . . . The ,Czech colonies in Chicago, Cle~land, Cedar Rap'ids, and many other pl:aces had Jon,g b een organized and respected. At the outbreak of the war they got into action. The Czech National Alliance w,as formed on August 18, 1914, with the purpos-e of informing the people of America and Europe of the just demands of the Czech nation for independence. Very soon the conflicting elements of ,Oa;tholics and anti-Catholics that had long divided the Czechs wer,e ,brought together, and soon afterwards the Slovaks came in" (p. 73). The :Slovak League of America, which rp layed just as active, if not a more active part than the Czech organizations for the estaJblishment of the Ozecho-SloivaJk (Republic, simply was ignored by 'M;r. Miller. Slovak colonies and the Slovak organi,z ations a:fifiliated with the iSlovak Lea,gue of America meant nothing to Mr. Miller. The tendency is only too obvious. Then, too,. Mr. Miller would have us believe that Masaryk was spontaneously a:cclaimed and "immediaite1y �57 SLOVAKIA accepted" 1by Slovaks and Czechs everywhere in America. The fact is that he was not. Czech and Slovruk Catholic leader~ in America knew how Masaryk felt aibout Catholicism (Rome must lbe tried and convicted! Away f:rom Rome!) and <killed him at length about the status of religion in the !proposed Czecho-:Slovak Republic. The Slovaks were not satisfied with Masarylk's oral picture of the status of ·Slovakia within the iRepulblic ; to win them over he met with them, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement, !May 30, 1918, which ,g uaranteed the SlOIVaks autonomy (IState.s' rights) ,w ithin the framework o,f OzechoSlova!kia. The artificial sibate, created by ipropaganda, fell apart li:ke a house .o f cards when it faced its fkst crisis. Miller and others, who rpushed the principles. of self-<letermination for the Ozechs, did not follow through to apply the principle to other nations. What followed was inevitable. OH.APTER VI - "The Historical Roots of Czech Democracy" - /by Hans Kohn, J.D. , "professo;z- of Modern European History, Smith College; J.D., German University of Prague; visiting Lecturer on Internationia;l Relations, Harvard University (19317-1938) ; Guggenheim ·F ellow (19401941); author of numerous 'boo~s and articles, among them: A History of NaJtionalisim in the East (192,9); Na-tiona:lism and Imperialism in the Hither East (1932); Na-, tionalism in the !Soviet Union (1933) ; Orient and Occident (1934); West(ern Civilization in the Near East (1936); iForce of Reason (1937); Revolutions and -DictaJtorships (1939) ." This is strictly another Czech chapter. In it Professor Kohn does not concern himself with the "historical roots of 'SlovaJk [)emocracy." How this cha,pter lbecaime a 1part of the history of Ozecho-Slovakia, without a corresponding Slovak cha!pter might best be expf.ained by Kerner, who sought out the authors of the chapters of the lbook he edited and published. Kerner ,p robably could not find a Czech to do it. The whole narrative rrevol,ves around 1F rantisek P,a l,a cky, "who was much more than the first great Czech historian." PalMky, "the father of modern Czech nationalism," gave to the Czechs the "sense of a mission, a raison d'etre 1 �58 SLOVAKIA for the aspiration to take anew their place o,n the field of history"; his interpretat ion of the Czech i)ast "created the secure foundation for Czech democracy " and became a "living intellectual tradition, ,v italizing all manifestati ons. of Czech life." 'Palaoky "deeply steeped in the moral philosoiphy of Kant," set himself to the task of "reinterpre ting" Czech history, so that he might make "the Czech Reformatio n the culminatio n and the meaning of Czech history, the decisive .period of which ,b egan with Jan Hus and the Hussite movement and experience d its last and most sUJblime flowering on the Czech Brethren." T. G. Masaryk, Palacky's "great disciple," Mr. Kohn tells us, "saw rightly not only that Palacky had educated the Czech people .to democracy , but that he had established in the eyes of Europe the Hussite refonnatio n as the most valid Czech title to recognition" (p. 104). But he tells us that "T. G. Masaryk points out rightly in his Palackeho idea naroda ceskeho (Prague, 1926; pp. 42 f.) 'the conviction that the Czech people cannot become politically independent is one of the fundament al political conceptions of Palacky'." The Palacky-Ma sary;k conception of Czech history is adhered to lby Mr. Kohn, even though it was criticized by the eminent Czech historian, Josef 'Pekar, as a falsificatio n of Czech history. The chapter by Mr. Kohn he1ps prove that Czecho-Slo vakia was a political mon_, strosity. OHA!PTER V!III - "Constitutional and Political Structure" - By iMalbone W. Graham, Ph.D., "Professor of Political :Science, University of California, Los Angeles; member, Advisory Committee, Institute of Czechoslovak Studies, Columbia University (1925); member, European Con• ference of American tProfessors of Internation al Law and Relations (1926); member of numecrous American learned societies; author of New Governmen ts of Central :Eiurope (1924) ; New Governmen ts of Eastern Europe (1927) ; The Soviet 1S ecurity System (1929); The League of Nations and the Recognitio n of States (1933); In Quest of a Law of Recognitio n (1933); The Soviet Union and Peace (1935) ," etc. �SLOVAKIA 59 "The medieval Bohemian State, whose overthrow at the hands of the iHabsburgs closed a long chapter in Czechoslovak national development and opened a darker one of subjugation, was, if only by (p. 106). its historical origins, essenti-ally a feudal structure" - The very first sentence of Mr. Graham's chapter reveals what is coming. What is the connection !between the "Bohemian" State and the ISlava:ks? 1Since there is none, how could the destruction o,f the "Bohemian" !State close "a long ,c hapter in CZECHOSLOVAK national development"? ·F or what purpo,s e did Mr. Graham resort to this falsification of history? To us it is quite obvious that here "Czechoslova k" means "Czech." 'But, Mr. Graham, apparently was more interested in building up the "antiquity" of the "Czechoslovak " business of chauvinistic ~echs (political reconstruction of the Czechoslo:vak State) than he was in relating historical facts. "In its ent from its strument of constituent • genesis, the Constitution of Czochoslovakia was differcompeers of the postwar period. Whereas every other ingovernment was the -product of a democratically elected assembly, the Czechoslovak Constitution was brought into being without elections, by a strictly national assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process. This apparently anti-democratic procedure was occasioned by the necessity of having availab le for the country from the outset a body with plen,a ry authority and full responsibility for its actions. At the moment the future boundaries of the new state were undecided, and elections could not be held lawfully in unassigned territory. Moreover, the institutional flux accompanying the wholesale liquidation of the Habsburg Monarchy ,c alled for the prompt creation of _a. substitute authority - stable, definite and unchallenged. This the Czechoslovak National Assembly supplied. It was a unicameral ·body made up of the Reichsrat representatives from the Bohemian, Moravian, and .Silesian Crown Lands, ai;; .el ected in 1911. Taking this prewar standard of political normalcy as a point of departure, in accordance with the prescriptions of Emperor Oharles's Federalization Manifesto of October 10, 1938, the Czech leaders awaited the formal adhesion of the Slovaks to tire new state, by the [)oclaration of Turciansky Sv. Martin of October 31, 1918, then coopted a bloc of fifty-five Slovaks into the body to give fundamental represe<ntation to that part of the Czechoslovak nation which, under Hungarian rule, had been deprived of virtually all means of political self-exvression. Later, when the definite boundaries of the country had been laid down in the draft treaty of Trianon with Hungary, addit'ional representatives were allotted to Slovakia" - (p. 109). Simple was it not? The "democracy" of Masaryk and Benes was given a Constitution about which the peoples of �60 SLOVAKIA Czecho ..Slova:kia had nothing to say. The new "democratic" State was just ,b orn and already "undemocratic" methods were resorted to. It is significant .that Professor Graham should try to excuse it or act as an apologist for it. That is not the task of a true historian. What does he mean by saying that the Czecho-1Slova:k Constitution was brought into being "by a strictly natlonal assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process"? I,f Mr. Graham did not know the details of how the Czecho-SlovaJk Constitution was brought into 1b eing, why did he attempt to write about it? Who were the Slovaks coopted by the Czech leaders into the "Czechoslovak National Assembly" to give fundamental representation TO THE PART OF THE CZECHOSLOVAK Nation ... m:ider Hungarian rule"? Did not Mr. G:mhaim 1know that Benes and other Czechs presumed to represent the Slovaks? It should ibe significant, too, that the Slovaks declared their "formal adhesion to the new State" on October 31, 1918, that is, three days after the independence of Czecho-Slovakia was proclaimed, by the Czech •Mruffia in Prague. There was no "Czechoslo,vaik nation" - ethnically or politically s:peaking - before the b.irth of Ozecho-:Slorvaikia, so how could the Slo,va!ks be a part of it? The implication seems to be that the run.democratic "Czechoslo1vaJk Constitution" created such a nation. "AH formal aspects aside, however," continues Mr. Graham (,p. 11), "the assemlbly which adopted lboth the provisional and deifinibve constitutions for the Czechoslovak StaJte was decidedly national, that is, fully representative of the political currents at work in the prewar life of the nation . .." But the historical fact is that the "lawful" represen. tatives, who prepared. and voted the Czecho-'Slova:k Constitution, were anything but lawful. We know that the members of the National Assembly, the first Czecho-Slovak Parliament, were not elected, but handpicked by the political clique headed lby Masaryk and Benes, who came into po:wer only with the help of the AHies. When the Constitution of Czecho ..SlovaJkia was approved on February 29, 1920, Slovakia was occupied by the Czech army and Andrew HJinka, leader of the Slovaks in their fight for freedom and inde- �SLOVAKIA 61 pendence, was still in a Czech prison at Mirov in -Moraivia. The Germans and Hungarians, as well as people of other nations in the new Czecho-!Slovak State, did not haive a single representative in this ',undemocratic" National Assemlbly, the Masaryk and Benes Ozechs ignoring all claims on their ibehalf. Furthermore, so that no aimendrments might be made to the Constitution against the will o.f the Ozechs, it was decreed that a two-thirds majority would be required to amend it. After the National Assemfbly, picked lby Masaryk and Benes, ,r atified the Constitution, the .A!ssembly was <lissolved, ,a nd four weeks Jater new parliaimentary elections were held. Hlinka was elected while he was stiH in prison; after his election he was released. At the first session Hilir.uka and other Slovaik members of Parliament de-· mantled the implemtcntation of the Pittsburgh Pact, but were told that it was contrary to the Ozecho-S'lovak Constitution. Masaryk and Benes had control of everything. The few !Slovaks who went along with them - called Judas Slovaks ~v 'Slova;k patriots - were given highly paid po-· sitions in the !State administration, and the fiction of "Czechoslovak" unity was 1pushed in all corners of the earth . • Stating that "it is unnecessary to recount the details of the actual enactment of the Constitution," because today its temporary or transitional stipulations have lost their significance and do not require consideration," !Mr. Gra-· ham says (p. 114) : "Rather is it of interest to discern how the basic ideolo,gy underlying the repubHcan. regime was translated into fundamental law." And that ideology, continues Mr. Graham, "is admirably eX!pressed in the preamble of the Constitution, whose phraseology, strongly redolent of that of the .A!rnerican Constitution, is also in itself a synthesis of the political philosophy of Masaryk and Benes." Be that as- Mr. Graham says it is, hut it certainly is not a synthesis of the ,political philosophy of the Czech and 'Slovak nations. The preamble to the OzechoSlova'k Constitution reads: "We, the Czechoslovak nation, desiring to consolidate the perfect unity of our people, to establish t,he reign of justi ce in the Republic, �SLOVAKIA 62 to assure the peac,e ful development of our native Czechoslovak land, to con tribute to the common welfare of all citizens of this State, and to secure the blessings of. freedom to coming generations, have in our National A,ssembly adopted the following Cons titution for the Czechoslovak Republic and in doing so we decla.re that it will be our endeavor to s ee that this Constitution, to·g et•h er with all the laiws of our land, be carried out in the spirit of our history, as well as in the spkit of those modern principles embodied in the idea of selfdetermination, for we desir.e to take our place in the Family of Nations as a member at once cultured, peace-loving, democratic and progressive." To compare the "eX!act degree of American influence on the ideology," expressed in the foggy, intellectual tripe above, Mr. Graham footnotes the American preamble, which reads as follows: "WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, i n order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, -insure domestic tranquility, p:rovide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessirngs of Liberty to ourselves ·a nd our Posterity, do ordain and establish this ,Constitution for the United States of America." Now, the American preamble makes sense and reads like a song, but not so the Czecho-Slovak preamible. What is "perfect unity" if not perfect consolidation? And why should "We, the Czechoslovak nation" mean anything lbut "our people"? Or did the handpicked National Asse:mibly presume its.elf, and not "our people," to be the "Czechoslovalk nation"? It is significant that the Masaryk-B~nes constitution makers did not start the preamlble with "'WE THE PEOBLE oif the Czech0-:Sio,v ak 'State," or with "We the 1people of the Bohemian Crown Lands and 1Slo'Vakia," instead of with :the fiction "We, the OzechosloJVak nation"! Mr. Graham explains the Czecho-'Slovak preamlble in this manner: "The primorcliat principle enunciated is that of the unity of the nation, not as a goal to be attained, and therefore executory, but, so far as the Czechs ,and Slovaks were concerned, as an achievement to be consolidated. W•hat is important in this affirmation o.f achieved constitutional ml'ity is not only its validation of the acts of th€ October revolution . . . but particularly its absolute rejection of all separatist tendencies (,p. 115) __ . '1t w,a s not the, intent of the Czechoslovak founding fathers to create legal pediments for future racist or separatist movements by conceding to the inha:bitants of various p.rurts of the country dlifferential status" (p. 116). Mr. Graham somehow conveniently forgot that Cze- �SLOVAKIA 63 cho--Slovia;kia was supposed to be a federation, patterned after the United States or Switzerland. Nevertheless, he knew the "intent" of the "Czechoslorvak" founding fathers! Mr. Graham fouled UJP on the false premise of "unity" of the "Ozechoslovak" nation, which his fertile imagination traced all the way ibaok to the "medieval Bohemian State." (More Coming) • • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIIA THE NEW CASTLE OF LIPTOV Beneath the Slovak Tatras, under the ibowed head of Krivaii, in the valley of the serpentine Vah river, lies the hidden town of Liiptovsky Hradok (the Little Castle of Lipto,v) . :Lt is oompletely encircled by mountains and the red roofs of the dwellings are shariply contrasted iby the fresh green of the surrounding forests. The town has its name from the castle there which today is in ruins, its walls increasing the romanticism of the reigion. The fortress, situated on a plain and surrounded 1by a moat, was built by Magistrate Done, son of iDominic, at the ibeginning of the 14th century. It took twenty years to build. Novy Hrad (New Castle), as Liptovsky Hradok is called, is near the river Bela and behind it rises the cliff Skalka. The vicinity of Hradok was once an ancient forest; even today many forests exist there, the source of much of the wood which can be seen on rafts ,p lying the Vah during most of the year. The castle itself was a twowinged affair with a small courtyard with a well. The center of the northern wall is ,completely demolished; the western part resembles a wide bastion in which is pre~ served a vaulted room. Done, the original occwpant of the castle, did not enjoy it very long; he was followed hy many others. In 1398, the Moravian warrior Procopius s'eiized it and held it for a · short time; in 143·3 L:iiptovs:ky Hradok was ta:ken by the Hussites and held several months. When they were evicted in 141,1, the management of the castle was taken over 'by magistrate Ladislaus z .u:baie Riikolf; the latter had � 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 1955, Vol. 5 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 14), March 1955.</li> <li>Issue 2-3 (No. 15-16), June-September 1955.</li> <li>Issue 4 (No. 17), December 1955.</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 1955 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 55 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK ORAPTER V - "What Woodrow Wilson and America Meant to Czechoslovakia" - rb y Her:bert Adolphus Miller, .Ph.D., "Lecturer on Social Economy, Bryn Mawr College; Professor of Sociology; Oberlin College (1'914-1925), and Ohio State Universi,ty (1924-,1931) ; chief, Division of Immigrant !Heritages, Carnegie Cor,poration; director, MidEuropean Union; president, Masaryk Institut,e," etc. •~in the year 1914 the number of non-Czech and non-Slovak Americans who had intimate know,l edge of the Czechoslova,ks and their aspirations could almost 1h,ave been counted on the fingers or one hMlld. ,E ven up to 1M,ay, 1918, iwhen Thomas Garrigue !Masaryk came to Amer.lea, the New York Times •h ad not carried a single serious editorial on the Czec•hoslov,aks. When he left in December of that year, he was one of the acknowledged g;reat men of the war period and also president-e,l ect of a country soon to become of recognized importance in the family of nations" (p. 71). "lln the face of such ,a complete la,ck of information it waa imposs.ilble for the Ameri= people to give any help to a nationa:l cause. There w,as a traditional predisposition for Americans to be interested in ,freedom but it was necessary for the Czechs and Slovaks in the United States to estahlish their rigiht to freedom" (p. 72). This chapter confirms the story that "Czecho-Slovakia" was a state 'born out of propaganda. Masaryk, the un. known "even up to May 1918," became a celebrated rpoJitical figure 1by DecemJber 1918. it all happened !because Masaryk got to know the "right" people, who in turn got the U. 1S. Army, the YlMCA and the YWCA, the New York 'l'imes, Woodrow Wilson, the ivarious sectarian churches, etc., to push the estrublishment of the state proposed by Masaryk ,a nd Benes. lgnorance of the facts, as usual in such cases, ,p layed a very, if not the most important role. "As often hruppens in such cases, the less knowledge, the greater the enthusioom," M:asary,k himself wrote in his "The M81king of a 1State" (rS vetova revoluce). Professor Miller unlblu:.shingly describes the role he played to put Masaryk's ideas across to the American pulblic and the American Government. 56 SLOVAKIA This chapter should have been titled "What Woodro,w Wilson and America Meant to· Masaryk, Benes and the Czechs." True, without Wilson and America Ozecho-Sloivakia would not have been born, lbut the fact nevertheless is that Ozecho-Slo,vaikia served the interests of the Masaryik and Benes Ozechs more than it did the interests of the vast mrujority of the population of that Republic. When MajooGenera1 E. F. Glenn, commander of the iDivision invited Mr. iMiHer "again to discuss what oould be done rubout reestablishing an eastern front through revolutionary activity," Mr. Miller arranged 1a meeting of the "leaders of the various g;roups of central Europe' (p. 76). And who, do you suppose, represented the .Slovaiks? '.Dwo Ozechs to whom Mr. 'Miller does not refer as Czechs, lbut simply states: "Charles Pergler and Professor Pisecky reipresented the Czecho-1Slovaik1s." With Miller, much like most of the other writers on Czecho-:Slovakia, just albout everything is "Czech," and "Slovak" is only casually mentioned. An illustration: "Att·ention then was turn-ed to the education of public opinion. The story was told to the !Committee on 'Public ,Information, and immediately the national aspirations of the Czechs, Poles, and Jugoslavs began to get space in the new,s,papers. . . Americ,a n public opiruion wa;s stimulated, first, by what the Czechs themselves did in America fr.om the very beginning of the war, ,a nd then later in Europe; and, secondly, through the immediate acceptance of Professor Masaryk (pp. 76-77) . . . . The ,Czech colonies in Chicago, Cle~land, Cedar Rap'ids, and many other pl:aces had Jon,g b een organized and respected. At the outbreak of the war they got into action. The Czech National Alliance w,as formed on August 18, 1914, with the purpos-e of informing the people of America and Europe of the just demands of the Czech nation for independence. Very soon the conflicting elements of ,Oa;tholics and anti-Catholics that had long divided the Czechs wer,e ,brought together, and soon afterwards the Slovaks came in" (p. 73). The :Slovak League of America, which rp layed just as active, if not a more active part than the Czech organizations for the estaJblishment of the Ozecho-SloivaJk (Republic, simply was ignored by 'M;r. Miller. Slovak colonies and the Slovak organi,z ations a:fifiliated with the iSlovak Lea,gue of America meant nothing to Mr. Miller. The tendency is only too obvious. Then, too,. Mr. Miller would have us believe that Masaryk was spontaneously a:cclaimed and "immediaite1y 57 SLOVAKIA accepted" 1by Slovaks and Czechs everywhere in America. The fact is that he was not. Czech and Slovruk Catholic leader~ in America knew how Masaryk felt aibout Catholicism (Rome must lbe tried and convicted! Away f:rom Rome!) and <killed him at length about the status of religion in the !proposed Czecho-:Slovak Republic. The Slovaks were not satisfied with Masarylk's oral picture of the status of ·Slovakia within the iRepulblic ; to win them over he met with them, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement, !May 30, 1918, which ,g uaranteed the SlOIVaks autonomy (IState.s' rights) ,w ithin the framework o,f OzechoSlova!kia. The artificial sibate, created by ipropaganda, fell apart li:ke a house .o f cards when it faced its fkst crisis. Miller and others, who rpushed the principles. of self-<letermination for the Ozechs, did not follow through to apply the principle to other nations. What followed was inevitable. OH.APTER VI - "The Historical Roots of Czech Democracy" - /by Hans Kohn, J.D. , "professo;z- of Modern European History, Smith College; J.D., German University of Prague; visiting Lecturer on Internationia;l Relations, Harvard University (19317-1938) ; Guggenheim ·F ellow (19401941); author of numerous 'boo~s and articles, among them: A History of NaJtionalisim in the East (192,9); Na-tiona:lism and Imperialism in the Hither East (1932); Na-, tionalism in the !Soviet Union (1933) ; Orient and Occident (1934); West(ern Civilization in the Near East (1936); iForce of Reason (1937); Revolutions and -DictaJtorships (1939) ." This is strictly another Czech chapter. In it Professor Kohn does not concern himself with the "historical roots of 'SlovaJk [)emocracy." How this cha,pter lbecaime a 1part of the history of Ozecho-Slovakia, without a corresponding Slovak cha!pter might best be expf.ained by Kerner, who sought out the authors of the chapters of the lbook he edited and published. Kerner ,p robably could not find a Czech to do it. The whole narrative rrevol,ves around 1F rantisek P,a l,a cky, "who was much more than the first great Czech historian." PalMky, "the father of modern Czech nationalism," gave to the Czechs the "sense of a mission, a raison d'etre 1 58 SLOVAKIA for the aspiration to take anew their place o,n the field of history"; his interpretat ion of the Czech i)ast "created the secure foundation for Czech democracy " and became a "living intellectual tradition, ,v italizing all manifestati ons. of Czech life." 'Palaoky "deeply steeped in the moral philosoiphy of Kant," set himself to the task of "reinterpre ting" Czech history, so that he might make "the Czech Reformatio n the culminatio n and the meaning of Czech history, the decisive .period of which ,b egan with Jan Hus and the Hussite movement and experience d its last and most sUJblime flowering on the Czech Brethren." T. G. Masaryk, Palacky's "great disciple," Mr. Kohn tells us, "saw rightly not only that Palacky had educated the Czech people .to democracy , but that he had established in the eyes of Europe the Hussite refonnatio n as the most valid Czech title to recognition" (p. 104). But he tells us that "T. G. Masaryk points out rightly in his Palackeho idea naroda ceskeho (Prague, 1926; pp. 42 f.) 'the conviction that the Czech people cannot become politically independent is one of the fundament al political conceptions of Palacky'." The Palacky-Ma sary;k conception of Czech history is adhered to lby Mr. Kohn, even though it was criticized by the eminent Czech historian, Josef 'Pekar, as a falsificatio n of Czech history. The chapter by Mr. Kohn he1ps prove that Czecho-Slo vakia was a political mon_, strosity. OHA!PTER V!III - "Constitutional and Political Structure" - By iMalbone W. Graham, Ph.D., "Professor of Political :Science, University of California, Los Angeles; member, Advisory Committee, Institute of Czechoslovak Studies, Columbia University (1925); member, European Con• ference of American tProfessors of Internation al Law and Relations (1926); member of numecrous American learned societies; author of New Governmen ts of Central :Eiurope (1924) ; New Governmen ts of Eastern Europe (1927) ; The Soviet 1S ecurity System (1929); The League of Nations and the Recognitio n of States (1933); In Quest of a Law of Recognitio n (1933); The Soviet Union and Peace (1935) ," etc. SLOVAKIA 59 "The medieval Bohemian State, whose overthrow at the hands of the iHabsburgs closed a long chapter in Czechoslovak national development and opened a darker one of subjugation, was, if only by (p. 106). its historical origins, essenti-ally a feudal structure" - The very first sentence of Mr. Graham's chapter reveals what is coming. What is the connection !between the "Bohemian" State and the ISlava:ks? 1Since there is none, how could the destruction o,f the "Bohemian" !State close "a long ,c hapter in CZECHOSLOVAK national development"? ·F or what purpo,s e did Mr. Graham resort to this falsification of history? To us it is quite obvious that here "Czechoslova k" means "Czech." 'But, Mr. Graham, apparently was more interested in building up the "antiquity" of the "Czechoslovak " business of chauvinistic ~echs (political reconstruction of the Czechoslo:vak State) than he was in relating historical facts. "In its ent from its strument of constituent • genesis, the Constitution of Czochoslovakia was differcompeers of the postwar period. Whereas every other ingovernment was the -product of a democratically elected assembly, the Czechoslovak Constitution was brought into being without elections, by a strictly national assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process. This apparently anti-democratic procedure was occasioned by the necessity of having availab le for the country from the outset a body with plen,a ry authority and full responsibility for its actions. At the moment the future boundaries of the new state were undecided, and elections could not be held lawfully in unassigned territory. Moreover, the institutional flux accompanying the wholesale liquidation of the Habsburg Monarchy ,c alled for the prompt creation of _a. substitute authority - stable, definite and unchallenged. This the Czechoslovak National Assembly supplied. It was a unicameral ·body made up of the Reichsrat representatives from the Bohemian, Moravian, and .Silesian Crown Lands, ai;; .el ected in 1911. Taking this prewar standard of political normalcy as a point of departure, in accordance with the prescriptions of Emperor Oharles's Federalization Manifesto of October 10, 1938, the Czech leaders awaited the formal adhesion of the Slovaks to tire new state, by the [)oclaration of Turciansky Sv. Martin of October 31, 1918, then coopted a bloc of fifty-five Slovaks into the body to give fundamental represe<ntation to that part of the Czechoslovak nation which, under Hungarian rule, had been deprived of virtually all means of political self-exvression. Later, when the definite boundaries of the country had been laid down in the draft treaty of Trianon with Hungary, addit'ional representatives were allotted to Slovakia" - (p. 109). Simple was it not? The "democracy" of Masaryk and Benes was given a Constitution about which the peoples of 60 SLOVAKIA Czecho ..Slova:kia had nothing to say. The new "democratic" State was just ,b orn and already "undemocratic" methods were resorted to. It is significant .that Professor Graham should try to excuse it or act as an apologist for it. That is not the task of a true historian. What does he mean by saying that the Czecho-1Slova:k Constitution was brought into being "by a strictly natlonal assembly created through a distinctive cooperative process"? I,f Mr. Graham did not know the details of how the Czecho-SlovaJk Constitution was brought into 1b eing, why did he attempt to write about it? Who were the Slovaks coopted by the Czech leaders into the "Czechoslovak National Assembly" to give fundamental representation TO THE PART OF THE CZECHOSLOVAK Nation ... m:ider Hungarian rule"? Did not Mr. G:mhaim 1know that Benes and other Czechs presumed to represent the Slovaks? It should ibe significant, too, that the Slovaks declared their "formal adhesion to the new State" on October 31, 1918, that is, three days after the independence of Czecho-Slovakia was proclaimed, by the Czech •Mruffia in Prague. There was no "Czechoslo,vaik nation" - ethnically or politically s:peaking - before the b.irth of Ozecho-:Slorvaikia, so how could the Slo,va!ks be a part of it? The implication seems to be that the run.democratic "Czechoslo1vaJk Constitution" created such a nation. "AH formal aspects aside, however," continues Mr. Graham (,p. 11), "the assemlbly which adopted lboth the provisional and deifinibve constitutions for the Czechoslovak StaJte was decidedly national, that is, fully representative of the political currents at work in the prewar life of the nation . .." But the historical fact is that the "lawful" represen. tatives, who prepared. and voted the Czecho-'Slova:k Constitution, were anything but lawful. We know that the members of the National Assembly, the first Czecho-Slovak Parliament, were not elected, but handpicked by the political clique headed lby Masaryk and Benes, who came into po:wer only with the help of the AHies. When the Constitution of Czecho ..SlovaJkia was approved on February 29, 1920, Slovakia was occupied by the Czech army and Andrew HJinka, leader of the Slovaks in their fight for freedom and inde- SLOVAKIA 61 pendence, was still in a Czech prison at Mirov in -Moraivia. The Germans and Hungarians, as well as people of other nations in the new Czecho-!Slovak State, did not haive a single representative in this ',undemocratic" National Assemlbly, the Masaryk and Benes Ozechs ignoring all claims on their ibehalf. Furthermore, so that no aimendrments might be made to the Constitution against the will o.f the Ozechs, it was decreed that a two-thirds majority would be required to amend it. After the National Assemfbly, picked lby Masaryk and Benes, ,r atified the Constitution, the .A!ssembly was <lissolved, ,a nd four weeks Jater new parliaimentary elections were held. Hlinka was elected while he was stiH in prison; after his election he was released. At the first session Hilir.uka and other Slovaik members of Parliament de-· mantled the implemtcntation of the Pittsburgh Pact, but were told that it was contrary to the Ozecho-S'lovak Constitution. Masaryk and Benes had control of everything. The few !Slovaks who went along with them - called Judas Slovaks ~v 'Slova;k patriots - were given highly paid po-· sitions in the !State administration, and the fiction of "Czechoslovak" unity was 1pushed in all corners of the earth . • Stating that "it is unnecessary to recount the details of the actual enactment of the Constitution," because today its temporary or transitional stipulations have lost their significance and do not require consideration," !Mr. Gra-· ham says (p. 114) : "Rather is it of interest to discern how the basic ideolo,gy underlying the repubHcan. regime was translated into fundamental law." And that ideology, continues Mr. Graham, "is admirably eX!pressed in the preamble of the Constitution, whose phraseology, strongly redolent of that of the .A!rnerican Constitution, is also in itself a synthesis of the political philosophy of Masaryk and Benes." Be that as- Mr. Graham says it is, hut it certainly is not a synthesis of the ,political philosophy of the Czech and 'Slovak nations. The preamble to the OzechoSlova'k Constitution reads: "We, the Czechoslovak nation, desiring to consolidate the perfect unity of our people, to establish t,he reign of justi ce in the Republic, SLOVAKIA 62 to assure the peac,e ful development of our native Czechoslovak land, to con tribute to the common welfare of all citizens of this State, and to secure the blessings of. freedom to coming generations, have in our National A,ssembly adopted the following Cons titution for the Czechoslovak Republic and in doing so we decla.re that it will be our endeavor to s ee that this Constitution, to·g et•h er with all the laiws of our land, be carried out in the spirit of our history, as well as in the spkit of those modern principles embodied in the idea of selfdetermination, for we desir.e to take our place in the Family of Nations as a member at once cultured, peace-loving, democratic and progressive." To compare the "eX!act degree of American influence on the ideology," expressed in the foggy, intellectual tripe above, Mr. Graham footnotes the American preamble, which reads as follows: "WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, i n order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, -insure domestic tranquility, p:rovide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessirngs of Liberty to ourselves ·a nd our Posterity, do ordain and establish this ,Constitution for the United States of America." Now, the American preamble makes sense and reads like a song, but not so the Czecho-Slovak preamible. What is "perfect unity" if not perfect consolidation? And why should "We, the Czechoslovak nation" mean anything lbut "our people"? Or did the handpicked National Asse:mibly presume its.elf, and not "our people," to be the "Czechoslovalk nation"? It is significant that the Masaryk-B~nes constitution makers did not start the preamlble with "'WE THE PEOBLE oif the Czech0-:Sio,v ak 'State," or with "We the 1people of the Bohemian Crown Lands and 1Slo'Vakia," instead of with :the fiction "We, the OzechosloJVak nation"! Mr. Graham explains the Czecho-'Slovak preamlble in this manner: "The primorcliat principle enunciated is that of the unity of the nation, not as a goal to be attained, and therefore executory, but, so far as the Czechs ,and Slovaks were concerned, as an achievement to be consolidated. W•hat is important in this affirmation o.f achieved constitutional ml'ity is not only its validation of the acts of th€ October revolution . . . but particularly its absolute rejection of all separatist tendencies (,p. 115) __ . '1t w,a s not the, intent of the Czechoslovak founding fathers to create legal pediments for future racist or separatist movements by conceding to the inha:bitants of various p.rurts of the country dlifferential status" (p. 116). Mr. Graham somehow conveniently forgot that Cze- SLOVAKIA 63 cho--Slovia;kia was supposed to be a federation, patterned after the United States or Switzerland. Nevertheless, he knew the "intent" of the "Czechoslorvak" founding fathers! Mr. Graham fouled UJP on the false premise of "unity" of the "Ozechoslovak" nation, which his fertile imagination traced all the way ibaok to the "medieval Bohemian State." (More Coming) • • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIIA THE NEW CASTLE OF LIPTOV Beneath the Slovak Tatras, under the ibowed head of Krivaii, in the valley of the serpentine Vah river, lies the hidden town of Liiptovsky Hradok (the Little Castle of Lipto,v) . :Lt is oompletely encircled by mountains and the red roofs of the dwellings are shariply contrasted iby the fresh green of the surrounding forests. The town has its name from the castle there which today is in ruins, its walls increasing the romanticism of the reigion. The fortress, situated on a plain and surrounded 1by a moat, was built by Magistrate Done, son of iDominic, at the ibeginning of the 14th century. It took twenty years to build. Novy Hrad (New Castle), as Liptovsky Hradok is called, is near the river Bela and behind it rises the cliff Skalka. The vicinity of Hradok was once an ancient forest; even today many forests exist there, the source of much of the wood which can be seen on rafts ,p lying the Vah during most of the year. The castle itself was a twowinged affair with a small courtyard with a well. The center of the northern wall is ,completely demolished; the western part resembles a wide bastion in which is pre~ served a vaulted room. Done, the original occwpant of the castle, did not enjoy it very long; he was followed hy many others. In 1398, the Moravian warrior Procopius s'eiized it and held it for a · short time; in 143·3 L:iiptovs:ky Hradok was ta:ken by the Hussites and held several months. When they were evicted in 141,1, the management of the castle was taken over 'by magistrate Ladislaus z .u:baie Riikolf; the latter had  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (2/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 5, No. 4 (17), December 1955 pp. 55-63 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 1955 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/186">Vol. 5, No. 2-3 (15-16), pp. 38-62</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/222">Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), pp. 57-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9cccf38bc22879e70dd339fdc97c1403.pdf 3399f86f31024434dee12664ff3567f9 PDF Text Text 38 SLOVAKIA HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P. A. HIROBAK In 1'9149, the Uniiversity of California Press, ipulblished the "third printing" of the !book "CZEOHOSW VAKIA" (504 pages) which was edited iby Rolbert J. Kerner, Sather professor of history in the Unilversity :of California. 'Dhe book was made ipossilble, ,p rofessor Kerner states in his preface, iby "the oolla!boration of twenty distinguished and alble scholiars and writers" and that, concludes Mir. Kerner, "has made it ;possiible to present a vo1ume ,which is an honest, unprejudiced:, and frank appraisal of the important contrilbution which the Czechoslovak nation made to the history of our time in its two short decades of independence between two world wars." Just how honest, unprejudiced and frank that aipp:r,aisal of the "important" contribution is, the ireader may be a;ble to g,ather from what follows here and arrive at the condusion, stated so aiptly iby professor Kerner, that, indeed, "few nations, if any can show such a record" or, possibly, go a bit .farther and state cate.gorically that, indeed, no niation can show .such a record! But how honest and unprejudiced are "distinguished and able scholars" who set out to do a job beyond their competency? Can a distinguished historian write a true history of CZIDCH0-1SUOVAKITA without a thorough lmowledge of the SlovaJks and the land they 'haive occupied during the past 1500 years? And yet that is exaotly what the "twenty distinguished and aJble scholars and writers" of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia" did to ,produce something which, in his opinion, was "hQlrulst, unprejudiced" ! Kerner's "Ozechoslovikia' is dirvided into six parts, but the tendency in all parts is much the same: strictly Czech. Kerner should haive named the 1b ook "Czechia," t'hen the wonk might ibe called, by a stretch of the imagination, a semlblance of something "hlOlll.est and unprejudiced." Otherwise, informed readers know rthat it definitely is not, and the uninformed axe cruelly deceived. The s~gniificance of this may be !better understood when we glance at the remarkaible selection of books in the sug- �SLOVAKIA 39 geeted bibliog,r aphy at the end of each cha;pter. The list is rema.r.kaJble not only for the !books and literary woi,ks included, but for the 1bodks and literary works omitted. The impression created is that the Slovruks had no ,w riters of a!lly impor-t and that no sourees of informatiO!ll on their history are availruble. iBut that i.'S not so. '.Dhis proves that the "twenty distinguished a:nd able scholars and writers," who collalborated with Kerner .cm his "Czechoslovakia" were little or not at all concerned with the history of the Sl01Vak people and their land. To magnify and glorify the history of the Ozechs and minimize, practically ignore, the history of the Slavruks, certainly cannot be the aim of an honest, UDJprejudiced and abjecti;ve writer of Ozecho~lovak history. Ozecho-Blovakia, as presented ,b y Kerner and his "twenty distinguished and aJble .s cholars and writers," does not give us a true picture of Czech-0-1Slovakia; it is not a true history of the Ozechs and SlOIV'aJks and their lands; it is definitely more propaga:nda than history - in line with other .such wm,ks which were promoted by the propaganda apparatus of Prag,ue. !Students of history should not 'be exposed to faJsifications and distortions of history, su<!h as that exemplified ·b y Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," because. that does not make for the truth, or for better relations ibetween the Ozechs and the Slovalks, or for a ·pr.oper understanding of those nations. I do not want to say unequirvocally that the writers who collaborated to produce Kerner's "Ozechoslovrukia" were knowingly dishonest ,a nd prejudiced, but their work co.n,vinced me definitely that ,w ittingly or uniwitti.ngly they did ibeoome Ozech propa:gandists. The writers have an undu:ly high regard for the chairacter and accomplishments of T. G. Masaryk amd Benes and the Ozechs in general, without an equa:lJy high reg,aro for facts, and little or no regard for the Slorvaks and their history. ,M ost writers of Ozeolio..Slovaik history and "Ozecho..slovak" democracy (IS. Harrison Thomson, Joseph S. Roucek, Herbert AdolJphus ,Miller, Brackett Lewis, among them), follow the Ozech line of T. G. Masaryik and Ed- �40 SLOVAKIA ward Benes and their governmeints ,w ho ,c ontrolled the entire propaganda apparatus• o;f ,Czecho-1Slov8Jkia. This Masaryk~enes line was and e;ve:n now is adhered to iby exchange students and iprofessors, heads of official and unofficial information !bureaus, the America.n Institute in Prague, the YMCA and YWCA of 0zecho-Slovrukia and other countries, the "OzechoslQIViruk N ationa,1- Ohurch" (strictly a Czech enteriprise) and most other religious sects, and practically all "eminent" writers, scholars and correspondents. And today the governments of all countries of the ,w orld still lbase their knowledge 'Of OzechoSlovakia and the vario:us nations that comprise it on the information supplied by the state propaganda apparatUJS of T. G. iMasaryk and Edward Benes. The import Ol:f this will undouibtedly be appreciated iby students of history, and even historians themselves, if they rememlber that this line has been followed and ipvopagaJted for ·a t least the past thirty-seven years. Accordirrrgly, the Czechs are a "historical" nation, while the SlovaJks are oruy a •~branch" of it and their language just a "dialect" orf the Czech. Ridiculous attempts are made to trace the histo,r y of the non-.existent "Ozechoslovruk" nation to the times of the Great Moravian Empire ,a nd Sts. Cyril and [Methodius. The "CzechoslOW!Jks" are supposed to 1b e the nation of Hus, Masaryk, and Benes, but also the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methoilius, WenceslaUJS and Ludlmila. The Ozechs, however, are ",p rogressive" Catholics and the 1Slovruks "reactionary" Catholics. ,F rom officiail statistics we learn how many Poles, Germruns, Jews, 'Magyars and Uikrainians there Weir'e iin Czecho-1Slovakia at any ,g iven time,. but not how many ,SlQIVlaks. That is explained ruway by the s1Jateme.nt th:at the Slovaks were not considered a tminority, hence, they were included under the category of "0zechosloivaiks." The latter term, however, is terr1bly l<_?ng, so the shorter "Czech" is used in many in,stainces as an "aJbbreviation." The term "Slovalk" could not •b e us.ed, I suppose, because it has O'Ile more letter than "Czech"! When statistics do, however, mention Czechs and .Slovaks se,pairately, the figures are in- �SLOVAKIA 41 variably magnified on bhe Ozech side and minim1zed on the Slovak side. The !Magyars were experts at this sort of "mathematics" long before Ozecho-iSlova!kia was !born. The tendency is too olbviou.s. Many distinguished and aJble scholars and writers of the tyipe mentioned lby Kerner, can tell us exactly wh&e and albout when the Czechs, Poles, Russians, Slovenians, Croatians, rSe11bs, etc., fust settled in their respective territories, lbut, it seems, they cannot even venture a.in honest guess when it comes to the Slovaks. I say again: the tendency is dl:wious. They tell us that the Great Moraivian Empilre was the prede•cessor of the Czecho-Slol\TaJk RepU!blic, a Czech venttl!re, when in fact it was not. The Slova:ks, their predecesors that is, occupied both sides of the Morawa River at that time (whence, the name of :the empire) aind, hence, formed the very heart of the shor-Uived emipire, which was destroyed by the GermaJI1s with the aid of the Ozechs who had settled in, Bohemia, the land of the Boii. And we used to hear and read aJboot the "Crown lands of Bohemia," lbut now it seems to be the mode in "1p rogress,ive" historical ch'cles, to use the expression "Crech crown lands." I repeat : the tendency is only too. ohvio.us. The Czechs are not and do, not ,wa,,nt to be Slovaks a,nd, co,ruversely, the Slorva'ks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The SlovaJks .a nd the Ozechs did not have a common history, language, culture and tradition du.ring the past 1500 years, ~ause they did not occupy the same territQry. In a word, the Cizechs 0JI1d the Sl01Vaks developed sepaJTa tely and are, therefore, two distinct ethnic nations. 'l'he Slovaks never were, nor are they now, a "part" of the Czech nation. This simple truth, recognized 'by fille Czechs and SlOIVaJks themselves for many centuries ;past, should also be recognized lby "distinguished and alble scholars ood writers" of our time. It is tiiue that the SlovaJks formed a common political State with the Czechs in 19'.18, but only on certain conditions, the most important of which was that they would be a completely autonomous unit of the Ozecho-SlovaJk �42 SLOV.AKIA federatio.n, that is, that they would en~oy full states' rights. The condition not obeiirrg fulfilled, spelled the end of OrechoSlovaJkia. Because Benes insisted that the Czechs be the "stat~ation," Czecho-Slo1vaJk ia was doomed to perdition. Today the Slovaks do not want to be contained in any common State wti.th the Czechs or any other foreign nation. They can be kept so temporarily only lby force. !But that is not what the "distinguished and aJble sch~lars and writers" who oo1lalboraJted with professor Kerner tell us in the book "CzechoslovaJkia." Propaganda oa.- history? Let us anailyize Kerner's ''Czechoslovakia" chapter by chapter to prove our contentions. But let me note first t!hat on page xvii, at the end of the "contents," professor Kerner tells us how to pronounce "Czech" (not "Czechoslovak," mind you) letters; and on p. xxi, the poem by Edna St. Vincent Millay is entitled "Ozecho-iSlovakia" (:not "Czechoslovalkia") , which b,rings uip the question of hyphenization of the 1political state of tihe 1SlovaJks and the Czechs which was 'b orn iln 1918. The treaty 1b y which Czecho--Slova1kia came into being spelled ithe name with a hyphen to indicate that two indiividual ethnic entities, two distinct nations, 'had formed one political state. The hyiphen was dropped lby Masaryk and Ben-es and their followers. Whether the hyphen was J.eft in the title of the ipoem because of the author's insistence, or prof. Kerner's "careless" editing, I do not know, but it is singular that the hyphen should a;ppear in a book liike "Ozechoslova;lcia" at all! 1 • "C~ECHOSLOVA:KIA, Part I: BACKGROUND Chapter I-"The Czechoslovaiks-Anthropol ogical Notes . .." By Ales Hrdlfclka, M.D., Sc.D., Gura.tor, Division of Physical Anthropology, United States National Museum; Huxley 'Medal Lecturer, London (1927) ; memlber, National Academy of Scien-ces; honorary Doctor of 1S cience (Prague, Br.no)," etc., etc. Please not.e: The underscoring here and in the following is mine. "The term Czechoslovak ,i,s o! r ecen t coinage, dating from 1918, l\·hen the united Cze chs and Slovaks proclaimed. thei r independence of the Dual Mon,archy and th eir est abHshmi:mt of the Czeohoslovak �SLOVAKIA 43 Republic. . . . 'Illie name Czech (pronounced Chekh) ls derived, accord Ing to an old tradition, from the chiefta&n of the main Slav tribe who brought them some time during the dawn, of ihistory probably in tihe fifth cent\.U'ly A.!D. - to the heart of the land (IP, 3) . . . In fact, the hLstoTY of the Czechoslovak tribes, from the dawn of written ,r ecords to the present day, has •be.en one of ever.Jiasting struggles ·a.galns,t dnvooers (PP. 4.-5) . . . Tihe Slovaks, who u.p to 1029 formed a unit with Moravia, were then torn away by the Ma• gya,rs, isolated from the west, for,c ed .away from the best grounds iu the warm •lolwland,s, and eventuaUy repressed. in every way" (p. 6). It is evident that even Dr. Ales Hrrdli6ka, distinguished ,anthropologist of ~ech origin, :seems to be a bit confused about when the "Czechslovruks" came into being. Whether the Ozechs -are descendants ,of the "main. 'Slav trilbe" is open to ·question. The 'SlO!Vaks fo:nrned a "unit" with Moravia up to. 1029, according to Hrdlicka, 1but who the people were who settled in Morruvia is Jeft to the reader. Mora,via, of ooUTse, came under the influence of the Ozechs in time, at least the western portion of it, :b ut was not settled lby the Ozechs when the .Slovruks formed a unit with it, for the simple reason, it seems, that the for~ fathers of ithe Slovaiks settled on iboth sides of the river Morava, w'hile the Ozechs settled in fue J.and of the Boii, which was a distinot geographical unit, ,prolbaJbly a/bout the size of present-day Bohemia . • "The Czechoslovaks to 1620'' - ,b y S. Harrison Thomson, Ph ..D., BLitt. - Professor of Medieval History, Unirversity of Co-lorado; Ph.D., Charles Uni'Vers,ty, Prague; B.Litt., Omord University; Ewtor, Magistri Johannis Hus Tractatus Res-ponsivus; Johannis Wyclif Summa de Ente (1930) ;" etc., etc. CI:I\A.PrIDR III - "Led ,b y a travelln,g IFI'lankish merchant, Samo, tihe Slavic tribes freed themselves ,from the Av,a r rule, and chose Samo for their •k ing (623-624) . . . This ,e arly kingdom, which would appea,r to !have been pr.emature, iw,as ,neither Czech nor Slovak. It would have to be called Western ·s1av, ,b y .reason or a large intermixture of Slavic tribes which became gra.dua:l!y differentiated as they settled in different local!tes . . . The names of the princess Llbuiie and the peasant Premysl whom she cih ose to be her husband are in all proba• bility tJhe names of real persons. At any rate ,t he male descendants or this ,s-emilegendaxy .Pfemysl were to rule over ,Bohemia and neighboring regions until 1306 . . . It is not certain whether tihe Slavic chi,eftalne. enga,ged at this time to pay .tribute to the Fr,alllk.is~ emperor or not" (P. 9). �SLOVAKIA 44 Id: Samo, the "traveling 1F ranlkish merchant," established a kingdom, he necessarily must hruve stopped traveling somewhere, and that "somewhere" ,w as on territory occupied 'by "S1'arvic" tr.i!bes, out of which later a certain nation, or certain nations, arose. ,s amo's kingdom was not on the territory settled by the Czechs or other Sla-vonic peoples, 1b ut Olll the terri1lory settled by the "Slavs" who were later oalled ISlorvaks. Fredegar's Chronicles seem to indicate as much (THIE ISI.JOV~S AND !UNG SAMO'S EMiP]RE, by iDr. Henrich Bartelk, SU)VA.KIA, June 1954). The "Slavic trilbes" whioh ibecame gradually differentiated as they settled in "different localities" could not be identical witll the "Slruvic tribes" which remained on the territory of ISrum<>'s kingdom and, later, came to ~ ca1led the SlovaJks. As far ,as, the Ozech "Llbuse and Pfemysl" are concerned, let us talke the word Olf learned Czechs that they were legendary characters ("Ottuv SLOVN1K NAUONY," Vol.. XV, p. 1038; Vol. XX, rp. 625). We might a.loo concede, without offending historical truth, t!hat all "1S1'avic" chieftains, including the forefathers of the 'Czechs, paid tribute to the Frankish emperor, when he was strong enough to exact it. Why should the 'Slavs of Bohemia" be an exception? II t seems that professor Harrison is interested in building up a case for the Czechs to prove that they were completely independent during the time of Charlemagne (8th-9th cenrtury). Why? 1 • "Later in the ,c entury (846) !Louis the German su,bju,g-ated Mora. 11ia, •b ut suffered defeat wihen he ,a ttacked the Slavs of Bohemia. Th1s ,a ttack of tLouis the German n,vas directed ,against the empire of the Moravian prince Mojmir, who had shown rem arkable abllity in consolidating his rule south, east •a nd west to include southern Poland, Silesia, Bohemia, Moravia, and the valleys of the middle Danube and Theiss rivers a,s far as the northern boundaries of the Byzantine Empil'e . .. After the death of Svato,pluk (894) the Moravian Empire rapidly broke up into its component parts. The Czech princes of the Pi'emyslide line .gained independence for Bohemia, and the Magyars, new arrivals dn. t,he east, -extended llieir power over n~rthern Pannonia. German's and Slavs, united for the moment, were de• feated by the Ma,gyars in 907 neax (Bratislava (Pressburg), and the ruin of the Moravian state was complete" (P. 10). Louis subjugaited iMoravia, but was defeated by the "Slavs of Bohemia," which means that the latter were not �SLOVAKIA 45 identioal with the Slavs of Moravia, who were ruled by Mojmir. !Professor !Harrison also tells us that Mojmir, the Moravian prince, consolidated his rule by consolidating various ISlmrianic ('Slavic) trilbes, including those of Bohemia. This Mojmir did by force. It is significant that Harrison does not refer to Mojmir as a "Slovak" ,p rince, though he does not hesitate to say that 'Czech" princes gained independence fur Bohemia. He also omits to say that the Czechs, not the ",Slavs of Bohemia," mind you, gained their independence by !breaking ·a way from ,t he !MO!'aJVian Empire in 895, :aJfter the death of S,v atopluk. The Czechs, then, heliped to destro¥ the integrity of the Grea,t Moravian ffimpire, the heart of which ,was in Slovak country, the country of the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia. In 900 the Czechs, the Slavs of Bohemia, together with the Germans, invaded the territory of the Sl01VaJks, the Slavs of Great Moravia, aJild after a terrific /battle forced !Mojmir II to sue for peace. Svatoplulk's three sons, ruling various areas of the Empire and constantly •a t each others throats, contributed greatly to the dissolution of Great Moravia. When the !Magyars moved into northern IPannonia, they met with little resistance, lbut professor Harriso n neglects to say what people settled in northern Pannonia, even though history tells us that the forefathers of the Slovaks occu'Pied tha.t territooy at the time. And where professor Harrison found the legend that "Germans and Slavs, uni.ted for the moment,." tried to save t!he Great Morawian Empire from falling into the hands of the Magyars in 907, he does !IlOt say. As mentioned rubove, the Germans, and the 'Slavs of Bohemia" (the Coochs) contributed to the downfall of Great Morawia. It is not, I thinlk, unreasonaJble to say that if the Germans and Slavs were really united to sruve the Moravian Em'Pire from falling into the hands of the Magyars, the latter would hardly have taken what was left of it in 907. Careless reporting of history? Probably, ·b ut to me it seems to be tendencious and puTposeful. Professor Harrison, it seems, was doing a jolb for the Brague regime and �46 SLOVAKIA the Ozechs. This is all the more obvious in his !book "Czechoslovakia in EmQpean H!istory" (Princeton Uniiversity Press, 1943, 1195'3), for which Harrison was ·aJWarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize for Literature" in 1944, when the Ozecho-1Slova'k State factually did not exist for five years. 'Dhe award was made iby Dr. Benes's ·g overnmentin.J..ondon at the Uni:versity Clulb in New Yorik, Decem.lber 30, 1944. • •~remysl Otaka.r [ (1197-1230:) was able to use circumstances for the •b enefit of his dynrusty and the Czech kingdom . . . iHe shifted his allegiance four times. eadh time gaining conoession:s or confirmation of eonc-essions .previously granted ,b y another claimant to the throne . . . . But to Pfomysl must be assigned the responsibility for inviting tJhe German immig,r ation. Encouraged by the court, many Czech nobles. had married Germ,a;n ,w omen; some of the best positions of the ·churoh in ,Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; ·German mf.nnesin,g ers ,w,ere in high favor at the royal court and at the courts of the Ticher nobles" (P. 13). Here professor !Harrison tells us tJhat 1P rem.ysl Otakar was quite a "shifity" ruler, using circumstances for the benefit of his dynasty and the "Czech" kingdom, not the "Boh,emian" ikingdom, but favored German immigration, and "Czech" (not Bohemian) ndbles married: German women, and some of the best ;positions of ,t he Church in Bohemia and Moravia were held lby German clerics, etc. It is evident here rthat professor Harrison cannot make up his mind whether the Bohemians were Ozechs or GelUllans, or both! It is quite clear, however, that the Slovaiks, the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia, did not .fit into the picture of the "Cz,ech" ikingdom at that ,t ime. The twenty ipa,ges of Kerner's "OzechosloivaJlda" taken up iby Harrison's "'IJhe Czechoolovaks to 1620" use the word Slovak(ia) some seven times and, therefore, repudiate the idea, insinuation or implication, that .there were any "Czechoslovaks" up ,t o 1620. Not only that, but for Harrison, it seems, the ISlo.vaJks - the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia - simply do not exist at all after the fall of the Great iMoraivian Empire, except for the mention (p. 17) of "a consideraJble number of (Hussiite) adherents 1? Sfovalkia," which is quite a stretch of the imagination. The Hussite !business was strictly Cezch; the Hussites did �SLOVAKIA 47 more damage than good for the Czechs themselves, and aibsolutely no good for the Slovaks, whose lands they invaded, pillaging and !burning their homes, and murdering their population. Furthermore, !Harri.son oreaites the impression that the !Battle of White !Mountain (1620) was ,a; nationalistic affair, W1aJged lby the Ozechs against the Genmans. That is the legend fabricated 'Mld propagated by some Protestant Czechs. The White 1MoU1DJtain affair, however, was definitely a religious and dynastic aifafir. After Tilly, the emperor's general, defeated Frederiok and the Bohemian (111ot Czech!) maignates, some 27 of the leading "rebels" were beheaded: one a Catholic; six were Germans. Not one, however, was executed becaJUse of his nationality. Not without interest is Harrison's mention (p. 11) that the Premyslide iprinces di'Vided the country, in .t he tenth century, "into administrative distrfots (zupy) with a royal representative (zupan) at the head of each distTiot." wf the Czech Premys.lides actually used the terms "zupa, zupan," I wonder if professor Harrison mi,g ht enlighten us from whom they might have acquired those words, since they are rarely used !by the Czechs . • CHA!PTER III - "The Czechoslovaks from the Battle of White ,Mountain to the World War" - by RO'bert J. Kerner, Ph. D ., i.lL.D., /Litt.D. - Sather Professor of History, Uni'Versity of California; LL.D., Omaha University; Litt.iD., Paiik College; foreign memlber, Royal Bohemian Society of Letters and Sciences (Prague); foreign member, Safarik Learned Society (Bratislava); commander, Order of the Whlite Lion (Ozecho~SlovaJkia); memlber, Expert Staff, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace (!Paris); etc., etc. "The dlsa,strous battle of W•h ite Mountain on November 8, 1620, uslhered lin a period of three centur.les in which the Klngdom of Bohemia was reduced to .three provinces, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia, in ,t he Habs,b urg MOIIlarchy. During the first centUTY of •t his period the nation lost three-fourths of its native nobility, its most eminent and wealthy citizens, its schools and noted scholara, and its national independen-ce. A remarkable national renaissance took place in the second century. In the remainder of the period, the Czecho• slovak nation, after tlailin.g to bring •about a reorganization of the �48 SLOVAKIA Ha;bsburg Monarchy on ,a federal -basis, or to secure the same dg,h ts as tfue Magyars, ,c arried out a ,s uccessful revolution a,nd obtained its independence" (P. 29). !Referring to the underscored words, I ask professor Kerner: 1. What nation, the Czech or Bohemian? 2. What "Czechoslovak." nraition, when there was none? 3. What Magyars, ,o r does iKerner mean Hungarians? 4. What revolution 1by the "Ozechoslovaik" nation?. Kerner used the title he did for this chapter delilberately, because he must haJVe known there were no "CzechoslO'V8Jks," ethnically spooking, ,b efore or after the battle of White Mol.l.[ltain, to the World War, except in the minds of dreamers and chauvinistic, imperialistic Creohs. He could easily haJVe ,o mitted the d:ew references to Slovaks and the m8Jny to "Orechos}ovaiks" in the 211 1pages of the chrupter and had ,a rpretty good ,s tory on the "Czechs'' from the Battle of White Mountain to the World War." Practically everything in the chapter is "Czech" - language, literature, nation, historians, pe3Jsants noblemen, renaissance, Catholics, Pr.otestants, opera, national anthem, Lutherans, journalists - lbut Kerner still makes pretense at writing aJbout "Czechoslovaks." Is there any good ,r eason why an honest, Ulliprejudiced, objective historian should try to fool even himself? Surely, Kerner musrt !know that the ~echs devel01ped in the Austrian ,p art, ,w hile the Slova!ks developed in ,t he Hungarirun prurt of the Dual Monarchy. What Kerner means to imply when he says that the "Czechoslovak nafilon . . . . . . carried out a successful revolution" and db.tamed its independence is at least questionaJble. We know that there was not even a revolution in Prague. !Robert Ingrim tells us: "All that J:J.a;ppened ,was tJhat Emperor-King Charles, seeing that Wilson :a:bandoned his former program in the hour of victory, dropped tJhe fed,ema;listic idea and ordered his minds.tern and lieutenant-governors to surrend,e r the admi'llistration to coonmittees of the various nationalities. Thi,s explains among other things why Masaryk, as the first president of Czecho-Slovakia, had to decree which date was to be regarded as the beginning of the Czech re· volution. It simply had not taken place. All bhe successor states, including little. Austria, needed the legal fiction of a ,r evolution, because as• new states they repudiated the idea of continuity and based �SLOVAKIA 49 their la/\V,s upon a revolutionary origin. For the Czechs this was very important. When, in 1921, .the .Sudeten Germans complained to the League of Nations t:hat they had not been allowed to take par.t in the making of the constitution of the new State, the Czecho-Siov•a k government replied. that 'the Cz~ho./Slovak State was the work and product of the revolution, made solely by the Czecho-Slovak nation,' which was, therefore, 'the only constitutional factor.' Hence, 'the Natiooru Revolutionary Assembly was alone authorized to set up the constitution' by W1h1ch Germans, \Hungarians, Ruthenians, and Poles had •b een made second-class citizens" (After Hitler Sta11n? P. 107). To complete the above piotu.re, '.I might add that the Slovak memlbers of the "Na,tional Revolutioaiary Assembly" were lhand-'I)icked lby Masaryk and Benes and, included firve Czechs, hence, were not truly representa.tirve of the political will of the 1S101Vaik nation. The constitution that resulted, therefore, was strictly a Czech product, j'llSt as was Ozecho-lSlovak domestic iand foreign policy. In referring to the development that took ipla.ce during the Reformation and ICoU!Ilter-lReformation in Ozech rund Slovak territories, Kerner says that "in general the same development took place in the ISloivaJk counties od' Hungary as in Bohemia, /Moravia and \S ilesia." If a person did not know !better, he might be led to 1believe that Kerner did not use the express-ion "Ozech counties" in his comparison, because Bohemia, Moria.via and !Silesia were supposedly solidly Czech. We know that they were not. And we know, too, that Bohemia was not the only country that suffered during the Thirty Yea.rs' War; that war "ravaged Bohemia with the same fury it unleashed all over the Germanies. . . There was no, difference and certainly no national ,pll!'.pose" (I.n,g rim, op. cit., ,p. 57). Kerner, furthermore, writes ab.9-ut "Magyar'' magnates and "Magyar" nolbility, rwhen he really means "Hungarian" magnates and noibility. There is a difference: the Magyars were not the only inhabitants of Hungary before or aft-er the 17th century. The same applies .to the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian." Of course, we might say that the tenns today - af.ter the expulsion of over three million Germans - are mo.re or less synonymous. Let us, however, remember that they were not even in ,t he recent past: the Czechs were not the only inhabitants of Bohemia. �50 SLOVAKIA "A new period in .the history of the Czechoslovak nation was inaJugurated" (p. 32), when 1Fredericik the Great seirzed Silesia in 1740, Kerner states oaitegorically and, fartiher down on the same page, that "the reforms of Maria '.Dheresa and Joseph JiI . . . not only culminated in the completion of the evolution ,which tra.nsf.ormed the Kingdom of Bohemia into three provinces and hence virtual amalg,amaJtion of 1!he Austrian Hereditary Lands with the Lands of the (Bohemim Crown into a single administrative unit, but they threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation 'by the process• of Germanization in schools, government, ,and church." Here, it is obvious that Kerner w-..s a 1b it ~fuddled and •a )pparently forgot, in his zeal to promot.e the concept of a "Czoohoslovaik nation," that ,t he SkwaJks lived in HU!Ilg,ary and,. hence, !by no stretch of t'he imaigination, even in this "enlightened" and "iprogres.sive" era, could have had any connection with the "Austrian Hereditary Lands" and the "Lamds of the Bohemi,a n Crown." It w.as the existent Czechs and not the nJOn-existent "OzechoslwaJks" who were threatened with the loss of identity as a nation iby the process of ~a.n:rzatiorn, in Austria. We can concede that the policy of Joseph ll "of trying to denationalize" Magyars, Italians, Poles, and Rumaniians "aroused them to activity" (p. 34), as it did the ~echs, SlovaJks, Croats, Slovenes, and Serbians, ibut why does Kerner lump the latter nations together as "Czeichoslovaiks" and "Jugoslavs" when he knows that such did not exist either in Joseph !I's time or even later? 'I'he reason fur this is only too obvious. On page 3Q,. the "Czechoslovaks" we.re threatened "w1t'h Joss of identity as a nation," but three pages later, according to Kerner, "at the same time the situation of the Slovaks in HWigary was somewhat improved by the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II" (p. 35). The same reforms even led "to a great national revival (p. 32) . . . the Czech renaissance develo ped momentum step by step as decree after decree of Maria Theresa and Joseph II sought to a'bolish the use of the Czech language. When Joseph II completed t!he official demise of the Czech Ian1 �SLOVAKIA 51 guage in school, government, allld church in 1790, the Czech nation revwed. 1So mysterious was this development that its exact oauses have been a su:bject: of dispute among the best ·scholars" (1p. 34). Then on t:he following pa;ge (35) Kerner states: "The Ohurch feared that it would lose its ,g rip on the Czech nation i:f its priests spolke only German. These and other indications led to the establishment by Leoipold rnr of a chair in the Czech language at the University of ,Praigue in 1791." What, then, is this business ,th,a,t the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph JiI ''threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation"? And what is so mysterious about <the reviival of the Czech nation in 1790? Kerner certainly must ha,ve ,h eard a;bouit the principle of action and reaction! If the iMa~rs, and laiter the Ozechs, had not tried to suppress the Slovak lang,uage and oppressed the Slovaks, they would have rprobaibly .perished as a nation in time . .Js it not olbtvious what ha,ppens to languages and peo~ ples in America rwhere freedom abounds? [n America peoples of every color, .race and creed enjoy freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of asoomibly; they are d':ree to !build their own churches, schools, liibraries, 'beneficial organi:zations and ipubHsh new.s,pa,pers and books in their respective languages. Yet, there is no doufbt in. my mind that in time non-®nglish iperiodioa1s and 1books, published in America, will /be a rarity. Certainly, this must be just as olbvious - ,a nd not myst.erious - even to professor Kerner. • "A Protestant sc hool, -witJh a c hair in the Czech language a.nd literature, was founded in Brati,s.lava, and this inst:i,tution counted amQ/Ilg its s,t udents the future Czech his torian !FrantAse'k Palacky from Moravia and tlhe Slovaks Jan Kolla r ia.n.d Pave.I Josef i:lafaiik. The Protestant Slovaks followed closely the d·e velopment or the Czechs, Wlhereas the Catholic Slovaks under Antonin Bernolak tried to create, with indlff-erent success at the time, a. written Slovak dialect, which W'<IS s-eparate from .but closely akin to the Czech because a western dialect of spoken ,Slovak was used. The course of poli• tical events could not cheok the national revival of Czechoslovaks" (p. 36) . ,P rofessor Kerner does not relate the whole story, but only the part that s'l.lits his ipUTpOSe and, hence, sins by �52 SLOVAKIA omi-ssion. The Catholic Slcwa!ks oonstituted rut least 75 per cent of the Sl()IVaik nation, while the Protestant Slovaks only aibout ill per cent. Koillar and Safarik cultivated ,a "dead" 1amgiuage, a langu,a;ge tha;t was used iby a small part of tile Slovak nation, the Lutherans. And the latter used that language - "biblical" Czech, therefore, not the "live" language of the vast masses of the Czech people - mostly for and during religious functions, while at home they used Sloiv•aik. Anton, not Antonin (the Czech equivalent), Bernolwk not only "tried" to create a Slo.va!k literary language, but actually did estaibLish such a literary medium of Slorvak which was u:sed :some fifty years b,y S[ovak writers. There was no need :for iBernolaik to. create "a written Slovak dialect," ;b ecause various 'Slova!k dialects already were existent at that time. And iBernola:k definitely did 111ot choose the western dialect because it was "closely alkin" to Czech. Kerner, however, is quite right when he says that "the comse of political events could not check the nationa:I revival of the Ozechoslovalks," lbecaJuse they were non--existenrt. Those events could not check the national rerv:wal of either the Ozechs or the :S'1ov0iks . 1 • "Caug,h t between their sympathies with the Czechs and their fears of their .Magyar ov•erlord:s, Slovak patri'ots saw their security, not in coalescing at once with their Czech brethren, but in iworking to create a separate Slovak national movement by taking up once more the unsuccessful jdea of Bernolak that of developing a separate written Slovak language. Ludevit Stur, Michal Hodza, and Jo.:,ef Hurban, fearing the reproaches of the Magyars if they continued to use the Czech language, and hoping to attract the Slovak peasant masses, chooe in 184-5 to make. a dialect spoiken. in tlle central Slovak counties the '!lew literary language. The Czechs wa,r ned in v,a in against this departure from t.he practice of a thousand years. ·T hey argued that dts r esults would only be. to the >benefit of the Germans and Magy,ar.i" (p. 38). This statement is not based on 'hone.sit, hi:sitorical research. ilt is a fabrication pure and simple. Slova!k patriots ,t hen, even as now, fully realized that they could not safegu,,ard their nation.al existence !by playing second-, fiddle to other nations in the political coTIJCert. They did not fear the 'Maigyiars who sought to Magy.arme them any more than they feared the Czechs who sought to Ozechize �SLOVAKIA 53 the:rn. True Slovak ·p atriots never let their sympathies for the Ozechs or other oppressed nations interfere with their ultimate natioo.a.1 aim: freedom and rpolitioal independence - to become masters of their own household, of their own destiny. '.Dhey rebelled against the Magyars and, later, eiven against the Czechs, just as the Magyars and the Ozechs had rebelled ag,ainst the HlaJbsburgs. Stur, Hodza, Hurban (Jozef, not Josef) a,nd other Slova,k patriots developed the literary SlovaJk medilllIIl estrublished by iBen1i0laJk and his followers - the "lilve" language used lby the vast masses of the Slovalk people, both O~tholic and also Lutheran. They wrote in Czech for the Cze.ohs and in Slovak for the Slov,aks. Kerner does not say so directly, ibut the implication is ,t here that Stur, Hod.fa •a nd Hurb-an did use the Czech language exclusively in rtheir writings. The fact is thaJt; they did not and they did not fear the "reproaches of the Magyairs" for using Czech at ,any time they desired to do so. As int.elligent men they knew fully well they ieould not rouse their people nationally by using a language that was foreign to them, a language they did not consider their own. Why, then, the 'balderdash a:bout the Czechs warning Slo;vak paitriots against their depa;rture "from the practice of a thousand years"? '.Dhe vast majority of .the IS1ovruk natiO!Il, i!he Catholic Slovaiks, used their own Slovak language in their churches, homes and in their Hterary worlks, b;ut 'Professorr Kerner wO'Uld hruve students of history "Czechoslovak" history - believe that they used the Czech language forr a "thousand years" prior t,o 1845. Why does Kerner resort to outright falsehoods and aJbsurrd falbrications? Czech was brought into Siovakia, it is true, by Czech exiles during i!he Coun.ter..R.eformation to strengthen Lutheranism, ibut it never 'became the predominant literary medium of the ,vast masses of the Slovak people and their ,w riters. 1 • "The Magyar large landholder, the Catholic clergyman, and the Jewish merchant, screened, ,b ehind a blatant Magyar propaganda, worked to denaclonalize the Slovak peasant by falsifying his history and •by asserting tihat his language had no orelation to the Czech and did not belong to the languages of western Europe" (p. 44). �54 SLOVAKIA It is significant that Kerner should put the finger on "Catholic clergymen" - without mentioning names - and omit Protestant "progressilve" preachers and Jewish R3Jb.. bis who were equally interested in "denationiali ~ng" the Slovalk peasant, practically always woTking aigainst :the national interests of the ISlovalk nation. Of course, this is nothing new in history. T. G. iMasaryik and Benes, who should have learned the lesson of :A.ustr1a:-Hungary, denied the existence of it.he !Slovak nation as an individual ethnic entity, declaring the ISlovia!ks were only a "branch" of the Czech nation and their language only ,a "dialect" of the Ozech. (Falsifying history seems to be a specialty of the followem of Masaryk and Benes. And Kerner proves it! 1 • I "Whereas Kr-amai' became, so to ~,peak, the symbol of the economic u,psm1ge of the Czech lboUTgeoisie, Masaryk became the intellectual and spiritual head of the entire nation, including the Slovaks . • • . He (~·a saryk) became a Protestant, a modern Czech Puritan. Influenced by his reading af Czech history, he ,b elieved that h-e found. !ts plhilosophy 1n the religious ideal of il:he Hussites and the Ozeoh !Brethren" (pp. 47-48). The truth, however, is that T. G. Masaryk never was the "intellectual and spiritual head" of the 1Slov•lrlLs. If the Ozechs wish to consider Masaryk :as such, they are free to do so. The o.vel'IWhelming Catholic majority oif the Slovak people could not. Hlas Kerner forgotten Masaryk's blatant cries "away from !R;ome!" and "Rcxme must (be put on trial and condemned!"? Czech history is not Slovak history; the philosophy of Slova:k history does not rest on the "religious ideal of the Hussites and the Czech Brethren." Catholic Czechs form ibhe majority of the Czech nation, hence, we have good reason to doulbt Kerner's evaluation of Masaryik -as far as •t hey ,a re concerned, lbecaJuse Masaryk never did represent or COlllcern himself !With their spiritual interests, in fact, put them in jeopardy. Masaryik, according to Kerner, "viewed the problem of the small oppressed n.a:tiO'IlS ,as the polilticai and international phase of the social question - the exploit,aitdon of one nation by anot!her, for political exploitation meant cheap lalbor to the laboring drasse.s." 'But what happened after Czeoho-!Slovakiia was lborn and Masaryk !became he:r first president? He denied staites' rights to Slovakia and �SLOVAKIA 55 thought nothing of the OLechs exploiting the ,S lovaks and their national wealth! CHA[PTER [V - Peace Conference" - • "The World War, Revolution and iby RO{'bert J. Kern.er. '10n July 4 (191,5), Masaryk publicly in,a ugurated the revolutionary movement •by a ,l ecture on Jan Hus in Zurich, Srwitzerl•a nd. After Benes succeeded in escaping J.irom Austria, the Czech Foreign Committee issued its public manifesto for Czechoslovak independence in Pans on !November 14, 1915. This manifesto had previously been agreed upon by the leaders at home and by the leaders of Czech and Slovak colonies In America, England, and France a point on wihich !Masaryk insisted" (p. 53). 'W ho were those leaders "alt home" and in the Czech and Slovak colonies in America, England, and France? The record tells us that the leaders of the Czechs and Slovalks at home ikinew practically nothing of Masaryk's plans at that time; and the leaders of their respective colonies in various countries still less! • "This Committee (the Czech Foreign Committee) led to the creation of the •Czechoslovak Nation-al Council in 1916., which under Masaryk, Benes, and ~tefanlk gradually assumed the functions of goverJlllilent" (pg. 153-54) . . . "The Czechoslovak National Council, which was leading the struggle abroad, had not been disavowed by the nation at home" (p. 56). 1t is quite clear, rt:hen, that the Czech Committee is credited with the creation of the "Czechoslovak" Council, which Masaryk headed. But it is not in accord with fact that the Council "had not been disruvowed 1b y the nation at home." Masaryk was the leader of the Czech (Progressive Party, which he alone represented in the .Austrian ,parliament. When he left Austria, late .in 1914, Miasaryk went abroad with a ipr.ogram of his own. As far as is !known, he had not consulited wii.th Ozech and Siovalk leaders a:t home and had no authorization f.ram the Czechs or the Slovaks at home ito represent their politioal will. Of course, wherever Masaryk went, he did pose as a competent representative of the Czechs at home. When President. Wilson, .late in Decemlber 1916, requested an lb;elligerents to state their war aims, the Allied reply of January 1'2, 1917, included the following demand: "Lilberation of Italians, Riumaniains, Slaws,. and Czeciio- �56 SLOVAKIA Slovaks from foreign rule." Please note the "Slavs and Czecho-Slovaks" part, lbecaUJSe thaJt tells us 'j ust how well the Allies were informed on the sUJbjoot. Since Slovruks and Czechs spoke different languages, occupied different territories, and never in history had been united, rbhe appelation "Ozecho-1Slorvruk,s " was real new. At that time, when the British government was asked, in ithe Commons, ,w hethmit could indicate the territory inhabited iby "Czecho-1Slo-· vakis," the ra nswer was "no." The Czechs at home resented being mentioned as a nation under "foreign rule." One of their leading ipaipers, the NARODNE I.1IiSTY, had this tto say aJbout it: 1 "It is amazing how indefatigably Masaryk endeavors to defile the honor of the CZECH nation. The enemies have learnt that the love of all Austrian peoples for their inherited dynasty and their fatherland is firm and unshakable. The enemies have realized that those who make contradictory statements abroad are liars and impostors." In Norvem!ber, 1916, all the Czech parties in the Austrian rparliament, without a single exception, had issued a solemn declaration, stating thrat "the basis and guaranty of the national existence of the Czech people are the dynasty, called to the throne centuries ago, and the indivisibly constituted Monarchy." In the declaration they demanded foderafozation. And oin December 30, 191.6, all the Czech party leaders attended ttihe emiperor's coronation as king of Hungary as "guesrts of honor." After the Afli.ed reply to, Wilson became !known, the society of Czech memlbers of parliament sent the following letter (J,a nuary 23, 1'917) to the foreign minister of AustroHtrogary: "In view of the Alli-ed runswer to President ,W ilson in which the liberation of the Czechs figures as a war ,a im, we reject this insinuation whiClh is based on entirely erroneous assumptions. We declare emphatically that the Czech people, as always in the past, is convinced that it can be assured of a prosperous development only under the Habsburg scepter and within the Habsburg Monarchy" (Ingrim: "After Hitler Stalin?" p. 75). The very same Czech members of parliament requested Prime M:in.istffi' C1am....Martinic, a Czech, to arrange an audience with the emperor for them. Why? !Because :they said: "We want to tell His Majesty that we shall always stand by him and his successors; that our demands will always be compatible �SLOVAKIA 57 with the interests of the Habsburg dyansty and of the realm; that we are loyal servants of the king and the country; that our complaints have never shaken our belief that after victory the claims of the ,Czech people will find satisfaction within the framework of the realm and under the Habsburg crown." It is quite obvious, then, thaJt the representatirves of the Czech people did not want separation - independence but federalization. Furthermore, Masaryk ,a nd his Council were hiit from another quarter. At the conference of the Sociiailist International in 1Stockho1m, June 1:917, the Czech delegates vociferously demanded "an independent Czech State within a federated Austria-Hungary." Is it possible that professor Kerner, an expert on Czecho-SloiValkia, is ignorant of what w:as going on even m Czech lands while !Masaryk a.nd Benes were calling for the destruction of Austria? I cannot ·believe it •a nd, therefore, say that iKerner delilberately did not tell the truth when he said that Mas•a ry'k's Council "had not been disavowed by the nation at home." Masarylk :himself admits it in his work "Svetowa RevoJuce" (pp. 1150-il.52; 253-254 ; 32,1 ). When 'Kerneir wr1tes aJbo.ut the organimtion of the "Czechoslovak Legions," the work a,ccomplished lby Masarylk and iBenes in ,E ngland, France, Russia allld America for the esta;blishment of the "Ozechosloivalk Reipulblic," he completely ignores the effort put forth by Gen&al Milan R. Stefanik, the !Slovak who, did much in France, the U.S. A., Italy and Russi.a for the realization of the Republic. fu the twenty pages of this cltaJpter, Kerner mentiom; the name of this great Slovak only once, but does not tell us a single thing aJbo,ut the ,w ork he did so tha,t Czecho-,Slova'l da might become a reality. If Ma,s aryk himself was not loath to give credit to •S tefanik for his accompl.isihmen,ts, why should Kerner ibe? Furthermore, Kerner devotes. several pages to the "OzechoslavaJk" Legion in Siiberia - "the ,a rmy which had fought vicitorio'll.Sly at !Kiev, Zhitamir, and Baikhmach, and which yearned to leave Russia in peace in order to continue the conflict ,a gainst the Germans in the West." He almost outdoes Masaryk himself on the ·" Siberian anabasis" legend. �58 SLOVAKIA The fact is, however, that the legion was offered a short route home via Murmansk and Archangel whence British sh1ps were to transport it to the battle front in France. But the legion, afraid of German sulbmarines and not too eager to fight, preferred ithe long way home via Siberia to Viadfuvostok. AB a result, Masarylk's a:xmy reached Europe long after the smoke of the war had lifted, without haJVing contributed ,to the defeat of Germany and Austria. The IStberian anabas:is made greait propagand a for Masaryk's cause, as he himself atlmitted, and without it, in fact, the "calli:!e" m1ght haive 'been lost. '.I recommend that Kerner and other students •o f history, read pp. 81-83 of fugrim's "After Hlitler !Stalin?" - and, ibut carefully, even Masaryik's "Svetava. Revoluce." • "In the ,a ims publicized as the objectives of peace, the Czechosl ovaks were promised their independence on the basis of the selfdetermination of the Czechoslovak nation. It is a fum:l.amentaJ question just what "self-deteirmi natlon of the nations" meant a.t tihat time. It s eems most probrul>le that when it ,was first uttered it meant the determinatio n of a n entire nation to choo.se whether it wished to be jndependent or live under another, and not self-determination of small parts of it" (p. 62). Here, Kerner quite naively would have us :b elieve that he iis be.fuddled lby the meaning of "self-determ ination." Of course, he could have given credit ,to Masaryk and especially Benes for his 1pretended quandary. I say "pretended ," /because he himself tells us on the page following: " In many regions the populations were thoroughly mixed in composition . . . . As far as the Czechoslovak s were concerned, the matter was complicated by the fact that their claims in the Czech regions rested on historic rights, the Lands of the Bohemian Crown (Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia), which they as a nation had created and maintained in history, rund on the rights of nationality for the ,Slovaks in Hungary, wihere the Magyars cJ.almed 'historic rights of the Lands of tihe Hungarian Crown" (p. 63) . So, what is this business "the Czechoslov aks were promised their independen ce on the ,basis of the self-determ ination of the Czechoslovak nation"? !Kerner purt:s himse1f in a ivery ludicrous situation: he admits the existence of the Czech naition, Czech regions, etc., does not admit directly the existence of the Slovak counterpar ts, but still insists on having a "Orechoslovak" nation! �SLOVAKIA 69 AP, mentioned earlier, one of the aims of the Allies was the "lilberaition of Iltalians, Rumanians, Slavs and Cze- choslovaks from foreign r.ule." The Czechs and Slova;ks got i'lllto the picture also as "Ozech~ova ks," and not only as Slavs, at the persistent insistence of Dr. Edward Benes to support the fiction promoted by M'aJSaryik and himself that "Czechs and Slovaks were the same." The truth, however, remains that the SlovaJks are an individual nation in the great family of Slovanic nations, as are the Poles, Byelorussians , Ukrainians, Russians, C.zec'hs, Bulg,aria:ns, .S erbs, ISlO!Veni•a ns, Croatians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, a,nd Lusatia,n tSerbs, whatever Kerner and other "historians" of his type might have to say to the contrary notwithstandi ng. If Kerner does not be1ieve that t:he right of self-dete:nmination applies equally to the Czechs and /Slovaks, let him .say so outright and be done wi~h it. Kerner should know, as we certainly lmow, that the magic formula that druzzled. and charmed. President Wilson was "national determination," which meant that every ethnic group be conceded the right to decide to which state it wished to belong. More dmpo:ntrunt than what it meanit, of course, was what it implied: the notion that the id68.l state would be one inhabited only by one ethnic entity, one nation. The tenth of WiliSion's "1Fo!Urteen Points" reads as follows: ''!The peoples of Austria-iHu111gary , whose place among the nations we wish to see s·afeguaro€d and •a ssured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development." What does "the peoples of Austria-Hung ary" mean to professor Kerner? Does it mean all the peoples, except the Slova1k people? If Masaryik used his charms to maJk:e Wilson •b elieve the fiction that the "Czechs and the Slovaiks were the same," and so to deceive him does that alter the .truth that the Ozechs a.nd the Slov~ are not one people, one nation? Why should Kenner want us to believe otheIWise? • "The !Peace Conference chose to give the Czechos-lovaks the hiatoric boundaries in the Czech regions of Austri•a and ethnic bound•a rles In the Slovak districts of Hungary. Furthermore, it •a ddoo, under cond,l tlons of autonomy, Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia. It thmi created a state in Wlhlch 34 per cent of the population was non-Czech0- �60 SLOVAKIA slovak, ,a nd this element included a German .population of over three millimi.s, livin,g chiefly in the outer rim of Bohemia, in a state of less than fifteen millions" (p. 63). But this is 111ot quite the whole ,s tory. The Peace Conference decided as it did, 'becaJUOO it relied on the "expert" information supplied iby Masaryk and Benes, !both Czechs, who presumed to represent iboth the Czechs and also the Slova!ks. In the state created, the non-Czech population was in the majority, and this included some three and a half million Germams, in a state of "less than fifteen millions" (how much less?). The Conference ga;ve the "Czechoslovaks" nothing, lbuit it did allow the boundaries for the "new" state that was -created, as Kerner states, "on the -g round that rune or ten million Czechoslovaks should be favored •w ith independence oiver three million Germans" (p. 65) - the argument Oif Masaryk and Benes! They needed the almost three million Slovaiks of Hrung,ary to m.aJce "nine or ten n:rlllion Czechoslovaks," but the Czechs and the ISloivaJks, were "the same"! • "The Duchy of TesC'hen was ,w,hat was left of Silesia, one of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, after Frederiick the Great had seized fourte en-fifteeruths of that territory in 1740. The historic rights of the Czechs went •back to t!he fourteenth century. Before that the Duchy had been ,Polish {p. r66) . . . It was, however, Poland's diss·a tisfaction with this decision which led her diplomacy into d.e manding a.nd acquiring Czech Teschen on the occasion of the Conference of Mu· nlch (October, 1938). This blow from the rear really made it impossible for Czechoslovakia to fight after she was abandoned by her Western allies" (p. 68) . It is ,olbvious that Kerner either laoks knowledge about Teschen or is deli'berately attemptilllg to confuse the readers of his "Ozechoslova:kia." Just lilke Miasaryik and Benes, iit seems that Kerner does not want students oif history to know the whole tmth about Ozecho-Sloivaki,a. Furthermore, the ,allegation that Ozecho,...Slov,rukia was "forced" to :su,r render to iHitler !Without firing a shot, because her "Western allies" had abandoned her, OT because IDngland ·a nd France asked her to, is purely fictitious. Benes surrendered Czecho-Slovaki.a to Hitler without the approval of parliament. The Benes Czechs knew fully well that Czeoho-SlovaJkia could not be saved, because her non-Czech majority was not wiling to fight for her. They �SLOVAKIA 61 chose to urrender "at the behest of their faithless friends," because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the Germa~lovak-Magyar~Rutib.en.ian-iPolish majority of her population was not ready to die for a tate that had treated them as second-rate citizens for ome thirty years. And let us not forget that even the Czech,s, who considered themselves t he "State-nation," did not fire a single shot in defense of Czecho-JSlovrukia. Furthermore, it is no secret ,t hat Benes did not cultivate friendshiip with Poland and other neigh'boring states : his pro Soviet policy over decades of years is proof of that. Already in 1929 Viscount D'Abernon prophesied: "The treaty between Czecbo S lovakia and Poland is thought a triumph of French m ilitarism . o it m a y be, but the duration w ill b e te mpo rary . . . the Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon as disturbing forces cease to operate quite as powerfully as today." • "Germ an propaganda l ater s ought to spread the view that the bou ndaries of Czeoho slovakia, a s well as t hose of P ol and, wer e drawn by the Peace Conferene e in ignorance and that they repres e nted a failure to understand the problems of central Europe. N ot hing could be far th er from tJh e facts . The deleg ates o f the Peace Cont rence had access to and used the best available information and considered these problems from all possible angles" (p. 6 ). After reviewing the events that followed World Wa.r I Mld led to World War IiI, I believe it is safe to say that Kerner's statement is "farther from the facts" than even the "German propaganda" he alludes to. The fact rernains t hat World War I not only failed to solive Europe's problems, ,b ut even ,a ccentuated them and led t o World War II. At Paris there was a meeting of two continents which were quite ignorant of each other. The peacemakers blundered when they accepted interested parties as experts wit hout having them chedked 'by the opposition. When Lloyd George asked Benes how many Ma.gyam would fall undeT Ozech rule, Benes replied that their number would lbe 350,000 ('D. H. Miller: "My Diary at the Conference in Paris"; in reality it was more ibhan one million. Benes, plead.., ing fOT a "natural frontier," described a little ~oolk as a nasvigalble river. Repudiation of Kerner's claim may also be found in A . J. P. Taylor's "The HaJbsbu.rg Monarchy," C. A . Ma- �62 SLOVAKIA cartney's "Problems of the Danubiam Basin," Lloyd George's "The Tr.urth About the Peace Treaties," J. M. Keynes "The Economic Consequences of the Peace." Winston Churchill's "Afternnath and World Crises,." Robert fugrim's "After Hitler :Stalin?" and even T. G. Masa;ryk's "Svet<Jva Revoluce." But Kerner himself does that quite effecti:vely with the last three sentences - especially the last sentence - of the ivery same par.aJgraph, ,whi.oh reads: "Another ,s olution of the Czechoslovak problem might indeed be sought •by some future .p eace conference, if the poignant problem of the German nation is solved, for example, on the model of Switzerla:nd rather than that permitting a rampant totalitarian racialism. U.nti,l then it may be said that the work of t!he Peace Conference was a reasonable solution for its time. Common sense and Intelligence and a few minor boundary rectifications might have aecured a durable settlement" (p. 69). Of course, Professor Kerner, could hardly have intended it that way, but this is quite an admission from a mem. her of the "EXPERT STAFF, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace"! We know today that Kerner was not the only "exipert" who la'o ked sufficient "common sense and intelligence" at that time. (More coming) WHO SAID IT? "In 1868 the Ozeoh initel,lectuails and the Bohemian aristocrats renewed filleir allegi1ance. . . The eighty Bohemian a<bsentees from the Reicllsrat made a declaration of their aims: they asked for equal na:tional rights for the Czechs in Bohemia, and for a refornn of the electoral system; they demanded also the unity of the lands of St. We:nceslaus and the same independence for this "grea,t Bohemia" a;s HUlllgary possessed. The Ozech leaders were bewitched by the Hungarian example. '1'1hey saw, quite rightly, that the Magyars had achieved their nation'al freedom by associating it with historic rilghts, and they supposed that the way to achieve the national freed~m of the Czechs was to claim the historic rights of Bohemia. They did not see that the historic rights of Hungary were real, the historic rights of Bohemia imaginary. . . " - (A. J. P. Taylor, TH1E HABSIBURG MONA'ROHY, London, 1948; p. 142). � 38 SLOVAKIA HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P. A. HIROBAK In 1'9149, the Uniiversity of California Press, ipulblished the "third printing" of the !book "CZEOHOSW VAKIA" (504 pages) which was edited iby Rolbert J. Kerner, Sather professor of history in the Unilversity :of California. 'Dhe book was made ipossilble, ,p rofessor Kerner states in his preface, iby "the oolla!boration of twenty distinguished and alble scholiars and writers" and that, concludes Mir. Kerner, "has made it ;possiible to present a vo1ume ,which is an honest, unprejudiced:, and frank appraisal of the important contrilbution which the Czechoslovak nation made to the history of our time in its two short decades of independence between two world wars." Just how honest, unprejudiced and frank that aipp:r,aisal of the "important" contribution is, the ireader may be a;ble to g,ather from what follows here and arrive at the condusion, stated so aiptly iby professor Kerner, that, indeed, "few nations, if any can show such a record" or, possibly, go a bit .farther and state cate.gorically that, indeed, no niation can show .such a record! But how honest and unprejudiced are "distinguished and able scholars" who set out to do a job beyond their competency? Can a distinguished historian write a true history of CZIDCH0-1SUOVAKITA without a thorough lmowledge of the SlovaJks and the land they 'haive occupied during the past 1500 years? And yet that is exaotly what the "twenty distinguished and aJble scholars and writers" of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia" did to ,produce something which, in his opinion, was "hQlrulst, unprejudiced" ! Kerner's "Ozechoslovikia' is dirvided into six parts, but the tendency in all parts is much the same: strictly Czech. Kerner should haive named the 1b ook "Czechia," t'hen the wonk might ibe called, by a stretch of the imagination, a semlblance of something "hlOlll.est and unprejudiced." Otherwise, informed readers know rthat it definitely is not, and the uninformed axe cruelly deceived. The s~gniificance of this may be !better understood when we glance at the remarkaible selection of books in the sug- �SLOVAKIA 39 geeted bibliog,r aphy at the end of each cha;pter. The list is rema.r.kaJble not only for the !books and literary woi,ks included, but for the 1bodks and literary works omitted. The impression created is that the Slovruks had no ,w riters of a!lly impor-t and that no sourees of informatiO!ll on their history are availruble. iBut that i.'S not so. '.Dhis proves that the "twenty distinguished a:nd able scholars and writers," who collalborated with Kerner .cm his "Czechoslovakia" were little or not at all concerned with the history of the Sl01Vak people and their land. To magnify and glorify the history of the Ozechs and minimize, practically ignore, the history of the Slavruks, certainly cannot be the aim of an honest, UDJprejudiced and abjecti;ve writer of Ozecho~lovak history. Ozecho-Blovakia, as presented ,b y Kerner and his "twenty distinguished and aJble .s cholars and writers," does not give us a true picture of Czech-0-1Slovakia; it is not a true history of the Ozechs and SlOIV'aJks and their lands; it is definitely more propaga:nda than history - in line with other .such wm,ks which were promoted by the propaganda apparatus of Prag,ue. !Students of history should not 'be exposed to faJsifications and distortions of history, su<!h as that exemplified ·b y Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," because. that does not make for the truth, or for better relations ibetween the Ozechs and the Slovalks, or for a ·pr.oper understanding of those nations. I do not want to say unequirvocally that the writers who collaborated to produce Kerner's "Ozechoslovrukia" were knowingly dishonest ,a nd prejudiced, but their work co.n,vinced me definitely that ,w ittingly or uniwitti.ngly they did ibeoome Ozech propa:gandists. The writers have an undu:ly high regard for the chairacter and accomplishments of T. G. Masaryk amd Benes and the Ozechs in general, without an equa:lJy high reg,aro for facts, and little or no regard for the Slorvaks and their history. ,M ost writers of Ozeolio..Slovaik history and "Ozecho..slovak" democracy (IS. Harrison Thomson, Joseph S. Roucek, Herbert AdolJphus ,Miller, Brackett Lewis, among them), follow the Ozech line of T. G. Masaryik and Ed- �40 SLOVAKIA ward Benes and their governmeints ,w ho ,c ontrolled the entire propaganda apparatus• o;f ,Czecho-1Slov8Jkia. This Masaryk~enes line was and e;ve:n now is adhered to iby exchange students and iprofessors, heads of official and unofficial information !bureaus, the America.n Institute in Prague, the YMCA and YWCA of 0zecho-Slovrukia and other countries, the "OzechoslQIViruk N ationa,1- Ohurch" (strictly a Czech enteriprise) and most other religious sects, and practically all "eminent" writers, scholars and correspondents. And today the governments of all countries of the ,w orld still lbase their knowledge 'Of OzechoSlovakia and the vario:us nations that comprise it on the information supplied by the state propaganda apparatUJS of T. G. iMasaryk and Edward Benes. The import Ol:f this will undouibtedly be appreciated iby students of history, and even historians themselves, if they rememlber that this line has been followed and ipvopagaJted for ·a t least the past thirty-seven years. Accordirrrgly, the Czechs are a "historical" nation, while the SlovaJks are oruy a •~branch" of it and their language just a "dialect" orf the Czech. Ridiculous attempts are made to trace the histo,r y of the non-.existent "Ozechoslovruk" nation to the times of the Great Moravian Empire ,a nd Sts. Cyril and [Methodius. The "CzechoslOW!Jks" are supposed to 1b e the nation of Hus, Masaryk, and Benes, but also the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methoilius, WenceslaUJS and Ludlmila. The Ozechs, however, are ",p rogressive" Catholics and the 1Slovruks "reactionary" Catholics. ,F rom officiail statistics we learn how many Poles, Germruns, Jews, 'Magyars and Uikrainians there Weir'e iin Czecho-1Slovakia at any ,g iven time,. but not how many ,SlQIVlaks. That is explained ruway by the s1Jateme.nt th:at the Slovaks were not considered a tminority, hence, they were included under the category of "0zechosloivaiks." The latter term, however, is terr1bly l<_?ng, so the shorter "Czech" is used in many in,stainces as an "aJbbreviation." The term "Slovalk" could not •b e us.ed, I suppose, because it has O'Ile more letter than "Czech"! When statistics do, however, mention Czechs and .Slovaks se,pairately, the figures are in- �SLOVAKIA 41 variably magnified on bhe Ozech side and minim1zed on the Slovak side. The !Magyars were experts at this sort of "mathematics" long before Ozecho-iSlova!kia was !born. The tendency is too olbviou.s. Many distinguished and aJble scholars and writers of the tyipe mentioned lby Kerner, can tell us exactly wh&e and albout when the Czechs, Poles, Russians, Slovenians, Croatians, rSe11bs, etc., fust settled in their respective territories, lbut, it seems, they cannot even venture a.in honest guess when it comes to the Slovaks. I say again: the tendency is dl:wious. They tell us that the Great Moraivian Empilre was the prede•cessor of the Czecho-Slol\TaJk RepU!blic, a Czech venttl!re, when in fact it was not. The Slova:ks, their predecesors that is, occupied both sides of the Morawa River at that time (whence, the name of :the empire) aind, hence, formed the very heart of the shor-Uived emipire, which was destroyed by the GermaJI1s with the aid of the Ozechs who had settled in, Bohemia, the land of the Boii. And we used to hear and read aJboot the "Crown lands of Bohemia," lbut now it seems to be the mode in "1p rogress,ive" historical ch'cles, to use the expression "Crech crown lands." I repeat : the tendency is only too. ohvio.us. The Czechs are not and do, not ,wa,,nt to be Slovaks a,nd, co,ruversely, the Slorva'ks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The SlovaJks .a nd the Ozechs did not have a common history, language, culture and tradition du.ring the past 1500 years, ~ause they did not occupy the same territQry. In a word, the Cizechs 0JI1d the Sl01Vaks developed sepaJTa tely and are, therefore, two distinct ethnic nations. 'l'he Slovaks never were, nor are they now, a "part" of the Czech nation. This simple truth, recognized 'by fille Czechs and SlOIVaJks themselves for many centuries ;past, should also be recognized lby "distinguished and alble scholars ood writers" of our time. It is tiiue that the SlovaJks formed a common political State with the Czechs in 19'.18, but only on certain conditions, the most important of which was that they would be a completely autonomous unit of the Ozecho-SlovaJk �42 SLOV.AKIA federatio.n, that is, that they would en~oy full states' rights. The condition not obeiirrg fulfilled, spelled the end of OrechoSlovaJkia. Because Benes insisted that the Czechs be the "stat~ation," Czecho-Slo1vaJk ia was doomed to perdition. Today the Slovaks do not want to be contained in any common State wti.th the Czechs or any other foreign nation. They can be kept so temporarily only lby force. !But that is not what the "distinguished and aJble sch~lars and writers" who oo1lalboraJted with professor Kerner tell us in the book "CzechoslovaJkia." Propaganda oa.- history? Let us anailyize Kerner's ''Czechoslovakia" chapter by chapter to prove our contentions. But let me note first t!hat on page xvii, at the end of the "contents," professor Kerner tells us how to pronounce "Czech" (not "Czechoslovak," mind you) letters; and on p. xxi, the poem by Edna St. Vincent Millay is entitled "Ozecho-iSlovakia" (:not "Czechoslovalkia") , which b,rings uip the question of hyphenization of the 1political state of tihe 1SlovaJks and the Czechs which was 'b orn iln 1918. The treaty 1b y which Czecho--Slova1kia came into being spelled ithe name with a hyphen to indicate that two indiividual ethnic entities, two distinct nations, 'had formed one political state. The hyiphen was dropped lby Masaryk and Ben-es and their followers. Whether the hyphen was J.eft in the title of the ipoem because of the author's insistence, or prof. Kerner's "careless" editing, I do not know, but it is singular that the hyphen should a;ppear in a book liike "Ozechoslova;lcia" at all! 1 • "C~ECHOSLOVA:KIA, Part I: BACKGROUND Chapter I-"The Czechoslovaiks-Anthropol ogical Notes . .." By Ales Hrdlfclka, M.D., Sc.D., Gura.tor, Division of Physical Anthropology, United States National Museum; Huxley 'Medal Lecturer, London (1927) ; memlber, National Academy of Scien-ces; honorary Doctor of 1S cience (Prague, Br.no)," etc., etc. Please not.e: The underscoring here and in the following is mine. "The term Czechoslovak ,i,s o! r ecen t coinage, dating from 1918, l\·hen the united Cze chs and Slovaks proclaimed. thei r independence of the Dual Mon,archy and th eir est abHshmi:mt of the Czeohoslovak �SLOVAKIA 43 Republic. . . . 'Illie name Czech (pronounced Chekh) ls derived, accord Ing to an old tradition, from the chiefta&n of the main Slav tribe who brought them some time during the dawn, of ihistory probably in tihe fifth cent\.U'ly A.!D. - to the heart of the land (IP, 3) . . . In fact, the hLstoTY of the Czechoslovak tribes, from the dawn of written ,r ecords to the present day, has •be.en one of ever.Jiasting struggles ·a.galns,t dnvooers (PP. 4.-5) . . . Tihe Slovaks, who u.p to 1029 formed a unit with Moravia, were then torn away by the Ma• gya,rs, isolated from the west, for,c ed .away from the best grounds iu the warm •lolwland,s, and eventuaUy repressed. in every way" (p. 6). It is evident that even Dr. Ales Hrrdli6ka, distinguished ,anthropologist of ~ech origin, :seems to be a bit confused about when the "Czechslovruks" came into being. Whether the Ozechs -are descendants ,of the "main. 'Slav trilbe" is open to ·question. The 'SlO!Vaks fo:nrned a "unit" with Moravia up to. 1029, according to Hrdlicka, 1but who the people were who settled in Morruvia is Jeft to the reader. Mora,via, of ooUTse, came under the influence of the Ozechs in time, at least the western portion of it, :b ut was not settled lby the Ozechs when the .Slovruks formed a unit with it, for the simple reason, it seems, that the for~ fathers of ithe Slovaiks settled on iboth sides of the river Morava, w'hile the Ozechs settled in fue J.and of the Boii, which was a distinot geographical unit, ,prolbaJbly a/bout the size of present-day Bohemia . • "The Czechoslovaks to 1620'' - ,b y S. Harrison Thomson, Ph ..D., BLitt. - Professor of Medieval History, Unirversity of Co-lorado; Ph.D., Charles Uni'Vers,ty, Prague; B.Litt., Omord University; Ewtor, Magistri Johannis Hus Tractatus Res-ponsivus; Johannis Wyclif Summa de Ente (1930) ;" etc., etc. CI:I\A.PrIDR III - "Led ,b y a travelln,g IFI'lankish merchant, Samo, tihe Slavic tribes freed themselves ,from the Av,a r rule, and chose Samo for their •k ing (623-624) . . . This ,e arly kingdom, which would appea,r to !have been pr.emature, iw,as ,neither Czech nor Slovak. It would have to be called Western ·s1av, ,b y .reason or a large intermixture of Slavic tribes which became gra.dua:l!y differentiated as they settled in different local!tes . . . The names of the princess Llbuiie and the peasant Premysl whom she cih ose to be her husband are in all proba• bility tJhe names of real persons. At any rate ,t he male descendants or this ,s-emilegendaxy .Pfemysl were to rule over ,Bohemia and neighboring regions until 1306 . . . It is not certain whether tihe Slavic chi,eftalne. enga,ged at this time to pay .tribute to the Fr,alllk.is~ emperor or not" (P. 9). �SLOVAKIA 44 Id: Samo, the "traveling 1F ranlkish merchant," established a kingdom, he necessarily must hruve stopped traveling somewhere, and that "somewhere" ,w as on territory occupied 'by "S1'arvic" tr.i!bes, out of which later a certain nation, or certain nations, arose. ,s amo's kingdom was not on the territory settled by the Czechs or other Sla-vonic peoples, 1b ut Olll the terri1lory settled by the "Slavs" who were later oalled ISlorvaks. Fredegar's Chronicles seem to indicate as much (THIE ISI.JOV~S AND !UNG SAMO'S EMiP]RE, by iDr. Henrich Bartelk, SU)VA.KIA, June 1954). The "Slavic trilbes" whioh ibecame gradually differentiated as they settled in "different localities" could not be identical witll the "Slruvic tribes" which remained on the territory of ISrum<>'s kingdom and, later, came to ~ ca1led the SlovaJks. As far ,as, the Ozech "Llbuse and Pfemysl" are concerned, let us talke the word Olf learned Czechs that they were legendary characters ("Ottuv SLOVN1K NAUONY," Vol.. XV, p. 1038; Vol. XX, rp. 625). We might a.loo concede, without offending historical truth, t!hat all "1S1'avic" chieftains, including the forefathers of the 'Czechs, paid tribute to the Frankish emperor, when he was strong enough to exact it. Why should the 'Slavs of Bohemia" be an exception? II t seems that professor Harrison is interested in building up a case for the Czechs to prove that they were completely independent during the time of Charlemagne (8th-9th cenrtury). Why? 1 • "Later in the ,c entury (846) !Louis the German su,bju,g-ated Mora. 11ia, •b ut suffered defeat wihen he ,a ttacked the Slavs of Bohemia. Th1s ,a ttack of tLouis the German n,vas directed ,against the empire of the Moravian prince Mojmir, who had shown rem arkable abllity in consolidating his rule south, east •a nd west to include southern Poland, Silesia, Bohemia, Moravia, and the valleys of the middle Danube and Theiss rivers a,s far as the northern boundaries of the Byzantine Empil'e . .. After the death of Svato,pluk (894) the Moravian Empire rapidly broke up into its component parts. The Czech princes of the Pi'emyslide line .gained independence for Bohemia, and the Magyars, new arrivals dn. t,he east, -extended llieir power over n~rthern Pannonia. German's and Slavs, united for the moment, were de• feated by the Ma,gyars in 907 neax (Bratislava (Pressburg), and the ruin of the Moravian state was complete" (P. 10). Louis subjugaited iMoravia, but was defeated by the "Slavs of Bohemia," which means that the latter were not �SLOVAKIA 45 identioal with the Slavs of Moravia, who were ruled by Mojmir. !Professor !Harrison also tells us that Mojmir, the Moravian prince, consolidated his rule by consolidating various ISlmrianic ('Slavic) trilbes, including those of Bohemia. This Mojmir did by force. It is significant that Harrison does not refer to Mojmir as a "Slovak" ,p rince, though he does not hesitate to say that 'Czech" princes gained independence fur Bohemia. He also omits to say that the Czechs, not the ",Slavs of Bohemia," mind you, gained their independence by !breaking ·a way from ,t he !MO!'aJVian Empire in 895, :aJfter the death of S,v atopluk. The Czechs, then, heliped to destro¥ the integrity of the Grea,t Moravian ffimpire, the heart of which ,was in Slovak country, the country of the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia. In 900 the Czechs, the Slavs of Bohemia, together with the Germans, invaded the territory of the Sl01VaJks, the Slavs of Great Moravia, aJild after a terrific /battle forced !Mojmir II to sue for peace. Svatoplulk's three sons, ruling various areas of the Empire and constantly •a t each others throats, contributed greatly to the dissolution of Great Moravia. When the !Magyars moved into northern IPannonia, they met with little resistance, lbut professor Harriso n neglects to say what people settled in northern Pannonia, even though history tells us that the forefathers of the Slovaks occu'Pied tha.t territooy at the time. And where professor Harrison found the legend that "Germans and Slavs, uni.ted for the moment,." tried to save t!he Great Morawian Empire from falling into the hands of the Magyars in 907, he does !IlOt say. As mentioned rubove, the Germans, and the 'Slavs of Bohemia" (the Coochs) contributed to the downfall of Great Morawia. It is not, I thinlk, unreasonaJble to say that if the Germans and Slavs were really united to sruve the Moravian Em'Pire from falling into the hands of the Magyars, the latter would hardly have taken what was left of it in 907. Careless reporting of history? Probably, ·b ut to me it seems to be tendencious and puTposeful. Professor Harrison, it seems, was doing a jolb for the Brague regime and �46 SLOVAKIA the Ozechs. This is all the more obvious in his !book "Czechoslovakia in EmQpean H!istory" (Princeton Uniiversity Press, 1943, 1195'3), for which Harrison was ·aJWarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize for Literature" in 1944, when the Ozecho-1Slova'k State factually did not exist for five years. 'Dhe award was made iby Dr. Benes's ·g overnmentin.J..ondon at the Uni:versity Clulb in New Yorik, Decem.lber 30, 1944. • •~remysl Otaka.r [ (1197-1230:) was able to use circumstances for the •b enefit of his dynrusty and the Czech kingdom . . . iHe shifted his allegiance four times. eadh time gaining conoession:s or confirmation of eonc-essions .previously granted ,b y another claimant to the throne . . . . But to Pfomysl must be assigned the responsibility for inviting tJhe German immig,r ation. Encouraged by the court, many Czech nobles. had married Germ,a;n ,w omen; some of the best positions of the ·churoh in ,Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; ·German mf.nnesin,g ers ,w,ere in high favor at the royal court and at the courts of the Ticher nobles" (P. 13). Here professor !Harrison tells us tJhat 1P rem.ysl Otakar was quite a "shifity" ruler, using circumstances for the benefit of his dynasty and the "Czech" kingdom, not the "Boh,emian" ikingdom, but favored German immigration, and "Czech" (not Bohemian) ndbles married: German women, and some of the best ;positions of ,t he Church in Bohemia and Moravia were held lby German clerics, etc. It is evident here rthat professor Harrison cannot make up his mind whether the Bohemians were Ozechs or GelUllans, or both! It is quite clear, however, that the Slovaiks, the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia, did not .fit into the picture of the "Cz,ech" ikingdom at that ,t ime. The twenty ipa,ges of Kerner's "OzechosloivaJlda" taken up iby Harrison's "'IJhe Czechoolovaks to 1620" use the word Slovak(ia) some seven times and, therefore, repudiate the idea, insinuation or implication, that .there were any "Czechoslovaks" up ,t o 1620. Not only that, but for Harrison, it seems, the ISlo.vaJks - the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia - simply do not exist at all after the fall of the Great iMoraivian Empire, except for the mention (p. 17) of "a consideraJble number of (Hussiite) adherents 1? Sfovalkia," which is quite a stretch of the imagination. The Hussite !business was strictly Cezch; the Hussites did �SLOVAKIA 47 more damage than good for the Czechs themselves, and aibsolutely no good for the Slovaks, whose lands they invaded, pillaging and !burning their homes, and murdering their population. Furthermore, !Harri.son oreaites the impression that the !Battle of White !Mountain (1620) was ,a; nationalistic affair, W1aJged lby the Ozechs against the Genmans. That is the legend fabricated 'Mld propagated by some Protestant Czechs. The White 1MoU1DJtain affair, however, was definitely a religious and dynastic aifafir. After Tilly, the emperor's general, defeated Frederiok and the Bohemian (111ot Czech!) maignates, some 27 of the leading "rebels" were beheaded: one a Catholic; six were Germans. Not one, however, was executed becaJUse of his nationality. Not without interest is Harrison's mention (p. 11) that the Premyslide iprinces di'Vided the country, in .t he tenth century, "into administrative distrfots (zupy) with a royal representative (zupan) at the head of each distTiot." wf the Czech Premys.lides actually used the terms "zupa, zupan," I wonder if professor Harrison mi,g ht enlighten us from whom they might have acquired those words, since they are rarely used !by the Czechs . • CHA!PTER III - "The Czechoslovaks from the Battle of White ,Mountain to the World War" - by RO'bert J. Kerner, Ph. D ., i.lL.D., /Litt.D. - Sather Professor of History, Uni'Versity of California; LL.D., Omaha University; Litt.iD., Paiik College; foreign memlber, Royal Bohemian Society of Letters and Sciences (Prague); foreign member, Safarik Learned Society (Bratislava); commander, Order of the Whlite Lion (Ozecho~SlovaJkia); memlber, Expert Staff, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace (!Paris); etc., etc. "The dlsa,strous battle of W•h ite Mountain on November 8, 1620, uslhered lin a period of three centur.les in which the Klngdom of Bohemia was reduced to .three provinces, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia, in ,t he Habs,b urg MOIIlarchy. During the first centUTY of •t his period the nation lost three-fourths of its native nobility, its most eminent and wealthy citizens, its schools and noted scholara, and its national independen-ce. A remarkable national renaissance took place in the second century. In the remainder of the period, the Czecho• slovak nation, after tlailin.g to bring •about a reorganization of the �48 SLOVAKIA Ha;bsburg Monarchy on ,a federal -basis, or to secure the same dg,h ts as tfue Magyars, ,c arried out a ,s uccessful revolution a,nd obtained its independence" (P. 29). !Referring to the underscored words, I ask professor Kerner: 1. What nation, the Czech or Bohemian? 2. What "Czechoslovak." nraition, when there was none? 3. What Magyars, ,o r does iKerner mean Hungarians? 4. What revolution 1by the "Ozechoslovaik" nation?. Kerner used the title he did for this chapter delilberately, because he must haJVe known there were no "CzechoslO'V8Jks," ethnically spooking, ,b efore or after the battle of White Mol.l.[ltain, to the World War, except in the minds of dreamers and chauvinistic, imperialistic Creohs. He could easily haJVe ,o mitted the d:ew references to Slovaks and the m8Jny to "Orechos}ovaiks" in the 211 1pages of the chrupter and had ,a rpretty good ,s tory on the "Czechs'' from the Battle of White Mountain to the World War." Practically everything in the chapter is "Czech" - language, literature, nation, historians, pe3Jsants noblemen, renaissance, Catholics, Pr.otestants, opera, national anthem, Lutherans, journalists - lbut Kerner still makes pretense at writing aJbout "Czechoslovaks." Is there any good ,r eason why an honest, Ulliprejudiced, objective historian should try to fool even himself? Surely, Kerner musrt !know that the ~echs devel01ped in the Austrian ,p art, ,w hile the Slova!ks developed in ,t he Hungarirun prurt of the Dual Monarchy. What Kerner means to imply when he says that the "Czechoslovak nafilon . . . . . . carried out a successful revolution" and db.tamed its independence is at least questionaJble. We know that there was not even a revolution in Prague. !Robert Ingrim tells us: "All that J:J.a;ppened ,was tJhat Emperor-King Charles, seeing that Wilson :a:bandoned his former program in the hour of victory, dropped tJhe fed,ema;listic idea and ordered his minds.tern and lieutenant-governors to surrend,e r the admi'llistration to coonmittees of the various nationalities. Thi,s explains among other things why Masaryk, as the first president of Czecho-Slovakia, had to decree which date was to be regarded as the beginning of the Czech re· volution. It simply had not taken place. All bhe successor states, including little. Austria, needed the legal fiction of a ,r evolution, because as• new states they repudiated the idea of continuity and based �SLOVAKIA 49 their la/\V,s upon a revolutionary origin. For the Czechs this was very important. When, in 1921, .the .Sudeten Germans complained to the League of Nations t:hat they had not been allowed to take par.t in the making of the constitution of the new State, the Czecho-Siov•a k government replied. that 'the Cz~ho./Slovak State was the work and product of the revolution, made solely by the Czecho-Slovak nation,' which was, therefore, 'the only constitutional factor.' Hence, 'the Natiooru Revolutionary Assembly was alone authorized to set up the constitution' by W1h1ch Germans, \Hungarians, Ruthenians, and Poles had •b een made second-class citizens" (After Hitler Sta11n? P. 107). To complete the above piotu.re, '.I might add that the Slovak memlbers of the "Na,tional Revolutioaiary Assembly" were lhand-'I)icked lby Masaryk and Benes and, included firve Czechs, hence, were not truly representa.tirve of the political will of the 1S101Vaik nation. The constitution that resulted, therefore, was strictly a Czech product, j'llSt as was Ozecho-lSlovak domestic iand foreign policy. In referring to the development that took ipla.ce during the Reformation and ICoU!Ilter-lReformation in Ozech rund Slovak territories, Kerner says that "in general the same development took place in the ISloivaJk counties od' Hungary as in Bohemia, /Moravia and \S ilesia." If a person did not know !better, he might be led to 1believe that Kerner did not use the express-ion "Ozech counties" in his comparison, because Bohemia, Moria.via and !Silesia were supposedly solidly Czech. We know that they were not. And we know, too, that Bohemia was not the only country that suffered during the Thirty Yea.rs' War; that war "ravaged Bohemia with the same fury it unleashed all over the Germanies. . . There was no, difference and certainly no national ,pll!'.pose" (I.n,g rim, op. cit., ,p. 57). Kerner, furthermore, writes ab.9-ut "Magyar'' magnates and "Magyar" nolbility, rwhen he really means "Hungarian" magnates and noibility. There is a difference: the Magyars were not the only inhabitants of Hungary before or aft-er the 17th century. The same applies .to the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian." Of course, we might say that the tenns today - af.ter the expulsion of over three million Germans - are mo.re or less synonymous. Let us, however, remember that they were not even in ,t he recent past: the Czechs were not the only inhabitants of Bohemia. �50 SLOVAKIA "A new period in .the history of the Czechoslovak nation was inaJugurated" (p. 32), when 1Fredericik the Great seirzed Silesia in 1740, Kerner states oaitegorically and, fartiher down on the same page, that "the reforms of Maria '.Dheresa and Joseph JiI . . . not only culminated in the completion of the evolution ,which tra.nsf.ormed the Kingdom of Bohemia into three provinces and hence virtual amalg,amaJtion of 1!he Austrian Hereditary Lands with the Lands of the (Bohemim Crown into a single administrative unit, but they threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation 'by the process• of Germanization in schools, government, ,and church." Here, it is obvious that Kerner w-..s a 1b it ~fuddled and •a )pparently forgot, in his zeal to promot.e the concept of a "Czoohoslovaik nation," that ,t he SkwaJks lived in HU!Ilg,ary and,. hence, !by no stretch of t'he imaigination, even in this "enlightened" and "iprogres.sive" era, could have had any connection with the "Austrian Hereditary Lands" and the "Lamds of the Bohemi,a n Crown." It w.as the existent Czechs and not the nJOn-existent "OzechoslwaJks" who were threatened with the loss of identity as a nation iby the process of ~a.n:rzatiorn, in Austria. We can concede that the policy of Joseph ll "of trying to denationalize" Magyars, Italians, Poles, and Rumaniians "aroused them to activity" (p. 34), as it did the ~echs, SlovaJks, Croats, Slovenes, and Serbians, ibut why does Kerner lump the latter nations together as "Czeichoslovaiks" and "Jugoslavs" when he knows that such did not exist either in Joseph !I's time or even later? 'I'he reason fur this is only too obvious. On page 3Q,. the "Czechoslovaks" we.re threatened "w1t'h Joss of identity as a nation," but three pages later, according to Kerner, "at the same time the situation of the Slovaks in HWigary was somewhat improved by the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II" (p. 35). The same reforms even led "to a great national revival (p. 32) . . . the Czech renaissance develo ped momentum step by step as decree after decree of Maria Theresa and Joseph II sought to a'bolish the use of the Czech language. When Joseph II completed t!he official demise of the Czech Ian1 �SLOVAKIA 51 guage in school, government, allld church in 1790, the Czech nation revwed. 1So mysterious was this development that its exact oauses have been a su:bject: of dispute among the best ·scholars" (1p. 34). Then on t:he following pa;ge (35) Kerner states: "The Ohurch feared that it would lose its ,g rip on the Czech nation i:f its priests spolke only German. These and other indications led to the establishment by Leoipold rnr of a chair in the Czech language at the University of ,Praigue in 1791." What, then, is this business ,th,a,t the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph JiI ''threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation"? And what is so mysterious about <the reviival of the Czech nation in 1790? Kerner certainly must ha,ve ,h eard a;bouit the principle of action and reaction! If the iMa~rs, and laiter the Ozechs, had not tried to suppress the Slovak lang,uage and oppressed the Slovaks, they would have rprobaibly .perished as a nation in time . .Js it not olbtvious what ha,ppens to languages and peo~ ples in America rwhere freedom abounds? [n America peoples of every color, .race and creed enjoy freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of asoomibly; they are d':ree to !build their own churches, schools, liibraries, 'beneficial organi:zations and ipubHsh new.s,pa,pers and books in their respective languages. Yet, there is no doufbt in. my mind that in time non-®nglish iperiodioa1s and 1books, published in America, will /be a rarity. Certainly, this must be just as olbvious - ,a nd not myst.erious - even to professor Kerner. • "A Protestant sc hool, -witJh a c hair in the Czech language a.nd literature, was founded in Brati,s.lava, and this inst:i,tution counted amQ/Ilg its s,t udents the future Czech his torian !FrantAse'k Palacky from Moravia and tlhe Slovaks Jan Kolla r ia.n.d Pave.I Josef i:lafaiik. The Protestant Slovaks followed closely the d·e velopment or the Czechs, Wlhereas the Catholic Slovaks under Antonin Bernolak tried to create, with indlff-erent success at the time, a. written Slovak dialect, which W'<IS s-eparate from .but closely akin to the Czech because a western dialect of spoken ,Slovak was used. The course of poli• tical events could not cheok the national revival of Czechoslovaks" (p. 36) . ,P rofessor Kerner does not relate the whole story, but only the part that s'l.lits his ipUTpOSe and, hence, sins by �52 SLOVAKIA omi-ssion. The Catholic Slcwa!ks oonstituted rut least 75 per cent of the Sl()IVaik nation, while the Protestant Slovaks only aibout ill per cent. Koillar and Safarik cultivated ,a "dead" 1amgiuage, a langu,a;ge tha;t was used iby a small part of tile Slovak nation, the Lutherans. And the latter used that language - "biblical" Czech, therefore, not the "live" language of the vast masses of the Czech people - mostly for and during religious functions, while at home they used Sloiv•aik. Anton, not Antonin (the Czech equivalent), Bernolwk not only "tried" to create a Slo.va!k literary language, but actually did estaibLish such a literary medium of Slorvak which was u:sed :some fifty years b,y S[ovak writers. There was no need :for iBernolaik to. create "a written Slovak dialect," ;b ecause various 'Slova!k dialects already were existent at that time. And iBernola:k definitely did 111ot choose the western dialect because it was "closely alkin" to Czech. Kerner, however, is quite right when he says that "the comse of political events could not check the nationa:I revival of the Ozechoslovalks," lbecaJuse they were non--existenrt. Those events could not check the national rerv:wal of either the Ozechs or the :S'1ov0iks . 1 • "Caug,h t between their sympathies with the Czechs and their fears of their .Magyar ov•erlord:s, Slovak patri'ots saw their security, not in coalescing at once with their Czech brethren, but in iworking to create a separate Slovak national movement by taking up once more the unsuccessful jdea of Bernolak that of developing a separate written Slovak language. Ludevit Stur, Michal Hodza, and Jo.:,ef Hurban, fearing the reproaches of the Magyars if they continued to use the Czech language, and hoping to attract the Slovak peasant masses, chooe in 184-5 to make. a dialect spoiken. in tlle central Slovak counties the '!lew literary language. The Czechs wa,r ned in v,a in against this departure from t.he practice of a thousand years. ·T hey argued that dts r esults would only be. to the >benefit of the Germans and Magy,ar.i" (p. 38). This statement is not based on 'hone.sit, hi:sitorical research. ilt is a fabrication pure and simple. Slova!k patriots ,t hen, even as now, fully realized that they could not safegu,,ard their nation.al existence !by playing second-, fiddle to other nations in the political coTIJCert. They did not fear the 'Maigyiars who sought to Magy.arme them any more than they feared the Czechs who sought to Ozechize �SLOVAKIA 53 the:rn. True Slovak ·p atriots never let their sympathies for the Ozechs or other oppressed nations interfere with their ultimate natioo.a.1 aim: freedom and rpolitioal independence - to become masters of their own household, of their own destiny. '.Dhey rebelled against the Magyars and, later, eiven against the Czechs, just as the Magyars and the Ozechs had rebelled ag,ainst the HlaJbsburgs. Stur, Hodza, Hurban (Jozef, not Josef) a,nd other Slova,k patriots developed the literary SlovaJk medilllIIl estrublished by iBen1i0laJk and his followers - the "lilve" language used lby the vast masses of the Slovalk people, both O~tholic and also Lutheran. They wrote in Czech for the Cze.ohs and in Slovak for the Slov,aks. Kerner does not say so directly, ibut the implication is ,t here that Stur, Hod.fa •a nd Hurb-an did use the Czech language exclusively in rtheir writings. The fact is thaJt; they did not and they did not fear the "reproaches of the Magyairs" for using Czech at ,any time they desired to do so. As int.elligent men they knew fully well they ieould not rouse their people nationally by using a language that was foreign to them, a language they did not consider their own. Why, then, the 'balderdash a:bout the Czechs warning Slo;vak paitriots against their depa;rture "from the practice of a thousand years"? '.Dhe vast majority of .the IS1ovruk natiO!Il, i!he Catholic Slovaiks, used their own Slovak language in their churches, homes and in their Hterary worlks, b;ut 'Professorr Kerner wO'Uld hruve students of history "Czechoslovak" history - believe that they used the Czech language forr a "thousand years" prior t,o 1845. Why does Kerner resort to outright falsehoods and aJbsurrd falbrications? Czech was brought into Siovakia, it is true, by Czech exiles during i!he Coun.ter..R.eformation to strengthen Lutheranism, ibut it never 'became the predominant literary medium of the ,vast masses of the Slovak people and their ,w riters. 1 • "The Magyar large landholder, the Catholic clergyman, and the Jewish merchant, screened, ,b ehind a blatant Magyar propaganda, worked to denaclonalize the Slovak peasant by falsifying his history and •by asserting tihat his language had no orelation to the Czech and did not belong to the languages of western Europe" (p. 44). �54 SLOVAKIA It is significant that Kerner should put the finger on "Catholic clergymen" - without mentioning names - and omit Protestant "progressilve" preachers and Jewish R3Jb.. bis who were equally interested in "denationiali ~ng" the Slovalk peasant, practically always woTking aigainst :the national interests of the ISlovalk nation. Of course, this is nothing new in history. T. G. iMasaryik and Benes, who should have learned the lesson of :A.ustr1a:-Hungary, denied the existence of it.he !Slovak nation as an individual ethnic entity, declaring the ISlovia!ks were only a "branch" of the Czech nation and their language only ,a "dialect" of the Ozech. (Falsifying history seems to be a specialty of the followem of Masaryk and Benes. And Kerner proves it! 1 • I "Whereas Kr-amai' became, so to ~,peak, the symbol of the economic u,psm1ge of the Czech lboUTgeoisie, Masaryk became the intellectual and spiritual head of the entire nation, including the Slovaks . • • . He (~·a saryk) became a Protestant, a modern Czech Puritan. Influenced by his reading af Czech history, he ,b elieved that h-e found. !ts plhilosophy 1n the religious ideal of il:he Hussites and the Ozeoh !Brethren" (pp. 47-48). The truth, however, is that T. G. Masaryk never was the "intellectual and spiritual head" of the 1Slov•lrlLs. If the Ozechs wish to consider Masaryk :as such, they are free to do so. The o.vel'IWhelming Catholic majority oif the Slovak people could not. Hlas Kerner forgotten Masaryk's blatant cries "away from !R;ome!" and "Rcxme must (be put on trial and condemned!"? Czech history is not Slovak history; the philosophy of Slova:k history does not rest on the "religious ideal of the Hussites and the Czech Brethren." Catholic Czechs form ibhe majority of the Czech nation, hence, we have good reason to doulbt Kerner's evaluation of Masaryik -as far as •t hey ,a re concerned, lbecaJuse Masaryk never did represent or COlllcern himself !With their spiritual interests, in fact, put them in jeopardy. Masaryik, according to Kerner, "viewed the problem of the small oppressed n.a:tiO'IlS ,as the polilticai and international phase of the social question - the exploit,aitdon of one nation by anot!her, for political exploitation meant cheap lalbor to the laboring drasse.s." 'But what happened after Czeoho-!Slovakiia was lborn and Masaryk !became he:r first president? He denied staites' rights to Slovakia and �SLOVAKIA 55 thought nothing of the OLechs exploiting the ,S lovaks and their national wealth! CHA[PTER [V - Peace Conference" - • "The World War, Revolution and iby RO{'bert J. Kern.er. '10n July 4 (191,5), Masaryk publicly in,a ugurated the revolutionary movement •by a ,l ecture on Jan Hus in Zurich, Srwitzerl•a nd. After Benes succeeded in escaping J.irom Austria, the Czech Foreign Committee issued its public manifesto for Czechoslovak independence in Pans on !November 14, 1915. This manifesto had previously been agreed upon by the leaders at home and by the leaders of Czech and Slovak colonies In America, England, and France a point on wihich !Masaryk insisted" (p. 53). 'W ho were those leaders "alt home" and in the Czech and Slovak colonies in America, England, and France? The record tells us that the leaders of the Czechs and Slovalks at home ikinew practically nothing of Masaryk's plans at that time; and the leaders of their respective colonies in various countries still less! • "This Committee (the Czech Foreign Committee) led to the creation of the •Czechoslovak Nation-al Council in 1916., which under Masaryk, Benes, and ~tefanlk gradually assumed the functions of goverJlllilent" (pg. 153-54) . . . "The Czechoslovak National Council, which was leading the struggle abroad, had not been disavowed by the nation at home" (p. 56). 1t is quite clear, rt:hen, that the Czech Committee is credited with the creation of the "Czechoslovak" Council, which Masaryk headed. But it is not in accord with fact that the Council "had not been disruvowed 1b y the nation at home." Masaryk was the leader of the Czech (Progressive Party, which he alone represented in the .Austrian ,parliament. When he left Austria, late .in 1914, Miasaryk went abroad with a ipr.ogram of his own. As far as is !known, he had not consulited wii.th Ozech and Siovalk leaders a:t home and had no authorization f.ram the Czechs or the Slovaks at home ito represent their politioal will. Of course, wherever Masaryk went, he did pose as a competent representative of the Czechs at home. When President. Wilson, .late in Decemlber 1916, requested an lb;elligerents to state their war aims, the Allied reply of January 1'2, 1917, included the following demand: "Lilberation of Italians, Riumaniains, Slaws,. and Czeciio- �56 SLOVAKIA Slovaks from foreign rule." Please note the "Slavs and Czecho-Slovaks" part, lbecaUJSe thaJt tells us 'j ust how well the Allies were informed on the sUJbjoot. Since Slovruks and Czechs spoke different languages, occupied different territories, and never in history had been united, rbhe appelation "Ozecho-1Slorvruk,s " was real new. At that time, when the British government was asked, in ithe Commons, ,w hethmit could indicate the territory inhabited iby "Czecho-1Slo-· vakis," the ra nswer was "no." The Czechs at home resented being mentioned as a nation under "foreign rule." One of their leading ipaipers, the NARODNE I.1IiSTY, had this tto say aJbout it: 1 "It is amazing how indefatigably Masaryk endeavors to defile the honor of the CZECH nation. The enemies have learnt that the love of all Austrian peoples for their inherited dynasty and their fatherland is firm and unshakable. The enemies have realized that those who make contradictory statements abroad are liars and impostors." In Norvem!ber, 1916, all the Czech parties in the Austrian rparliament, without a single exception, had issued a solemn declaration, stating thrat "the basis and guaranty of the national existence of the Czech people are the dynasty, called to the throne centuries ago, and the indivisibly constituted Monarchy." In the declaration they demanded foderafozation. And oin December 30, 191.6, all the Czech party leaders attended ttihe emiperor's coronation as king of Hungary as "guesrts of honor." After the Afli.ed reply to, Wilson became !known, the society of Czech memlbers of parliament sent the following letter (J,a nuary 23, 1'917) to the foreign minister of AustroHtrogary: "In view of the Alli-ed runswer to President ,W ilson in which the liberation of the Czechs figures as a war ,a im, we reject this insinuation whiClh is based on entirely erroneous assumptions. We declare emphatically that the Czech people, as always in the past, is convinced that it can be assured of a prosperous development only under the Habsburg scepter and within the Habsburg Monarchy" (Ingrim: "After Hitler Stalin?" p. 75). The very same Czech members of parliament requested Prime M:in.istffi' C1am....Martinic, a Czech, to arrange an audience with the emperor for them. Why? !Because :they said: "We want to tell His Majesty that we shall always stand by him and his successors; that our demands will always be compatible �SLOVAKIA 57 with the interests of the Habsburg dyansty and of the realm; that we are loyal servants of the king and the country; that our complaints have never shaken our belief that after victory the claims of the ,Czech people will find satisfaction within the framework of the realm and under the Habsburg crown." It is quite obvious, then, thaJt the representatirves of the Czech people did not want separation - independence but federalization. Furthermore, Masaryk ,a nd his Council were hiit from another quarter. At the conference of the Sociiailist International in 1Stockho1m, June 1:917, the Czech delegates vociferously demanded "an independent Czech State within a federated Austria-Hungary." Is it possible that professor Kerner, an expert on Czecho-SloiValkia, is ignorant of what w:as going on even m Czech lands while !Masaryk a.nd Benes were calling for the destruction of Austria? I cannot ·believe it •a nd, therefore, say that iKerner delilberately did not tell the truth when he said that Mas•a ry'k's Council "had not been disavowed by the nation at home." Masarylk :himself admits it in his work "Svetowa RevoJuce" (pp. 1150-il.52; 253-254 ; 32,1 ). When 'Kerneir wr1tes aJbo.ut the organimtion of the "Czechoslovak Legions," the work a,ccomplished lby Masarylk and iBenes in ,E ngland, France, Russia allld America for the esta;blishment of the "Ozechosloivalk Reipulblic," he completely ignores the effort put forth by Gen&al Milan R. Stefanik, the !Slovak who, did much in France, the U.S. A., Italy and Russi.a for the realization of the Republic. fu the twenty pages of this cltaJpter, Kerner mentiom; the name of this great Slovak only once, but does not tell us a single thing aJbo,ut the ,w ork he did so tha,t Czecho-,Slova'l da might become a reality. If Ma,s aryk himself was not loath to give credit to •S tefanik for his accompl.isihmen,ts, why should Kerner ibe? Furthermore, Kerner devotes. several pages to the "OzechoslavaJk" Legion in Siiberia - "the ,a rmy which had fought vicitorio'll.Sly at !Kiev, Zhitamir, and Baikhmach, and which yearned to leave Russia in peace in order to continue the conflict ,a gainst the Germans in the West." He almost outdoes Masaryk himself on the ·" Siberian anabasis" legend. �58 SLOVAKIA The fact is, however, that the legion was offered a short route home via Murmansk and Archangel whence British sh1ps were to transport it to the battle front in France. But the legion, afraid of German sulbmarines and not too eager to fight, preferred ithe long way home via Siberia to Viadfuvostok. AB a result, Masarylk's a:xmy reached Europe long after the smoke of the war had lifted, without haJVing contributed ,to the defeat of Germany and Austria. The IStberian anabas:is made greait propagand a for Masaryk's cause, as he himself atlmitted, and without it, in fact, the "calli:!e" m1ght haive 'been lost. '.I recommend that Kerner and other students •o f history, read pp. 81-83 of fugrim's "After Hlitler !Stalin?" - and, ibut carefully, even Masaryik's "Svetava. Revoluce." • "In the ,a ims publicized as the objectives of peace, the Czechosl ovaks were promised their independence on the basis of the selfdetermination of the Czechoslovak nation. It is a fum:l.amentaJ question just what "self-deteirmi natlon of the nations" meant a.t tihat time. It s eems most probrul>le that when it ,was first uttered it meant the determinatio n of a n entire nation to choo.se whether it wished to be jndependent or live under another, and not self-determination of small parts of it" (p. 62). Here, Kerner quite naively would have us :b elieve that he iis be.fuddled lby the meaning of "self-determ ination." Of course, he could have given credit ,to Masaryk and especially Benes for his 1pretended quandary. I say "pretended ," /because he himself tells us on the page following: " In many regions the populations were thoroughly mixed in composition . . . . As far as the Czechoslovak s were concerned, the matter was complicated by the fact that their claims in the Czech regions rested on historic rights, the Lands of the Bohemian Crown (Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia), which they as a nation had created and maintained in history, rund on the rights of nationality for the ,Slovaks in Hungary, wihere the Magyars cJ.almed 'historic rights of the Lands of tihe Hungarian Crown" (p. 63) . So, what is this business "the Czechoslov aks were promised their independen ce on the ,basis of the self-determ ination of the Czechoslovak nation"? !Kerner purt:s himse1f in a ivery ludicrous situation: he admits the existence of the Czech naition, Czech regions, etc., does not admit directly the existence of the Slovak counterpar ts, but still insists on having a "Orechoslovak" nation! �SLOVAKIA 69 AP, mentioned earlier, one of the aims of the Allies was the "lilberaition of Iltalians, Rumanians, Slavs and Cze- choslovaks from foreign r.ule." The Czechs and Slova;ks got i'lllto the picture also as "Ozech~ova ks," and not only as Slavs, at the persistent insistence of Dr. Edward Benes to support the fiction promoted by M'aJSaryik and himself that "Czechs and Slovaks were the same." The truth, however, remains that the SlovaJks are an individual nation in the great family of Slovanic nations, as are the Poles, Byelorussians , Ukrainians, Russians, C.zec'hs, Bulg,aria:ns, .S erbs, ISlO!Veni•a ns, Croatians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, a,nd Lusatia,n tSerbs, whatever Kerner and other "historians" of his type might have to say to the contrary notwithstandi ng. If Kerner does not be1ieve that t:he right of self-dete:nmination applies equally to the Czechs and /Slovaks, let him .say so outright and be done wi~h it. Kerner should know, as we certainly lmow, that the magic formula that druzzled. and charmed. President Wilson was "national determination," which meant that every ethnic group be conceded the right to decide to which state it wished to belong. More dmpo:ntrunt than what it meanit, of course, was what it implied: the notion that the id68.l state would be one inhabited only by one ethnic entity, one nation. The tenth of WiliSion's "1Fo!Urteen Points" reads as follows: ''!The peoples of Austria-iHu111gary , whose place among the nations we wish to see s·afeguaro€d and •a ssured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development." What does "the peoples of Austria-Hung ary" mean to professor Kerner? Does it mean all the peoples, except the Slova1k people? If Masaryik used his charms to maJk:e Wilson •b elieve the fiction that the "Czechs and the Slovaiks were the same," and so to deceive him does that alter the .truth that the Ozechs a.nd the Slov~ are not one people, one nation? Why should Kenner want us to believe otheIWise? • "The !Peace Conference chose to give the Czechos-lovaks the hiatoric boundaries in the Czech regions of Austri•a and ethnic bound•a rles In the Slovak districts of Hungary. Furthermore, it •a ddoo, under cond,l tlons of autonomy, Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia. It thmi created a state in Wlhlch 34 per cent of the population was non-Czech0- �60 SLOVAKIA slovak, ,a nd this element included a German .population of over three millimi.s, livin,g chiefly in the outer rim of Bohemia, in a state of less than fifteen millions" (p. 63). But this is 111ot quite the whole ,s tory. The Peace Conference decided as it did, 'becaJUOO it relied on the "expert" information supplied iby Masaryk and Benes, !both Czechs, who presumed to represent iboth the Czechs and also the Slova!ks. In the state created, the non-Czech population was in the majority, and this included some three and a half million Germams, in a state of "less than fifteen millions" (how much less?). The Conference ga;ve the "Czechoslovaks" nothing, lbuit it did allow the boundaries for the "new" state that was -created, as Kerner states, "on the -g round that rune or ten million Czechoslovaks should be favored •w ith independence oiver three million Germans" (p. 65) - the argument Oif Masaryk and Benes! They needed the almost three million Slovaiks of Hrung,ary to m.aJce "nine or ten n:rlllion Czechoslovaks," but the Czechs and the ISloivaJks, were "the same"! • "The Duchy of TesC'hen was ,w,hat was left of Silesia, one of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, after Frederiick the Great had seized fourte en-fifteeruths of that territory in 1740. The historic rights of the Czechs went •back to t!he fourteenth century. Before that the Duchy had been ,Polish {p. r66) . . . It was, however, Poland's diss·a tisfaction with this decision which led her diplomacy into d.e manding a.nd acquiring Czech Teschen on the occasion of the Conference of Mu· nlch (October, 1938). This blow from the rear really made it impossible for Czechoslovakia to fight after she was abandoned by her Western allies" (p. 68) . It is ,olbvious that Kerner either laoks knowledge about Teschen or is deli'berately attemptilllg to confuse the readers of his "Ozechoslova:kia." Just lilke Miasaryik and Benes, iit seems that Kerner does not want students oif history to know the whole tmth about Ozecho-Sloivaki,a. Furthermore, the ,allegation that Ozecho,...Slov,rukia was "forced" to :su,r render to iHitler !Without firing a shot, because her "Western allies" had abandoned her, OT because IDngland ·a nd France asked her to, is purely fictitious. Benes surrendered Czecho-Slovaki.a to Hitler without the approval of parliament. The Benes Czechs knew fully well that Czeoho-SlovaJkia could not be saved, because her non-Czech majority was not wiling to fight for her. They �SLOVAKIA 61 chose to urrender "at the behest of their faithless friends," because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the Germa~lovak-Magyar~Rutib.en.ian-iPolish majority of her population was not ready to die for a tate that had treated them as second-rate citizens for ome thirty years. And let us not forget that even the Czech,s, who considered themselves t he "State-nation," did not fire a single shot in defense of Czecho-JSlovrukia. Furthermore, it is no secret ,t hat Benes did not cultivate friendshiip with Poland and other neigh'boring states : his pro Soviet policy over decades of years is proof of that. Already in 1929 Viscount D'Abernon prophesied: "The treaty between Czecbo S lovakia and Poland is thought a triumph of French m ilitarism . o it m a y be, but the duration w ill b e te mpo rary . . . the Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon as disturbing forces cease to operate quite as powerfully as today." • "Germ an propaganda l ater s ought to spread the view that the bou ndaries of Czeoho slovakia, a s well as t hose of P ol and, wer e drawn by the Peace Conferene e in ignorance and that they repres e nted a failure to understand the problems of central Europe. N ot hing could be far th er from tJh e facts . The deleg ates o f the Peace Cont rence had access to and used the best available information and considered these problems from all possible angles" (p. 6 ). After reviewing the events that followed World Wa.r I Mld led to World War IiI, I believe it is safe to say that Kerner's statement is "farther from the facts" than even the "German propaganda" he alludes to. The fact rernains t hat World War I not only failed to solive Europe's problems, ,b ut even ,a ccentuated them and led t o World War II. At Paris there was a meeting of two continents which were quite ignorant of each other. The peacemakers blundered when they accepted interested parties as experts wit hout having them chedked 'by the opposition. When Lloyd George asked Benes how many Ma.gyam would fall undeT Ozech rule, Benes replied that their number would lbe 350,000 ('D. H. Miller: "My Diary at the Conference in Paris"; in reality it was more ibhan one million. Benes, plead.., ing fOT a "natural frontier," described a little ~oolk as a nasvigalble river. Repudiation of Kerner's claim may also be found in A . J. P. Taylor's "The HaJbsbu.rg Monarchy," C. A . Ma- �62 SLOVAKIA cartney's "Problems of the Danubiam Basin," Lloyd George's "The Tr.urth About the Peace Treaties," J. M. Keynes "The Economic Consequences of the Peace." Winston Churchill's "Afternnath and World Crises,." Robert fugrim's "After Hitler :Stalin?" and even T. G. Masa;ryk's "Svet<Jva Revoluce." But Kerner himself does that quite effecti:vely with the last three sentences - especially the last sentence - of the ivery same par.aJgraph, ,whi.oh reads: "Another ,s olution of the Czechoslovak problem might indeed be sought •by some future .p eace conference, if the poignant problem of the German nation is solved, for example, on the model of Switzerla:nd rather than that permitting a rampant totalitarian racialism. U.nti,l then it may be said that the work of t!he Peace Conference was a reasonable solution for its time. Common sense and Intelligence and a few minor boundary rectifications might have aecured a durable settlement" (p. 69). Of course, Professor Kerner, could hardly have intended it that way, but this is quite an admission from a mem. her of the "EXPERT STAFF, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace"! We know today that Kerner was not the only "exipert" who la'o ked sufficient "common sense and intelligence" at that time. (More coming) WHO SAID IT? "In 1868 the Ozeoh initel,lectuails and the Bohemian aristocrats renewed filleir allegi1ance. . . The eighty Bohemian a<bsentees from the Reicllsrat made a declaration of their aims: they asked for equal na:tional rights for the Czechs in Bohemia, and for a refornn of the electoral system; they demanded also the unity of the lands of St. We:nceslaus and the same independence for this "grea,t Bohemia" a;s HUlllgary possessed. The Ozech leaders were bewitched by the Hungarian example. '1'1hey saw, quite rightly, that the Magyars had achieved their nation'al freedom by associating it with historic rilghts, and they supposed that the way to achieve the national freed~m of the Czechs was to claim the historic rights of Bohemia. They did not see that the historic rights of Hungary were real, the historic rights of Bohemia imaginary. . . " - (A. J. P. Taylor, TH1E HABSIBURG MONA'ROHY, London, 1948; p. 142). � 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 1955, Vol. 5 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 14), March 1955.</li> <li>Issue 2-3 (No. 15-16), June-September 1955.</li> <li>Issue 4 (No. 17), December 1955.</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 1955 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 38 SLOVAKIA HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P. A. HIROBAK In 1'9149, the Uniiversity of California Press, ipulblished the "third printing" of the !book "CZEOHOSW VAKIA" (504 pages) which was edited iby Rolbert J. Kerner, Sather professor of history in the Unilversity :of California. 'Dhe book was made ipossilble, ,p rofessor Kerner states in his preface, iby "the oolla!boration of twenty distinguished and alble scholiars and writers" and that, concludes Mir. Kerner, "has made it ;possiible to present a vo1ume ,which is an honest, unprejudiced:, and frank appraisal of the important contrilbution which the Czechoslovak nation made to the history of our time in its two short decades of independence between two world wars." Just how honest, unprejudiced and frank that aipp:r,aisal of the "important" contribution is, the ireader may be a;ble to g,ather from what follows here and arrive at the condusion, stated so aiptly iby professor Kerner, that, indeed, "few nations, if any can show such a record" or, possibly, go a bit .farther and state cate.gorically that, indeed, no niation can show .such a record! But how honest and unprejudiced are "distinguished and able scholars" who set out to do a job beyond their competency? Can a distinguished historian write a true history of CZIDCH0-1SUOVAKITA without a thorough lmowledge of the SlovaJks and the land they 'haive occupied during the past 1500 years? And yet that is exaotly what the "twenty distinguished and aJble scholars and writers" of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia" did to ,produce something which, in his opinion, was "hQlrulst, unprejudiced" ! Kerner's "Ozechoslovikia' is dirvided into six parts, but the tendency in all parts is much the same: strictly Czech. Kerner should haive named the 1b ook "Czechia," t'hen the wonk might ibe called, by a stretch of the imagination, a semlblance of something "hlOlll.est and unprejudiced." Otherwise, informed readers know rthat it definitely is not, and the uninformed axe cruelly deceived. The s~gniificance of this may be !better understood when we glance at the remarkaible selection of books in the sug- SLOVAKIA 39 geeted bibliog,r aphy at the end of each cha;pter. The list is rema.r.kaJble not only for the !books and literary woi,ks included, but for the 1bodks and literary works omitted. The impression created is that the Slovruks had no ,w riters of a!lly impor-t and that no sourees of informatiO!ll on their history are availruble. iBut that i.'S not so. '.Dhis proves that the "twenty distinguished a:nd able scholars and writers," who collalborated with Kerner .cm his "Czechoslovakia" were little or not at all concerned with the history of the Sl01Vak people and their land. To magnify and glorify the history of the Ozechs and minimize, practically ignore, the history of the Slavruks, certainly cannot be the aim of an honest, UDJprejudiced and abjecti;ve writer of Ozecho~lovak history. Ozecho-Blovakia, as presented ,b y Kerner and his "twenty distinguished and aJble .s cholars and writers," does not give us a true picture of Czech-0-1Slovakia; it is not a true history of the Ozechs and SlOIV'aJks and their lands; it is definitely more propaga:nda than history - in line with other .such wm,ks which were promoted by the propaganda apparatus of Prag,ue. !Students of history should not 'be exposed to faJsifications and distortions of history, su<!h as that exemplified ·b y Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," because. that does not make for the truth, or for better relations ibetween the Ozechs and the Slovalks, or for a ·pr.oper understanding of those nations. I do not want to say unequirvocally that the writers who collaborated to produce Kerner's "Ozechoslovrukia" were knowingly dishonest ,a nd prejudiced, but their work co.n,vinced me definitely that ,w ittingly or uniwitti.ngly they did ibeoome Ozech propa:gandists. The writers have an undu:ly high regard for the chairacter and accomplishments of T. G. Masaryk amd Benes and the Ozechs in general, without an equa:lJy high reg,aro for facts, and little or no regard for the Slorvaks and their history. ,M ost writers of Ozeolio..Slovaik history and "Ozecho..slovak" democracy (IS. Harrison Thomson, Joseph S. Roucek, Herbert AdolJphus ,Miller, Brackett Lewis, among them), follow the Ozech line of T. G. Masaryik and Ed- 40 SLOVAKIA ward Benes and their governmeints ,w ho ,c ontrolled the entire propaganda apparatus• o;f ,Czecho-1Slov8Jkia. This Masaryk~enes line was and e;ve:n now is adhered to iby exchange students and iprofessors, heads of official and unofficial information !bureaus, the America.n Institute in Prague, the YMCA and YWCA of 0zecho-Slovrukia and other countries, the "OzechoslQIViruk N ationa,1- Ohurch" (strictly a Czech enteriprise) and most other religious sects, and practically all "eminent" writers, scholars and correspondents. And today the governments of all countries of the ,w orld still lbase their knowledge 'Of OzechoSlovakia and the vario:us nations that comprise it on the information supplied by the state propaganda apparatUJS of T. G. iMasaryk and Edward Benes. The import Ol:f this will undouibtedly be appreciated iby students of history, and even historians themselves, if they rememlber that this line has been followed and ipvopagaJted for ·a t least the past thirty-seven years. Accordirrrgly, the Czechs are a "historical" nation, while the SlovaJks are oruy a •~branch" of it and their language just a "dialect" orf the Czech. Ridiculous attempts are made to trace the histo,r y of the non-.existent "Ozechoslovruk" nation to the times of the Great Moravian Empire ,a nd Sts. Cyril and [Methodius. The "CzechoslOW!Jks" are supposed to 1b e the nation of Hus, Masaryk, and Benes, but also the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methoilius, WenceslaUJS and Ludlmila. The Ozechs, however, are ",p rogressive" Catholics and the 1Slovruks "reactionary" Catholics. ,F rom officiail statistics we learn how many Poles, Germruns, Jews, 'Magyars and Uikrainians there Weir'e iin Czecho-1Slovakia at any ,g iven time,. but not how many ,SlQIVlaks. That is explained ruway by the s1Jateme.nt th:at the Slovaks were not considered a tminority, hence, they were included under the category of "0zechosloivaiks." The latter term, however, is terr1bly l<_?ng, so the shorter "Czech" is used in many in,stainces as an "aJbbreviation." The term "Slovalk" could not •b e us.ed, I suppose, because it has O'Ile more letter than "Czech"! When statistics do, however, mention Czechs and .Slovaks se,pairately, the figures are in- SLOVAKIA 41 variably magnified on bhe Ozech side and minim1zed on the Slovak side. The !Magyars were experts at this sort of "mathematics" long before Ozecho-iSlova!kia was !born. The tendency is too olbviou.s. Many distinguished and aJble scholars and writers of the tyipe mentioned lby Kerner, can tell us exactly wh&e and albout when the Czechs, Poles, Russians, Slovenians, Croatians, rSe11bs, etc., fust settled in their respective territories, lbut, it seems, they cannot even venture a.in honest guess when it comes to the Slovaks. I say again: the tendency is dl:wious. They tell us that the Great Moraivian Empilre was the prede•cessor of the Czecho-Slol\TaJk RepU!blic, a Czech venttl!re, when in fact it was not. The Slova:ks, their predecesors that is, occupied both sides of the Morawa River at that time (whence, the name of :the empire) aind, hence, formed the very heart of the shor-Uived emipire, which was destroyed by the GermaJI1s with the aid of the Ozechs who had settled in, Bohemia, the land of the Boii. And we used to hear and read aJboot the "Crown lands of Bohemia," lbut now it seems to be the mode in "1p rogress,ive" historical ch'cles, to use the expression "Crech crown lands." I repeat : the tendency is only too. ohvio.us. The Czechs are not and do, not ,wa,,nt to be Slovaks a,nd, co,ruversely, the Slorva'ks are not and do not want to be Czechs. The SlovaJks .a nd the Ozechs did not have a common history, language, culture and tradition du.ring the past 1500 years, ~ause they did not occupy the same territQry. In a word, the Cizechs 0JI1d the Sl01Vaks developed sepaJTa tely and are, therefore, two distinct ethnic nations. 'l'he Slovaks never were, nor are they now, a "part" of the Czech nation. This simple truth, recognized 'by fille Czechs and SlOIVaJks themselves for many centuries ;past, should also be recognized lby "distinguished and alble scholars ood writers" of our time. It is tiiue that the SlovaJks formed a common political State with the Czechs in 19'.18, but only on certain conditions, the most important of which was that they would be a completely autonomous unit of the Ozecho-SlovaJk 42 SLOV.AKIA federatio.n, that is, that they would en~oy full states' rights. The condition not obeiirrg fulfilled, spelled the end of OrechoSlovaJkia. Because Benes insisted that the Czechs be the "stat~ation," Czecho-Slo1vaJk ia was doomed to perdition. Today the Slovaks do not want to be contained in any common State wti.th the Czechs or any other foreign nation. They can be kept so temporarily only lby force. !But that is not what the "distinguished and aJble sch~lars and writers" who oo1lalboraJted with professor Kerner tell us in the book "CzechoslovaJkia." Propaganda oa.- history? Let us anailyize Kerner's ''Czechoslovakia" chapter by chapter to prove our contentions. But let me note first t!hat on page xvii, at the end of the "contents," professor Kerner tells us how to pronounce "Czech" (not "Czechoslovak," mind you) letters; and on p. xxi, the poem by Edna St. Vincent Millay is entitled "Ozecho-iSlovakia" (:not "Czechoslovalkia") , which b,rings uip the question of hyphenization of the 1political state of tihe 1SlovaJks and the Czechs which was 'b orn iln 1918. The treaty 1b y which Czecho--Slova1kia came into being spelled ithe name with a hyphen to indicate that two indiividual ethnic entities, two distinct nations, 'had formed one political state. The hyiphen was dropped lby Masaryk and Ben-es and their followers. Whether the hyphen was J.eft in the title of the ipoem because of the author's insistence, or prof. Kerner's "careless" editing, I do not know, but it is singular that the hyphen should a;ppear in a book liike "Ozechoslova;lcia" at all! 1 • "C~ECHOSLOVA:KIA, Part I: BACKGROUND Chapter I-"The Czechoslovaiks-Anthropol ogical Notes . .." By Ales Hrdlfclka, M.D., Sc.D., Gura.tor, Division of Physical Anthropology, United States National Museum; Huxley 'Medal Lecturer, London (1927) ; memlber, National Academy of Scien-ces; honorary Doctor of 1S cience (Prague, Br.no)," etc., etc. Please not.e: The underscoring here and in the following is mine. "The term Czechoslovak ,i,s o! r ecen t coinage, dating from 1918, l\·hen the united Cze chs and Slovaks proclaimed. thei r independence of the Dual Mon,archy and th eir est abHshmi:mt of the Czeohoslovak SLOVAKIA 43 Republic. . . . 'Illie name Czech (pronounced Chekh) ls derived, accord Ing to an old tradition, from the chiefta&n of the main Slav tribe who brought them some time during the dawn, of ihistory probably in tihe fifth cent\.U'ly A.!D. - to the heart of the land (IP, 3) . . . In fact, the hLstoTY of the Czechoslovak tribes, from the dawn of written ,r ecords to the present day, has •be.en one of ever.Jiasting struggles ·a.galns,t dnvooers (PP. 4.-5) . . . Tihe Slovaks, who u.p to 1029 formed a unit with Moravia, were then torn away by the Ma• gya,rs, isolated from the west, for,c ed .away from the best grounds iu the warm •lolwland,s, and eventuaUy repressed. in every way" (p. 6). It is evident that even Dr. Ales Hrrdli6ka, distinguished ,anthropologist of ~ech origin, :seems to be a bit confused about when the "Czechslovruks" came into being. Whether the Ozechs -are descendants ,of the "main. 'Slav trilbe" is open to ·question. The 'SlO!Vaks fo:nrned a "unit" with Moravia up to. 1029, according to Hrdlicka, 1but who the people were who settled in Morruvia is Jeft to the reader. Mora,via, of ooUTse, came under the influence of the Ozechs in time, at least the western portion of it, :b ut was not settled lby the Ozechs when the .Slovruks formed a unit with it, for the simple reason, it seems, that the for~ fathers of ithe Slovaiks settled on iboth sides of the river Morava, w'hile the Ozechs settled in fue J.and of the Boii, which was a distinot geographical unit, ,prolbaJbly a/bout the size of present-day Bohemia . • "The Czechoslovaks to 1620'' - ,b y S. Harrison Thomson, Ph ..D., BLitt. - Professor of Medieval History, Unirversity of Co-lorado; Ph.D., Charles Uni'Vers,ty, Prague; B.Litt., Omord University; Ewtor, Magistri Johannis Hus Tractatus Res-ponsivus; Johannis Wyclif Summa de Ente (1930) ;" etc., etc. CI:I\A.PrIDR III - "Led ,b y a travelln,g IFI'lankish merchant, Samo, tihe Slavic tribes freed themselves ,from the Av,a r rule, and chose Samo for their •k ing (623-624) . . . This ,e arly kingdom, which would appea,r to !have been pr.emature, iw,as ,neither Czech nor Slovak. It would have to be called Western ·s1av, ,b y .reason or a large intermixture of Slavic tribes which became gra.dua:l!y differentiated as they settled in different local!tes . . . The names of the princess Llbuiie and the peasant Premysl whom she cih ose to be her husband are in all proba• bility tJhe names of real persons. At any rate ,t he male descendants or this ,s-emilegendaxy .Pfemysl were to rule over ,Bohemia and neighboring regions until 1306 . . . It is not certain whether tihe Slavic chi,eftalne. enga,ged at this time to pay .tribute to the Fr,alllk.is~ emperor or not" (P. 9). SLOVAKIA 44 Id: Samo, the "traveling 1F ranlkish merchant," established a kingdom, he necessarily must hruve stopped traveling somewhere, and that "somewhere" ,w as on territory occupied 'by "S1'arvic" tr.i!bes, out of which later a certain nation, or certain nations, arose. ,s amo's kingdom was not on the territory settled by the Czechs or other Sla-vonic peoples, 1b ut Olll the terri1lory settled by the "Slavs" who were later oalled ISlorvaks. Fredegar's Chronicles seem to indicate as much (THIE ISI.JOV~S AND !UNG SAMO'S EMiP]RE, by iDr. Henrich Bartelk, SU)VA.KIA, June 1954). The "Slavic trilbes" whioh ibecame gradually differentiated as they settled in "different localities" could not be identical witll the "Slruvic tribes" which remained on the territory of ISrum<>'s kingdom and, later, came to ~ ca1led the SlovaJks. As far ,as, the Ozech "Llbuse and Pfemysl" are concerned, let us talke the word Olf learned Czechs that they were legendary characters ("Ottuv SLOVN1K NAUONY," Vol.. XV, p. 1038; Vol. XX, rp. 625). We might a.loo concede, without offending historical truth, t!hat all "1S1'avic" chieftains, including the forefathers of the 'Czechs, paid tribute to the Frankish emperor, when he was strong enough to exact it. Why should the 'Slavs of Bohemia" be an exception? II t seems that professor Harrison is interested in building up a case for the Czechs to prove that they were completely independent during the time of Charlemagne (8th-9th cenrtury). Why? 1 • "Later in the ,c entury (846) !Louis the German su,bju,g-ated Mora. 11ia, •b ut suffered defeat wihen he ,a ttacked the Slavs of Bohemia. Th1s ,a ttack of tLouis the German n,vas directed ,against the empire of the Moravian prince Mojmir, who had shown rem arkable abllity in consolidating his rule south, east •a nd west to include southern Poland, Silesia, Bohemia, Moravia, and the valleys of the middle Danube and Theiss rivers a,s far as the northern boundaries of the Byzantine Empil'e . .. After the death of Svato,pluk (894) the Moravian Empire rapidly broke up into its component parts. The Czech princes of the Pi'emyslide line .gained independence for Bohemia, and the Magyars, new arrivals dn. t,he east, -extended llieir power over n~rthern Pannonia. German's and Slavs, united for the moment, were de• feated by the Ma,gyars in 907 neax (Bratislava (Pressburg), and the ruin of the Moravian state was complete" (P. 10). Louis subjugaited iMoravia, but was defeated by the "Slavs of Bohemia," which means that the latter were not SLOVAKIA 45 identioal with the Slavs of Moravia, who were ruled by Mojmir. !Professor !Harrison also tells us that Mojmir, the Moravian prince, consolidated his rule by consolidating various ISlmrianic ('Slavic) trilbes, including those of Bohemia. This Mojmir did by force. It is significant that Harrison does not refer to Mojmir as a "Slovak" ,p rince, though he does not hesitate to say that 'Czech" princes gained independence fur Bohemia. He also omits to say that the Czechs, not the ",Slavs of Bohemia," mind you, gained their independence by !breaking ·a way from ,t he !MO!'aJVian Empire in 895, :aJfter the death of S,v atopluk. The Czechs, then, heliped to destro¥ the integrity of the Grea,t Moravian ffimpire, the heart of which ,was in Slovak country, the country of the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia. In 900 the Czechs, the Slavs of Bohemia, together with the Germans, invaded the territory of the Sl01VaJks, the Slavs of Great Moravia, aJild after a terrific /battle forced !Mojmir II to sue for peace. Svatoplulk's three sons, ruling various areas of the Empire and constantly •a t each others throats, contributed greatly to the dissolution of Great Moravia. When the !Magyars moved into northern IPannonia, they met with little resistance, lbut professor Harriso n neglects to say what people settled in northern Pannonia, even though history tells us that the forefathers of the Slovaks occu'Pied tha.t territooy at the time. And where professor Harrison found the legend that "Germans and Slavs, uni.ted for the moment,." tried to save t!he Great Morawian Empire from falling into the hands of the Magyars in 907, he does !IlOt say. As mentioned rubove, the Germans, and the 'Slavs of Bohemia" (the Coochs) contributed to the downfall of Great Morawia. It is not, I thinlk, unreasonaJble to say that if the Germans and Slavs were really united to sruve the Moravian Em'Pire from falling into the hands of the Magyars, the latter would hardly have taken what was left of it in 907. Careless reporting of history? Probably, ·b ut to me it seems to be tendencious and puTposeful. Professor Harrison, it seems, was doing a jolb for the Brague regime and 46 SLOVAKIA the Ozechs. This is all the more obvious in his !book "Czechoslovakia in EmQpean H!istory" (Princeton Uniiversity Press, 1943, 1195'3), for which Harrison was ·aJWarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize for Literature" in 1944, when the Ozecho-1Slova'k State factually did not exist for five years. 'Dhe award was made iby Dr. Benes's ·g overnmentin.J..ondon at the Uni:versity Clulb in New Yorik, Decem.lber 30, 1944. • •~remysl Otaka.r [ (1197-1230:) was able to use circumstances for the •b enefit of his dynrusty and the Czech kingdom . . . iHe shifted his allegiance four times. eadh time gaining conoession:s or confirmation of eonc-essions .previously granted ,b y another claimant to the throne . . . . But to Pfomysl must be assigned the responsibility for inviting tJhe German immig,r ation. Encouraged by the court, many Czech nobles. had married Germ,a;n ,w omen; some of the best positions of the ·churoh in ,Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; ·German mf.nnesin,g ers ,w,ere in high favor at the royal court and at the courts of the Ticher nobles" (P. 13). Here professor !Harrison tells us tJhat 1P rem.ysl Otakar was quite a "shifity" ruler, using circumstances for the benefit of his dynasty and the "Czech" kingdom, not the "Boh,emian" ikingdom, but favored German immigration, and "Czech" (not Bohemian) ndbles married: German women, and some of the best ;positions of ,t he Church in Bohemia and Moravia were held lby German clerics, etc. It is evident here rthat professor Harrison cannot make up his mind whether the Bohemians were Ozechs or GelUllans, or both! It is quite clear, however, that the Slovaiks, the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia, did not .fit into the picture of the "Cz,ech" ikingdom at that ,t ime. The twenty ipa,ges of Kerner's "OzechosloivaJlda" taken up iby Harrison's "'IJhe Czechoolovaks to 1620" use the word Slovak(ia) some seven times and, therefore, repudiate the idea, insinuation or implication, that .there were any "Czechoslovaks" up ,t o 1620. Not only that, but for Harrison, it seems, the ISlo.vaJks - the Slavs of Moravia and Pannonia - simply do not exist at all after the fall of the Great iMoraivian Empire, except for the mention (p. 17) of "a consideraJble number of (Hussiite) adherents 1? Sfovalkia," which is quite a stretch of the imagination. The Hussite !business was strictly Cezch; the Hussites did SLOVAKIA 47 more damage than good for the Czechs themselves, and aibsolutely no good for the Slovaks, whose lands they invaded, pillaging and !burning their homes, and murdering their population. Furthermore, !Harri.son oreaites the impression that the !Battle of White !Mountain (1620) was ,a; nationalistic affair, W1aJged lby the Ozechs against the Genmans. That is the legend fabricated 'Mld propagated by some Protestant Czechs. The White 1MoU1DJtain affair, however, was definitely a religious and dynastic aifafir. After Tilly, the emperor's general, defeated Frederiok and the Bohemian (111ot Czech!) maignates, some 27 of the leading "rebels" were beheaded: one a Catholic; six were Germans. Not one, however, was executed becaJUse of his nationality. Not without interest is Harrison's mention (p. 11) that the Premyslide iprinces di'Vided the country, in .t he tenth century, "into administrative distrfots (zupy) with a royal representative (zupan) at the head of each distTiot." wf the Czech Premys.lides actually used the terms "zupa, zupan," I wonder if professor Harrison mi,g ht enlighten us from whom they might have acquired those words, since they are rarely used !by the Czechs . • CHA!PTER III - "The Czechoslovaks from the Battle of White ,Mountain to the World War" - by RO'bert J. Kerner, Ph. D ., i.lL.D., /Litt.D. - Sather Professor of History, Uni'Versity of California; LL.D., Omaha University; Litt.iD., Paiik College; foreign memlber, Royal Bohemian Society of Letters and Sciences (Prague); foreign member, Safarik Learned Society (Bratislava); commander, Order of the Whlite Lion (Ozecho~SlovaJkia); memlber, Expert Staff, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace (!Paris); etc., etc. "The dlsa,strous battle of W•h ite Mountain on November 8, 1620, uslhered lin a period of three centur.les in which the Klngdom of Bohemia was reduced to .three provinces, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia, in ,t he Habs,b urg MOIIlarchy. During the first centUTY of •t his period the nation lost three-fourths of its native nobility, its most eminent and wealthy citizens, its schools and noted scholara, and its national independen-ce. A remarkable national renaissance took place in the second century. In the remainder of the period, the Czecho• slovak nation, after tlailin.g to bring •about a reorganization of the 48 SLOVAKIA Ha;bsburg Monarchy on ,a federal -basis, or to secure the same dg,h ts as tfue Magyars, ,c arried out a ,s uccessful revolution a,nd obtained its independence" (P. 29). !Referring to the underscored words, I ask professor Kerner: 1. What nation, the Czech or Bohemian? 2. What "Czechoslovak." nraition, when there was none? 3. What Magyars, ,o r does iKerner mean Hungarians? 4. What revolution 1by the "Ozechoslovaik" nation?. Kerner used the title he did for this chapter delilberately, because he must haJVe known there were no "CzechoslO'V8Jks," ethnically spooking, ,b efore or after the battle of White Mol.l.[ltain, to the World War, except in the minds of dreamers and chauvinistic, imperialistic Creohs. He could easily haJVe ,o mitted the d:ew references to Slovaks and the m8Jny to "Orechos}ovaiks" in the 211 1pages of the chrupter and had ,a rpretty good ,s tory on the "Czechs'' from the Battle of White Mountain to the World War." Practically everything in the chapter is "Czech" - language, literature, nation, historians, pe3Jsants noblemen, renaissance, Catholics, Pr.otestants, opera, national anthem, Lutherans, journalists - lbut Kerner still makes pretense at writing aJbout "Czechoslovaks." Is there any good ,r eason why an honest, Ulliprejudiced, objective historian should try to fool even himself? Surely, Kerner musrt !know that the ~echs devel01ped in the Austrian ,p art, ,w hile the Slova!ks developed in ,t he Hungarirun prurt of the Dual Monarchy. What Kerner means to imply when he says that the "Czechoslovak nafilon . . . . . . carried out a successful revolution" and db.tamed its independence is at least questionaJble. We know that there was not even a revolution in Prague. !Robert Ingrim tells us: "All that J:J.a;ppened ,was tJhat Emperor-King Charles, seeing that Wilson :a:bandoned his former program in the hour of victory, dropped tJhe fed,ema;listic idea and ordered his minds.tern and lieutenant-governors to surrend,e r the admi'llistration to coonmittees of the various nationalities. Thi,s explains among other things why Masaryk, as the first president of Czecho-Slovakia, had to decree which date was to be regarded as the beginning of the Czech re· volution. It simply had not taken place. All bhe successor states, including little. Austria, needed the legal fiction of a ,r evolution, because as• new states they repudiated the idea of continuity and based SLOVAKIA 49 their la/\V,s upon a revolutionary origin. For the Czechs this was very important. When, in 1921, .the .Sudeten Germans complained to the League of Nations t:hat they had not been allowed to take par.t in the making of the constitution of the new State, the Czecho-Siov•a k government replied. that 'the Cz~ho./Slovak State was the work and product of the revolution, made solely by the Czecho-Slovak nation,' which was, therefore, 'the only constitutional factor.' Hence, 'the Natiooru Revolutionary Assembly was alone authorized to set up the constitution' by W1h1ch Germans, \Hungarians, Ruthenians, and Poles had •b een made second-class citizens" (After Hitler Sta11n? P. 107). To complete the above piotu.re, '.I might add that the Slovak memlbers of the "Na,tional Revolutioaiary Assembly" were lhand-'I)icked lby Masaryk and Benes and, included firve Czechs, hence, were not truly representa.tirve of the political will of the 1S101Vaik nation. The constitution that resulted, therefore, was strictly a Czech product, j'llSt as was Ozecho-lSlovak domestic iand foreign policy. In referring to the development that took ipla.ce during the Reformation and ICoU!Ilter-lReformation in Ozech rund Slovak territories, Kerner says that "in general the same development took place in the ISloivaJk counties od' Hungary as in Bohemia, /Moravia and \S ilesia." If a person did not know !better, he might be led to 1believe that Kerner did not use the express-ion "Ozech counties" in his comparison, because Bohemia, Moria.via and !Silesia were supposedly solidly Czech. We know that they were not. And we know, too, that Bohemia was not the only country that suffered during the Thirty Yea.rs' War; that war "ravaged Bohemia with the same fury it unleashed all over the Germanies. . . There was no, difference and certainly no national ,pll!'.pose" (I.n,g rim, op. cit., ,p. 57). Kerner, furthermore, writes ab.9-ut "Magyar'' magnates and "Magyar" nolbility, rwhen he really means "Hungarian" magnates and noibility. There is a difference: the Magyars were not the only inhabitants of Hungary before or aft-er the 17th century. The same applies .to the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian." Of course, we might say that the tenns today - af.ter the expulsion of over three million Germans - are mo.re or less synonymous. Let us, however, remember that they were not even in ,t he recent past: the Czechs were not the only inhabitants of Bohemia. 50 SLOVAKIA "A new period in .the history of the Czechoslovak nation was inaJugurated" (p. 32), when 1Fredericik the Great seirzed Silesia in 1740, Kerner states oaitegorically and, fartiher down on the same page, that "the reforms of Maria '.Dheresa and Joseph JiI . . . not only culminated in the completion of the evolution ,which tra.nsf.ormed the Kingdom of Bohemia into three provinces and hence virtual amalg,amaJtion of 1!he Austrian Hereditary Lands with the Lands of the (Bohemim Crown into a single administrative unit, but they threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation 'by the process• of Germanization in schools, government, ,and church." Here, it is obvious that Kerner w-..s a 1b it ~fuddled and •a )pparently forgot, in his zeal to promot.e the concept of a "Czoohoslovaik nation," that ,t he SkwaJks lived in HU!Ilg,ary and,. hence, !by no stretch of t'he imaigination, even in this "enlightened" and "iprogres.sive" era, could have had any connection with the "Austrian Hereditary Lands" and the "Lamds of the Bohemi,a n Crown." It w.as the existent Czechs and not the nJOn-existent "OzechoslwaJks" who were threatened with the loss of identity as a nation iby the process of ~a.n:rzatiorn, in Austria. We can concede that the policy of Joseph ll "of trying to denationalize" Magyars, Italians, Poles, and Rumaniians "aroused them to activity" (p. 34), as it did the ~echs, SlovaJks, Croats, Slovenes, and Serbians, ibut why does Kerner lump the latter nations together as "Czeichoslovaiks" and "Jugoslavs" when he knows that such did not exist either in Joseph !I's time or even later? 'I'he reason fur this is only too obvious. On page 3Q,. the "Czechoslovaks" we.re threatened "w1t'h Joss of identity as a nation," but three pages later, according to Kerner, "at the same time the situation of the Slovaks in HWigary was somewhat improved by the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II" (p. 35). The same reforms even led "to a great national revival (p. 32) . . . the Czech renaissance develo ped momentum step by step as decree after decree of Maria Theresa and Joseph II sought to a'bolish the use of the Czech language. When Joseph II completed t!he official demise of the Czech Ian1 SLOVAKIA 51 guage in school, government, allld church in 1790, the Czech nation revwed. 1So mysterious was this development that its exact oauses have been a su:bject: of dispute among the best ·scholars" (1p. 34). Then on t:he following pa;ge (35) Kerner states: "The Ohurch feared that it would lose its ,g rip on the Czech nation i:f its priests spolke only German. These and other indications led to the establishment by Leoipold rnr of a chair in the Czech language at the University of ,Praigue in 1791." What, then, is this business ,th,a,t the reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph JiI ''threatened the Czechoslovaks with loss of identity as a nation"? And what is so mysterious about <the reviival of the Czech nation in 1790? Kerner certainly must ha,ve ,h eard a;bouit the principle of action and reaction! If the iMa~rs, and laiter the Ozechs, had not tried to suppress the Slovak lang,uage and oppressed the Slovaks, they would have rprobaibly .perished as a nation in time . .Js it not olbtvious what ha,ppens to languages and peo~ ples in America rwhere freedom abounds? [n America peoples of every color, .race and creed enjoy freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of asoomibly; they are d':ree to !build their own churches, schools, liibraries, 'beneficial organi:zations and ipubHsh new.s,pa,pers and books in their respective languages. Yet, there is no doufbt in. my mind that in time non-®nglish iperiodioa1s and 1books, published in America, will /be a rarity. Certainly, this must be just as olbvious - ,a nd not myst.erious - even to professor Kerner. • "A Protestant sc hool, -witJh a c hair in the Czech language a.nd literature, was founded in Brati,s.lava, and this inst:i,tution counted amQ/Ilg its s,t udents the future Czech his torian !FrantAse'k Palacky from Moravia and tlhe Slovaks Jan Kolla r ia.n.d Pave.I Josef i:lafaiik. The Protestant Slovaks followed closely the d·e velopment or the Czechs, Wlhereas the Catholic Slovaks under Antonin Bernolak tried to create, with indlff-erent success at the time, a. written Slovak dialect, which W'<IS s-eparate from .but closely akin to the Czech because a western dialect of spoken ,Slovak was used. The course of poli• tical events could not cheok the national revival of Czechoslovaks" (p. 36) . ,P rofessor Kerner does not relate the whole story, but only the part that s'l.lits his ipUTpOSe and, hence, sins by 52 SLOVAKIA omi-ssion. The Catholic Slcwa!ks oonstituted rut least 75 per cent of the Sl()IVaik nation, while the Protestant Slovaks only aibout ill per cent. Koillar and Safarik cultivated ,a "dead" 1amgiuage, a langu,a;ge tha;t was used iby a small part of tile Slovak nation, the Lutherans. And the latter used that language - "biblical" Czech, therefore, not the "live" language of the vast masses of the Czech people - mostly for and during religious functions, while at home they used Sloiv•aik. Anton, not Antonin (the Czech equivalent), Bernolwk not only "tried" to create a Slo.va!k literary language, but actually did estaibLish such a literary medium of Slorvak which was u:sed :some fifty years b,y S[ovak writers. There was no need :for iBernolaik to. create "a written Slovak dialect," ;b ecause various 'Slova!k dialects already were existent at that time. And iBernola:k definitely did 111ot choose the western dialect because it was "closely alkin" to Czech. Kerner, however, is quite right when he says that "the comse of political events could not check the nationa:I revival of the Ozechoslovalks," lbecaJuse they were non--existenrt. Those events could not check the national rerv:wal of either the Ozechs or the :S'1ov0iks . 1 • "Caug,h t between their sympathies with the Czechs and their fears of their .Magyar ov•erlord:s, Slovak patri'ots saw their security, not in coalescing at once with their Czech brethren, but in iworking to create a separate Slovak national movement by taking up once more the unsuccessful jdea of Bernolak that of developing a separate written Slovak language. Ludevit Stur, Michal Hodza, and Jo.:,ef Hurban, fearing the reproaches of the Magyars if they continued to use the Czech language, and hoping to attract the Slovak peasant masses, chooe in 184-5 to make. a dialect spoiken. in tlle central Slovak counties the '!lew literary language. The Czechs wa,r ned in v,a in against this departure from t.he practice of a thousand years. ·T hey argued that dts r esults would only be. to the >benefit of the Germans and Magy,ar.i" (p. 38). This statement is not based on 'hone.sit, hi:sitorical research. ilt is a fabrication pure and simple. Slova!k patriots ,t hen, even as now, fully realized that they could not safegu,,ard their nation.al existence !by playing second-, fiddle to other nations in the political coTIJCert. They did not fear the 'Maigyiars who sought to Magy.arme them any more than they feared the Czechs who sought to Ozechize SLOVAKIA 53 the:rn. True Slovak ·p atriots never let their sympathies for the Ozechs or other oppressed nations interfere with their ultimate natioo.a.1 aim: freedom and rpolitioal independence - to become masters of their own household, of their own destiny. '.Dhey rebelled against the Magyars and, later, eiven against the Czechs, just as the Magyars and the Ozechs had rebelled ag,ainst the HlaJbsburgs. Stur, Hodza, Hurban (Jozef, not Josef) a,nd other Slova,k patriots developed the literary SlovaJk medilllIIl estrublished by iBen1i0laJk and his followers - the "lilve" language used lby the vast masses of the Slovalk people, both O~tholic and also Lutheran. They wrote in Czech for the Cze.ohs and in Slovak for the Slov,aks. Kerner does not say so directly, ibut the implication is ,t here that Stur, Hod.fa •a nd Hurb-an did use the Czech language exclusively in rtheir writings. The fact is thaJt; they did not and they did not fear the "reproaches of the Magyairs" for using Czech at ,any time they desired to do so. As int.elligent men they knew fully well they ieould not rouse their people nationally by using a language that was foreign to them, a language they did not consider their own. Why, then, the 'balderdash a:bout the Czechs warning Slo;vak paitriots against their depa;rture "from the practice of a thousand years"? '.Dhe vast majority of .the IS1ovruk natiO!Il, i!he Catholic Slovaiks, used their own Slovak language in their churches, homes and in their Hterary worlks, b;ut 'Professorr Kerner wO'Uld hruve students of history "Czechoslovak" history - believe that they used the Czech language forr a "thousand years" prior t,o 1845. Why does Kerner resort to outright falsehoods and aJbsurrd falbrications? Czech was brought into Siovakia, it is true, by Czech exiles during i!he Coun.ter..R.eformation to strengthen Lutheranism, ibut it never 'became the predominant literary medium of the ,vast masses of the Slovak people and their ,w riters. 1 • "The Magyar large landholder, the Catholic clergyman, and the Jewish merchant, screened, ,b ehind a blatant Magyar propaganda, worked to denaclonalize the Slovak peasant by falsifying his history and •by asserting tihat his language had no orelation to the Czech and did not belong to the languages of western Europe" (p. 44). 54 SLOVAKIA It is significant that Kerner should put the finger on "Catholic clergymen" - without mentioning names - and omit Protestant "progressilve" preachers and Jewish R3Jb.. bis who were equally interested in "denationiali ~ng" the Slovalk peasant, practically always woTking aigainst :the national interests of the ISlovalk nation. Of course, this is nothing new in history. T. G. iMasaryik and Benes, who should have learned the lesson of :A.ustr1a:-Hungary, denied the existence of it.he !Slovak nation as an individual ethnic entity, declaring the ISlovia!ks were only a "branch" of the Czech nation and their language only ,a "dialect" of the Ozech. (Falsifying history seems to be a specialty of the followem of Masaryk and Benes. And Kerner proves it! 1 • I "Whereas Kr-amai' became, so to ~,peak, the symbol of the economic u,psm1ge of the Czech lboUTgeoisie, Masaryk became the intellectual and spiritual head of the entire nation, including the Slovaks . • • . He (~·a saryk) became a Protestant, a modern Czech Puritan. Influenced by his reading af Czech history, he ,b elieved that h-e found. !ts plhilosophy 1n the religious ideal of il:he Hussites and the Ozeoh !Brethren" (pp. 47-48). The truth, however, is that T. G. Masaryk never was the "intellectual and spiritual head" of the 1Slov•lrlLs. If the Ozechs wish to consider Masaryk :as such, they are free to do so. The o.vel'IWhelming Catholic majority oif the Slovak people could not. Hlas Kerner forgotten Masaryk's blatant cries "away from !R;ome!" and "Rcxme must (be put on trial and condemned!"? Czech history is not Slovak history; the philosophy of Slova:k history does not rest on the "religious ideal of the Hussites and the Czech Brethren." Catholic Czechs form ibhe majority of the Czech nation, hence, we have good reason to doulbt Kerner's evaluation of Masaryik -as far as •t hey ,a re concerned, lbecaJuse Masaryk never did represent or COlllcern himself !With their spiritual interests, in fact, put them in jeopardy. Masaryik, according to Kerner, "viewed the problem of the small oppressed n.a:tiO'IlS ,as the polilticai and international phase of the social question - the exploit,aitdon of one nation by anot!her, for political exploitation meant cheap lalbor to the laboring drasse.s." 'But what happened after Czeoho-!Slovakiia was lborn and Masaryk !became he:r first president? He denied staites' rights to Slovakia and SLOVAKIA 55 thought nothing of the OLechs exploiting the ,S lovaks and their national wealth! CHA[PTER [V - Peace Conference" - • "The World War, Revolution and iby RO{'bert J. Kern.er. '10n July 4 (191,5), Masaryk publicly in,a ugurated the revolutionary movement •by a ,l ecture on Jan Hus in Zurich, Srwitzerl•a nd. After Benes succeeded in escaping J.irom Austria, the Czech Foreign Committee issued its public manifesto for Czechoslovak independence in Pans on !November 14, 1915. This manifesto had previously been agreed upon by the leaders at home and by the leaders of Czech and Slovak colonies In America, England, and France a point on wihich !Masaryk insisted" (p. 53). 'W ho were those leaders "alt home" and in the Czech and Slovak colonies in America, England, and France? The record tells us that the leaders of the Czechs and Slovalks at home ikinew practically nothing of Masaryk's plans at that time; and the leaders of their respective colonies in various countries still less! • "This Committee (the Czech Foreign Committee) led to the creation of the •Czechoslovak Nation-al Council in 1916., which under Masaryk, Benes, and ~tefanlk gradually assumed the functions of goverJlllilent" (pg. 153-54) . . . "The Czechoslovak National Council, which was leading the struggle abroad, had not been disavowed by the nation at home" (p. 56). 1t is quite clear, rt:hen, that the Czech Committee is credited with the creation of the "Czechoslovak" Council, which Masaryk headed. But it is not in accord with fact that the Council "had not been disruvowed 1b y the nation at home." Masaryk was the leader of the Czech (Progressive Party, which he alone represented in the .Austrian ,parliament. When he left Austria, late .in 1914, Miasaryk went abroad with a ipr.ogram of his own. As far as is !known, he had not consulited wii.th Ozech and Siovalk leaders a:t home and had no authorization f.ram the Czechs or the Slovaks at home ito represent their politioal will. Of course, wherever Masaryk went, he did pose as a competent representative of the Czechs at home. When President. Wilson, .late in Decemlber 1916, requested an lb;elligerents to state their war aims, the Allied reply of January 1'2, 1917, included the following demand: "Lilberation of Italians, Riumaniains, Slaws,. and Czeciio- 56 SLOVAKIA Slovaks from foreign rule." Please note the "Slavs and Czecho-Slovaks" part, lbecaUJSe thaJt tells us 'j ust how well the Allies were informed on the sUJbjoot. Since Slovruks and Czechs spoke different languages, occupied different territories, and never in history had been united, rbhe appelation "Ozecho-1Slorvruk,s " was real new. At that time, when the British government was asked, in ithe Commons, ,w hethmit could indicate the territory inhabited iby "Czecho-1Slo-· vakis," the ra nswer was "no." The Czechs at home resented being mentioned as a nation under "foreign rule." One of their leading ipaipers, the NARODNE I.1IiSTY, had this tto say aJbout it: 1 "It is amazing how indefatigably Masaryk endeavors to defile the honor of the CZECH nation. The enemies have learnt that the love of all Austrian peoples for their inherited dynasty and their fatherland is firm and unshakable. The enemies have realized that those who make contradictory statements abroad are liars and impostors." In Norvem!ber, 1916, all the Czech parties in the Austrian rparliament, without a single exception, had issued a solemn declaration, stating thrat "the basis and guaranty of the national existence of the Czech people are the dynasty, called to the throne centuries ago, and the indivisibly constituted Monarchy." In the declaration they demanded foderafozation. And oin December 30, 191.6, all the Czech party leaders attended ttihe emiperor's coronation as king of Hungary as "guesrts of honor." After the Afli.ed reply to, Wilson became !known, the society of Czech memlbers of parliament sent the following letter (J,a nuary 23, 1'917) to the foreign minister of AustroHtrogary: "In view of the Alli-ed runswer to President ,W ilson in which the liberation of the Czechs figures as a war ,a im, we reject this insinuation whiClh is based on entirely erroneous assumptions. We declare emphatically that the Czech people, as always in the past, is convinced that it can be assured of a prosperous development only under the Habsburg scepter and within the Habsburg Monarchy" (Ingrim: "After Hitler Stalin?" p. 75). The very same Czech members of parliament requested Prime M:in.istffi' C1am....Martinic, a Czech, to arrange an audience with the emperor for them. Why? !Because :they said: "We want to tell His Majesty that we shall always stand by him and his successors; that our demands will always be compatible SLOVAKIA 57 with the interests of the Habsburg dyansty and of the realm; that we are loyal servants of the king and the country; that our complaints have never shaken our belief that after victory the claims of the ,Czech people will find satisfaction within the framework of the realm and under the Habsburg crown." It is quite obvious, then, thaJt the representatirves of the Czech people did not want separation - independence but federalization. Furthermore, Masaryk ,a nd his Council were hiit from another quarter. At the conference of the Sociiailist International in 1Stockho1m, June 1:917, the Czech delegates vociferously demanded "an independent Czech State within a federated Austria-Hungary." Is it possible that professor Kerner, an expert on Czecho-SloiValkia, is ignorant of what w:as going on even m Czech lands while !Masaryk a.nd Benes were calling for the destruction of Austria? I cannot ·believe it •a nd, therefore, say that iKerner delilberately did not tell the truth when he said that Mas•a ry'k's Council "had not been disavowed by the nation at home." Masarylk :himself admits it in his work "Svetowa RevoJuce" (pp. 1150-il.52; 253-254 ; 32,1 ). When 'Kerneir wr1tes aJbo.ut the organimtion of the "Czechoslovak Legions," the work a,ccomplished lby Masarylk and iBenes in ,E ngland, France, Russia allld America for the esta;blishment of the "Ozechosloivalk Reipulblic," he completely ignores the effort put forth by Gen&al Milan R. Stefanik, the !Slovak who, did much in France, the U.S. A., Italy and Russi.a for the realization of the Republic. fu the twenty pages of this cltaJpter, Kerner mentiom; the name of this great Slovak only once, but does not tell us a single thing aJbo,ut the ,w ork he did so tha,t Czecho-,Slova'l da might become a reality. If Ma,s aryk himself was not loath to give credit to •S tefanik for his accompl.isihmen,ts, why should Kerner ibe? Furthermore, Kerner devotes. several pages to the "OzechoslavaJk" Legion in Siiberia - "the ,a rmy which had fought vicitorio'll.Sly at !Kiev, Zhitamir, and Baikhmach, and which yearned to leave Russia in peace in order to continue the conflict ,a gainst the Germans in the West." He almost outdoes Masaryk himself on the ·" Siberian anabasis" legend. 58 SLOVAKIA The fact is, however, that the legion was offered a short route home via Murmansk and Archangel whence British sh1ps were to transport it to the battle front in France. But the legion, afraid of German sulbmarines and not too eager to fight, preferred ithe long way home via Siberia to Viadfuvostok. AB a result, Masarylk's a:xmy reached Europe long after the smoke of the war had lifted, without haJVing contributed ,to the defeat of Germany and Austria. The IStberian anabas:is made greait propagand a for Masaryk's cause, as he himself atlmitted, and without it, in fact, the "calli:!e" m1ght haive 'been lost. '.I recommend that Kerner and other students •o f history, read pp. 81-83 of fugrim's "After Hlitler !Stalin?" - and, ibut carefully, even Masaryik's "Svetava. Revoluce." • "In the ,a ims publicized as the objectives of peace, the Czechosl ovaks were promised their independence on the basis of the selfdetermination of the Czechoslovak nation. It is a fum:l.amentaJ question just what "self-deteirmi natlon of the nations" meant a.t tihat time. It s eems most probrul>le that when it ,was first uttered it meant the determinatio n of a n entire nation to choo.se whether it wished to be jndependent or live under another, and not self-determination of small parts of it" (p. 62). Here, Kerner quite naively would have us :b elieve that he iis be.fuddled lby the meaning of "self-determ ination." Of course, he could have given credit ,to Masaryk and especially Benes for his 1pretended quandary. I say "pretended ," /because he himself tells us on the page following: " In many regions the populations were thoroughly mixed in composition . . . . As far as the Czechoslovak s were concerned, the matter was complicated by the fact that their claims in the Czech regions rested on historic rights, the Lands of the Bohemian Crown (Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia), which they as a nation had created and maintained in history, rund on the rights of nationality for the ,Slovaks in Hungary, wihere the Magyars cJ.almed 'historic rights of the Lands of tihe Hungarian Crown" (p. 63) . So, what is this business "the Czechoslov aks were promised their independen ce on the ,basis of the self-determ ination of the Czechoslovak nation"? !Kerner purt:s himse1f in a ivery ludicrous situation: he admits the existence of the Czech naition, Czech regions, etc., does not admit directly the existence of the Slovak counterpar ts, but still insists on having a "Orechoslovak" nation! SLOVAKIA 69 AP, mentioned earlier, one of the aims of the Allies was the "lilberaition of Iltalians, Rumanians, Slavs and Cze- choslovaks from foreign r.ule." The Czechs and Slova;ks got i'lllto the picture also as "Ozech~ova ks," and not only as Slavs, at the persistent insistence of Dr. Edward Benes to support the fiction promoted by M'aJSaryik and himself that "Czechs and Slovaks were the same." The truth, however, remains that the SlovaJks are an individual nation in the great family of Slovanic nations, as are the Poles, Byelorussians , Ukrainians, Russians, C.zec'hs, Bulg,aria:ns, .S erbs, ISlO!Veni•a ns, Croatians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, a,nd Lusatia,n tSerbs, whatever Kerner and other "historians" of his type might have to say to the contrary notwithstandi ng. If Kerner does not be1ieve that t:he right of self-dete:nmination applies equally to the Czechs and /Slovaks, let him .say so outright and be done wi~h it. Kerner should know, as we certainly lmow, that the magic formula that druzzled. and charmed. President Wilson was "national determination," which meant that every ethnic group be conceded the right to decide to which state it wished to belong. More dmpo:ntrunt than what it meanit, of course, was what it implied: the notion that the id68.l state would be one inhabited only by one ethnic entity, one nation. The tenth of WiliSion's "1Fo!Urteen Points" reads as follows: ''!The peoples of Austria-iHu111gary , whose place among the nations we wish to see s·afeguaro€d and •a ssured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development." What does "the peoples of Austria-Hung ary" mean to professor Kerner? Does it mean all the peoples, except the Slova1k people? If Masaryik used his charms to maJk:e Wilson •b elieve the fiction that the "Czechs and the Slovaiks were the same," and so to deceive him does that alter the .truth that the Ozechs a.nd the Slov~ are not one people, one nation? Why should Kenner want us to believe otheIWise? • "The !Peace Conference chose to give the Czechos-lovaks the hiatoric boundaries in the Czech regions of Austri•a and ethnic bound•a rles In the Slovak districts of Hungary. Furthermore, it •a ddoo, under cond,l tlons of autonomy, Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia. It thmi created a state in Wlhlch 34 per cent of the population was non-Czech0- 60 SLOVAKIA slovak, ,a nd this element included a German .population of over three millimi.s, livin,g chiefly in the outer rim of Bohemia, in a state of less than fifteen millions" (p. 63). But this is 111ot quite the whole ,s tory. The Peace Conference decided as it did, 'becaJUOO it relied on the "expert" information supplied iby Masaryk and Benes, !both Czechs, who presumed to represent iboth the Czechs and also the Slova!ks. In the state created, the non-Czech population was in the majority, and this included some three and a half million Germams, in a state of "less than fifteen millions" (how much less?). The Conference ga;ve the "Czechoslovaks" nothing, lbuit it did allow the boundaries for the "new" state that was -created, as Kerner states, "on the -g round that rune or ten million Czechoslovaks should be favored •w ith independence oiver three million Germans" (p. 65) - the argument Oif Masaryk and Benes! They needed the almost three million Slovaiks of Hrung,ary to m.aJce "nine or ten n:rlllion Czechoslovaks," but the Czechs and the ISloivaJks, were "the same"! • "The Duchy of TesC'hen was ,w,hat was left of Silesia, one of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, after Frederiick the Great had seized fourte en-fifteeruths of that territory in 1740. The historic rights of the Czechs went •back to t!he fourteenth century. Before that the Duchy had been ,Polish {p. r66) . . . It was, however, Poland's diss·a tisfaction with this decision which led her diplomacy into d.e manding a.nd acquiring Czech Teschen on the occasion of the Conference of Mu· nlch (October, 1938). This blow from the rear really made it impossible for Czechoslovakia to fight after she was abandoned by her Western allies" (p. 68) . It is ,olbvious that Kerner either laoks knowledge about Teschen or is deli'berately attemptilllg to confuse the readers of his "Ozechoslova:kia." Just lilke Miasaryik and Benes, iit seems that Kerner does not want students oif history to know the whole tmth about Ozecho-Sloivaki,a. Furthermore, the ,allegation that Ozecho,...Slov,rukia was "forced" to :su,r render to iHitler !Without firing a shot, because her "Western allies" had abandoned her, OT because IDngland ·a nd France asked her to, is purely fictitious. Benes surrendered Czecho-Slovaki.a to Hitler without the approval of parliament. The Benes Czechs knew fully well that Czeoho-SlovaJkia could not be saved, because her non-Czech majority was not wiling to fight for her. They SLOVAKIA 61 chose to urrender "at the behest of their faithless friends," because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the Germa~lovak-Magyar~Rutib.en.ian-iPolish majority of her population was not ready to die for a tate that had treated them as second-rate citizens for ome thirty years. And let us not forget that even the Czech,s, who considered themselves t he "State-nation," did not fire a single shot in defense of Czecho-JSlovrukia. Furthermore, it is no secret ,t hat Benes did not cultivate friendshiip with Poland and other neigh'boring states : his pro Soviet policy over decades of years is proof of that. Already in 1929 Viscount D'Abernon prophesied: "The treaty between Czecbo S lovakia and Poland is thought a triumph of French m ilitarism . o it m a y be, but the duration w ill b e te mpo rary . . . the Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon as disturbing forces cease to operate quite as powerfully as today." • "Germ an propaganda l ater s ought to spread the view that the bou ndaries of Czeoho slovakia, a s well as t hose of P ol and, wer e drawn by the Peace Conferene e in ignorance and that they repres e nted a failure to understand the problems of central Europe. N ot hing could be far th er from tJh e facts . The deleg ates o f the Peace Cont rence had access to and used the best available information and considered these problems from all possible angles" (p. 6 ). After reviewing the events that followed World Wa.r I Mld led to World War IiI, I believe it is safe to say that Kerner's statement is "farther from the facts" than even the "German propaganda" he alludes to. The fact rernains t hat World War I not only failed to solive Europe's problems, ,b ut even ,a ccentuated them and led t o World War II. At Paris there was a meeting of two continents which were quite ignorant of each other. The peacemakers blundered when they accepted interested parties as experts wit hout having them chedked 'by the opposition. When Lloyd George asked Benes how many Ma.gyam would fall undeT Ozech rule, Benes replied that their number would lbe 350,000 ('D. H. Miller: "My Diary at the Conference in Paris"; in reality it was more ibhan one million. Benes, plead.., ing fOT a "natural frontier," described a little ~oolk as a nasvigalble river. Repudiation of Kerner's claim may also be found in A . J. P. Taylor's "The HaJbsbu.rg Monarchy," C. A . Ma- 62 SLOVAKIA cartney's "Problems of the Danubiam Basin," Lloyd George's "The Tr.urth About the Peace Treaties," J. M. Keynes "The Economic Consequences of the Peace." Winston Churchill's "Afternnath and World Crises,." Robert fugrim's "After Hitler :Stalin?" and even T. G. Masa;ryk's "Svet<Jva Revoluce." But Kerner himself does that quite effecti:vely with the last three sentences - especially the last sentence - of the ivery same par.aJgraph, ,whi.oh reads: "Another ,s olution of the Czechoslovak problem might indeed be sought •by some future .p eace conference, if the poignant problem of the German nation is solved, for example, on the model of Switzerla:nd rather than that permitting a rampant totalitarian racialism. U.nti,l then it may be said that the work of t!he Peace Conference was a reasonable solution for its time. Common sense and Intelligence and a few minor boundary rectifications might have aecured a durable settlement" (p. 69). Of course, Professor Kerner, could hardly have intended it that way, but this is quite an admission from a mem. her of the "EXPERT STAFF, Colonel House Inquiry and American Commission to Negotiate Peace"! We know today that Kerner was not the only "exipert" who la'o ked sufficient "common sense and intelligence" at that time. (More coming) WHO SAID IT? "In 1868 the Ozeoh initel,lectuails and the Bohemian aristocrats renewed filleir allegi1ance. . . The eighty Bohemian a<bsentees from the Reicllsrat made a declaration of their aims: they asked for equal na:tional rights for the Czechs in Bohemia, and for a refornn of the electoral system; they demanded also the unity of the lands of St. We:nceslaus and the same independence for this "grea,t Bohemia" a;s HUlllgary possessed. The Ozech leaders were bewitched by the Hungarian example. '1'1hey saw, quite rightly, that the Magyars had achieved their nation'al freedom by associating it with historic rilghts, and they supposed that the way to achieve the national freed~m of the Czechs was to claim the historic rights of Bohemia. They did not see that the historic rights of Hungary were real, the historic rights of Bohemia imaginary. . . " - (A. J. P. Taylor, TH1E HABSIBURG MONA'ROHY, London, 1948; p. 142).  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (1/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 5, No. 2-3 (15-16), June-September 1955 pp. 38-62 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-September 1955 Relation A related resource continues in <a href="/items/show/176">Vol. 5, No. 4 (17), pp. 55-62</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/972606398b7036535e70791fa1bd27af.pdf 0eee8edb0f9e09c5d8dfe6637cce1b76 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 3 APOSTLE OF A'MErRICAN SLOVAKS THE REV. STEPHEN FURDEK By Phi1ip A . Hrobak Father Stephen Furdek was called to his eternal reward forty years ago, bwt his stature continues to grow with the years. When Furrdek died on January 18, 1915, he was mourned by Slovaks everywhere. Father Furdek was, indeed, a great American, a good Slovak, an exemplary priest of God, a true apostle of Christian charity, a successful organizer and leader of men. Rev. Stephen Furdek was born September 2, 1856, in the village of Trstena, Orava County, S1ovakia, materially probably one of the poorest of the poor communities of the land of the Tatras, which hras 'been inhabited 1zy Slovaks during the past 1500 years. It was there that Furdek completed his primary education as a boy. Then he attended the gymnasium at Banska Bystrica, transferring later to, the one at Nitra; and af.ter that he entered the seminary at Nitra. Completing his studies at Nitra with distinction, Furdek was sent to Pest University, where he became, ill a short time later and returned to Nitra. After recuperating, Fu.rdek taught school for a time in Straznice, Moravia, and then decided to study at the University of Prague. It was here that he studied classical ,philology for three years and became acquainted with Dr. Francis Bauer, rector of the seminary and, later, Cardinal and Archbishop of the Olomouc archbishopric, with whom he corresponded to his death. It was on the advice of Dr. Bauer that Furdek entered the seminary at Prague to complete his priestly studies. But he did not quite complete those there, because as a theologian in his fourth year he answered the call of Bishop Richard Gilmour of Cleveland, Ohio, for priests who could spook and understand Slovak and other SloV'anic languages. Parting wi:tlh his family and acquaintances in Trstena, Furdek set sail for America in March, 1882, and arrived in Cleveland, Ohio, several weelks Irater. ·· �4 SLOVAKIA In Cleveland, Furdek completed his studies for the priesthood and was ordained priest July 1, 1882. His first assignment was a chaplaincy at the Czech parish of St. Wenceslaus. In .Aipril, 1883, Bishop Gilmour appointed him pastor of the newly..founded congregation of Ourr Lady of Lourdes in the East 55th and Broadway section of Cleveland. However, at the end of May, 1883, Bishop Gilmour asked F1ather Furdek to take over the administration of the St. Procopius parish on the West Side, where a disturbance had occurred. Father furdek acquiesced, listened patiently to arguments proferred by the various ''warring" factions, reconciled and set them straight and made the parish a going concern. By February, 1884, Furdek was back at his old post of Our Lady of Lorurdes parish, where he labored successfully until his death in 1915. In the meantime, quite a number of Slorvrukis had settled in the downtown Wood.land-Scorvill-Commercial Avenue section of Cleveland; they attended St. Joseph's church on 23rd and Woodland Arvenue. Since the Franciscan Fathers there did not know Slovak or any related language, the Slov~s begged F'ather Furdek to do something about it. And he did. With the permission of the Bishop and the Franciscans, F'ather Furdek made his appearance regularly at one of the Masses at St. Joseph's to preach and instruct in Slov,aik, while one of the Franci,sca.n Fathers read the Holy Mass. As the number of Slovaik immigrants in Cleveland increased, they asked Father Furdek to help them esta;blish a parish "of our own" - a Slovak parish. This he did in 1888, when a lot, 180 by 180 feet, was bought at the corner of Corwin and Holton Avenues, just below Woodhill Road. IDven the Magyars of the Buckeye Road area contributed so that a wooden church was constructed on the site that same year. That was the start of St. Ladislaus parish. In 1890, at the request of his Bishop, Father Furdek went to Europe to seeGc out priests who would serve the spiritual needs of Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatians of the Cleveland diocese. After completing his mission, Furdek visited Lourdes and Rome and then returned to his parish in Cleveland. �SLOVAKIA 5 Father Furdek'.s entire life was a life of dedication to God and his fellowmen. EJarly in life he adopted the slogan "Za Boha a narod" (For God and nation) and adhered to it strictly throughout his life. The motto was adopted by the organizations which Furdek founded: the First Catholic Slovak Union of the United States of America (1890); the First Caitholic Slovak Ladies Union (1892); the Slovak Institute (Slovenska Matica - 1893); the Slovak League of America (1907); the National Fund, the Fund to Preserve our National Heritage. F'u.rdek also organized the St. Ladislaus parish in Cleveland and helped to found many others, including the parish schools which were built later. The First Catholic Slovak Union is undoubtedly the greatest achievement of Father Furdek's fruitful life. The biography of Furdek is substantially the history of the F'irst Catholic Slovak Union. Today this organization is the largest fraternal benefit society of Slovaks in the world. Furdek not only organized it, but was also its guiding spirit throughout his life. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the Slovruks from the Tatra country were literally pouring into America to better their economic lot and escape the political oppression of alien rulers at home. Furdek realized that much more could be acomplished by an organization than by an individual. He also knew that it was only natural for men to band together in a common cause. At the close of the nineteenth century, Slovak immigrants in various cities of the United States had already organized into benefit and social organizations on the local level. Furdek put hi:s sights on a national organization, which would do so much more "for God and nation." And Furdek's dream was realized when representatives of eight such Slovak societies answered his call for a convention at Cleveland, Ohio, September 4, 1890, and established the First Catholic Slovak Union. Today the First Catholic Slovruk Union is worth $22,000,000.00; over 200,000 Slovaks joined it since it was organized; the orgainization paid out some $40,000,000.00 �6 SLOV.A,~IA in death benefits to widows and or,phans of its members; another $5,000,000.00 in charity to individuals and institutions; and the Jednota Home for orphans, -opened in 1914, hras taken care of some 2,000 children of its members who lost one or both of their parents. In addition, the organization has paid for the high school education of many boys and girls who otherwise might have been deprived of it, because relatives could not afford to give it to them. Furdek and his followers, the members of the First Catholic Slovak Union, also ·played a major role in establishing some 300 Catholic •Slovak parishes, 150 parochial schools, several high schools; also St. Andrew's A:bbey of Slovruk Benedictines, Cleveland, Ohio, the Slovruk Franciscan Fathers of Clifton, N. J., P1ttsburgh, Pa., and Valparaiso, Ind., the Order of Sisters of Sts. Cyril and 'Methodius, Danville, Pa., the Slovak Dominican Sisters, Oxford, Mich., the Slovak Vincentian Sisters of Perrysville, Pa., and Bedford, Ohio, the Slovak Franciscan Sisters of Bellevue, Pa., Lacon, Ill., Bethlehem, Pa., and the Slovruk Btmedictine Sisters, Tinley Park, Ill. The First Catholic Slov~k Union of the United States and Canada has some 1100 subordinate branches with a total membership of 98,000. There are branches of the organization at practically every Catholic SlovaJk parish, as well as many non~Slovak parishes. Father Stephen Furdek was a man of U!Illblemished character, deep c01nvictions, and keen foresigiht; a man of the highest princtples, intelligent, kind, patient, just, understanding, ever ready to forgive and advise, quick to help and comfort the unfortunate. That is why Furdek was loved and revered by his own people and respected even by the enemies of his Church and nation. Thoroughly familiar with the virtues and failings of his people, Father Furdek did everything in his power to improve their material and spiritual -c ondition. All his labors tended to uplift his Slovak countrymen. His heart and haJnds were in practically every national and religious undertaking of the Slovaks in America. His only oomrplaitnt seemed to be that he could not do enough for his God and �SLOVAKIA 7 his people. Not only did he rouse the Slovaks of America and the members of the organization he founded to be up and doing, but he himself led the way, working selflessly and tirelessly, and supporting generously the cause at hand, whether it be a new church, a newly created foundation, a new school, the Holy Father, the domestic and foreign missions, etc. At the same time, however, Father Furdek was ever mindful of the sad plight of the Slovaks beneath the Tatras, the land of his fathers . Not only was he aware of it, but also decided to do something rubout it. He constantly appealed to the sons Ml.d daughters of the Slovak nation who came to the shores of free America not to be ashamed of their Slovak origin, but to proudly proclaim it. He appr~ ciated the blessings of freedom and wished to share them with his less fortunate brethren in Slovakia. How many times did Furdek sigh and pray "Lord, that our Slovak people over there might once enjoy the blessings of freedom that are mine in America!" And Father Furdek and his followers did much to alleviate the oppression of their countrymen at home Mld inspired many others to do likewise. The Slovak League of America, founded by Furdek in J 907, Cleveland, Ohio, is aJso a going concern today. Unlike the Jednota, the Slovaik League of Amerioa is not a fraternal insurance organi'zation, but a cultural and civic organizatioo of Americans of Slovruk desceint. Being an AmericMl institution it is primarily interested in promoting the welfare and security of the United States of America. But it is also interested in creating a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovaik nation, its histery, culture, traditions, achievements, and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. As a truly American organization it is resolutely opposed to the domination and exploitation of t:he Slovak nation by any other nation or political state. Like the other orgamzations founded by Furdek, the Slovruk League consistently repudiates Ml.d condemns Marxist communism. Father Furde'k believed that individuals . and nations could better their lot if they drew their strength from the rich, vital fountains of mO'ral forees, the foundation of �8 SLOVAKIA which are faith, religion and spiritual traditions. The circumstances that prevailed in Slovakia did not allow the Slovruks to prosper materially. As a nation they were humbled and alien rulers repudiated their inherent, God-given rights to freedom and independence. But spiritually, the Slovak nation never was poor but, in fact, wealthier than many other larger nations which were free and independent. The Slo'Vaks preserved their Christian character even under the most adverse conditions, and generation after generation preserved the individualistic traditions of the Slovak s,pirit. Father Furdek knew that the Slovaks in America did not have to surrender their character, their national traditions, but could in fact even develop the spiritual heritage of their forefathers and thus with the treasures of their own spirit contribute to the enrichment of Americam life. Father Furdek always contended that good Slovaks made good American citizens, that a Slovruk who remained loyal to God and his own nation simply could not become an unworthy citizen. Father Stephen Furdek was also a writer and poet of no mean a;bility. In 1891, he began publishing the newspaper "Jednota" (The Union) weekly, and fi'Ve years later the annual "Kalendar Jednota" or Jednota Almanac as it is called. Both are still being published by the First Catholic Slovak Union. Father Furdek not only ecli,ted these ,pu:blication.s, but also contributed heavily to them until his death in 1915. He found time, too, to write for several plllblications in Sloivakia. His was a very popular style; hL5 articles, stories, anecdotes and poems were relished 'by the Slovruks of America amd Europe. In 1910, he pub1'ished the book "S'Vet a jeho zahady" (The World and its Mysteries), an apologetic wurk repudiating the atheistic theories of scientists about the origin of the world and man. The importance vf hruving a school in every ,S lovak parish was highly appreciated and strongly advocated by Father Furdelk. It could be used to great advantage by both the young and the old. The latter could be instructed in English, and the former in SlO'Vak. Furdek aippreciated the fact that children especially .:ould not be expected to �SLOVAKIA 9 love something that was unlknown to them; they could love and a,ppreciate only wha.t they had an opportunity to become acquainted with. His Slovruk grammar and readers for children did much to preserve the Slovak 1-anguage in several generations of Slovaks in America. Father Furdek endearvored to a<!quaint Amerioans with Slovakia and the Slov,a ks, and the latter wi~ America. To win recogmtion for his people and preserve their good name was one of the principle aims of Father FurdeJk. Up to the time that Furdek began to pwblish his "Jedinota" (1891), the Slova,ks were referred to as "Hungarians, Huns, Sla,vish people, Slavonians, Slavs" - in a word, almost anything but what they really were. It was Furdek who insisted on the appellation •~sLOVAKS" and appealed to the readers of the J ednota in particU!lar to do likewise. Father Furdek enjoyed universal popul,a rity and the trust of his people. He was a man of great understanding, tact and diplomacy. Furdek settled many arguments and misunderstandings to the satisfaction of all parties COIIlcerned. An apostle of ,peace and tolerance, Furdek endeavored to a.void whatever might ca.use dissension and misunderstanding a,mong his people. To those who did not know him well, Furdek appeared to be cool, reserved and difficult to appl'Oach. That was Furdek O!Il the outside. Inside, however, beat a heart of gold, in fiact, Father Furdek was all heart. Furdek was not easily irritated, possessing surpr,i sing self-contro'I. even under the most trying circumstances. Hleated debates might be carried O!Il in his presence when, finally, he would be called upon to settle the a:vgument in question. Furdek always spoke little, 1but said very much, carefully weighing every word. He spoke softly, without any show of anger, bitterness or aggravation; he was fair and objectirve towards friend and foe alike in private as well as public relations with them. Father culties and thoroughly, fered what Furdek was not easily discouraged by diffidisappointmoots. He studied every problem presented his views intelligently and then ofhe thought was the best soJution. When he �10 SLOVAKIA decided it was in the best interests of the F,iz,st Oaitholic Slovak Union to change to the reserve system, he kept hammering away at it, appealing and ~laining to the membership and the delegates to the convention until the proposition was approved. We know today that if it had not been, the First CathoUc Slovak Union most liikely would not be in existence today. When Father Furdek thought it was time to seriously think of building a home for the orphaned children of the memlbers of the Je<lnota, he let the membership know rubout it and set himself to the task until the Jednota Home in Middletown, Pa., became a r~ ality in 1914. He also dreamed of building a high school and a uniiversity on the Jednota Home property, and if the good Lord had spared Furdek another decade, he undoubtedly would ha,ve promoted even these worthy objects successfully. Ailing for several years, Father Furdek ga,ve up his soul to its Maiker at 4 :40 p. m., January 18, 1915. The news of his death spread liike fire throughout Slovaik settlements in America; Slov~ks everywhere, Catholics aind non..Catholics alike, were deeply touched and mourned the passing of the greatest Slovaik in America. After the solemn Requiem chanted by the Rt. Rev. Monsignor O'Reilly, Ohancellor of the Diocese of Cleveland, in our Lady of Lourdes church, January 20, 1915, the earthly remains of Father Furdek were laid to rest in ,t he CalV'ary Cemetery. Over 10,000 people, including Bishop J. M. Koudelka of Superior, Wisconsin, 65 priests from Slovaik parishes of America, the Supreme Officers of the First Catholic SlovaJk Union, the Slovak League of America and other Slovak organizations, and many civic leaders, attended the last rites foc Father Furdek. Father Stephen Furdek, worthy son of the land of the majestic Tatras and adopted son of the land of the free and the home of the brave, fought the good fight, finished the course, and kept the faith. He shall live in the 'hearts of the Slovaks forever. Guided by his noble spirit they aire determined to carry on the good fight ''Za Boha a na:rod" until the end of time. � SLOVAKIA 3 APOSTLE OF A'MErRICAN SLOVAKS THE REV. STEPHEN FURDEK By Phi1ip A . Hrobak Father Stephen Furdek was called to his eternal reward forty years ago, bwt his stature continues to grow with the years. When Furrdek died on January 18, 1915, he was mourned by Slovaks everywhere. Father Furdek was, indeed, a great American, a good Slovak, an exemplary priest of God, a true apostle of Christian charity, a successful organizer and leader of men. Rev. Stephen Furdek was born September 2, 1856, in the village of Trstena, Orava County, S1ovakia, materially probably one of the poorest of the poor communities of the land of the Tatras, which hras 'been inhabited 1zy Slovaks during the past 1500 years. It was there that Furdek completed his primary education as a boy. Then he attended the gymnasium at Banska Bystrica, transferring later to, the one at Nitra; and af.ter that he entered the seminary at Nitra. Completing his studies at Nitra with distinction, Furdek was sent to Pest University, where he became, ill a short time later and returned to Nitra. After recuperating, Fu.rdek taught school for a time in Straznice, Moravia, and then decided to study at the University of Prague. It was here that he studied classical ,philology for three years and became acquainted with Dr. Francis Bauer, rector of the seminary and, later, Cardinal and Archbishop of the Olomouc archbishopric, with whom he corresponded to his death. It was on the advice of Dr. Bauer that Furdek entered the seminary at Prague to complete his priestly studies. But he did not quite complete those there, because as a theologian in his fourth year he answered the call of Bishop Richard Gilmour of Cleveland, Ohio, for priests who could spook and understand Slovak and other SloV'anic languages. Parting wi:tlh his family and acquaintances in Trstena, Furdek set sail for America in March, 1882, and arrived in Cleveland, Ohio, several weelks Irater. ·· �4 SLOVAKIA In Cleveland, Furdek completed his studies for the priesthood and was ordained priest July 1, 1882. His first assignment was a chaplaincy at the Czech parish of St. Wenceslaus. In .Aipril, 1883, Bishop Gilmour appointed him pastor of the newly..founded congregation of Ourr Lady of Lourdes in the East 55th and Broadway section of Cleveland. However, at the end of May, 1883, Bishop Gilmour asked F1ather Furdek to take over the administration of the St. Procopius parish on the West Side, where a disturbance had occurred. Father furdek acquiesced, listened patiently to arguments proferred by the various ''warring" factions, reconciled and set them straight and made the parish a going concern. By February, 1884, Furdek was back at his old post of Our Lady of Lorurdes parish, where he labored successfully until his death in 1915. In the meantime, quite a number of Slorvrukis had settled in the downtown Wood.land-Scorvill-Commercial Avenue section of Cleveland; they attended St. Joseph's church on 23rd and Woodland Arvenue. Since the Franciscan Fathers there did not know Slovak or any related language, the Slov~s begged F'ather Furdek to do something about it. And he did. With the permission of the Bishop and the Franciscans, F'ather Furdek made his appearance regularly at one of the Masses at St. Joseph's to preach and instruct in Slov,aik, while one of the Franci,sca.n Fathers read the Holy Mass. As the number of Slovaik immigrants in Cleveland increased, they asked Father Furdek to help them esta;blish a parish "of our own" - a Slovak parish. This he did in 1888, when a lot, 180 by 180 feet, was bought at the corner of Corwin and Holton Avenues, just below Woodhill Road. IDven the Magyars of the Buckeye Road area contributed so that a wooden church was constructed on the site that same year. That was the start of St. Ladislaus parish. In 1890, at the request of his Bishop, Father Furdek went to Europe to seeGc out priests who would serve the spiritual needs of Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatians of the Cleveland diocese. After completing his mission, Furdek visited Lourdes and Rome and then returned to his parish in Cleveland. �SLOVAKIA 5 Father Furdek'.s entire life was a life of dedication to God and his fellowmen. EJarly in life he adopted the slogan "Za Boha a narod" (For God and nation) and adhered to it strictly throughout his life. The motto was adopted by the organizations which Furdek founded: the First Catholic Slovak Union of the United States of America (1890); the First Caitholic Slovak Ladies Union (1892); the Slovak Institute (Slovenska Matica - 1893); the Slovak League of America (1907); the National Fund, the Fund to Preserve our National Heritage. F'u.rdek also organized the St. Ladislaus parish in Cleveland and helped to found many others, including the parish schools which were built later. The First Catholic Slovak Union is undoubtedly the greatest achievement of Father Furdek's fruitful life. The biography of Furdek is substantially the history of the F'irst Catholic Slovak Union. Today this organization is the largest fraternal benefit society of Slovaks in the world. Furdek not only organized it, but was also its guiding spirit throughout his life. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the Slovruks from the Tatra country were literally pouring into America to better their economic lot and escape the political oppression of alien rulers at home. Furdek realized that much more could be acomplished by an organization than by an individual. He also knew that it was only natural for men to band together in a common cause. At the close of the nineteenth century, Slovak immigrants in various cities of the United States had already organized into benefit and social organizations on the local level. Furdek put hi:s sights on a national organization, which would do so much more "for God and nation." And Furdek's dream was realized when representatives of eight such Slovak societies answered his call for a convention at Cleveland, Ohio, September 4, 1890, and established the First Catholic Slovak Union. Today the First Catholic Slovruk Union is worth $22,000,000.00; over 200,000 Slovaks joined it since it was organized; the orgainization paid out some $40,000,000.00 �6 SLOV.A,~IA in death benefits to widows and or,phans of its members; another $5,000,000.00 in charity to individuals and institutions; and the Jednota Home for orphans, -opened in 1914, hras taken care of some 2,000 children of its members who lost one or both of their parents. In addition, the organization has paid for the high school education of many boys and girls who otherwise might have been deprived of it, because relatives could not afford to give it to them. Furdek and his followers, the members of the First Catholic Slovak Union, also ·played a major role in establishing some 300 Catholic •Slovak parishes, 150 parochial schools, several high schools; also St. Andrew's A:bbey of Slovruk Benedictines, Cleveland, Ohio, the Slovruk Franciscan Fathers of Clifton, N. J., P1ttsburgh, Pa., and Valparaiso, Ind., the Order of Sisters of Sts. Cyril and 'Methodius, Danville, Pa., the Slovak Dominican Sisters, Oxford, Mich., the Slovak Vincentian Sisters of Perrysville, Pa., and Bedford, Ohio, the Slovak Franciscan Sisters of Bellevue, Pa., Lacon, Ill., Bethlehem, Pa., and the Slovruk Btmedictine Sisters, Tinley Park, Ill. The First Catholic Slov~k Union of the United States and Canada has some 1100 subordinate branches with a total membership of 98,000. There are branches of the organization at practically every Catholic SlovaJk parish, as well as many non~Slovak parishes. Father Stephen Furdek was a man of U!Illblemished character, deep c01nvictions, and keen foresigiht; a man of the highest princtples, intelligent, kind, patient, just, understanding, ever ready to forgive and advise, quick to help and comfort the unfortunate. That is why Furdek was loved and revered by his own people and respected even by the enemies of his Church and nation. Thoroughly familiar with the virtues and failings of his people, Father Furdek did everything in his power to improve their material and spiritual -c ondition. All his labors tended to uplift his Slovak countrymen. His heart and haJnds were in practically every national and religious undertaking of the Slovaks in America. His only oomrplaitnt seemed to be that he could not do enough for his God and �SLOVAKIA 7 his people. Not only did he rouse the Slovaks of America and the members of the organization he founded to be up and doing, but he himself led the way, working selflessly and tirelessly, and supporting generously the cause at hand, whether it be a new church, a newly created foundation, a new school, the Holy Father, the domestic and foreign missions, etc. At the same time, however, Father Furdek was ever mindful of the sad plight of the Slovaks beneath the Tatras, the land of his fathers . Not only was he aware of it, but also decided to do something rubout it. He constantly appealed to the sons Ml.d daughters of the Slovak nation who came to the shores of free America not to be ashamed of their Slovak origin, but to proudly proclaim it. He appr~ ciated the blessings of freedom and wished to share them with his less fortunate brethren in Slovakia. How many times did Furdek sigh and pray "Lord, that our Slovak people over there might once enjoy the blessings of freedom that are mine in America!" And Father Furdek and his followers did much to alleviate the oppression of their countrymen at home Mld inspired many others to do likewise. The Slovak League of America, founded by Furdek in J 907, Cleveland, Ohio, is aJso a going concern today. Unlike the Jednota, the Slovaik League of Amerioa is not a fraternal insurance organi'zation, but a cultural and civic organizatioo of Americans of Slovruk desceint. Being an AmericMl institution it is primarily interested in promoting the welfare and security of the United States of America. But it is also interested in creating a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovaik nation, its histery, culture, traditions, achievements, and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. As a truly American organization it is resolutely opposed to the domination and exploitation of t:he Slovak nation by any other nation or political state. Like the other orgamzations founded by Furdek, the Slovruk League consistently repudiates Ml.d condemns Marxist communism. Father Furde'k believed that individuals . and nations could better their lot if they drew their strength from the rich, vital fountains of mO'ral forees, the foundation of �8 SLOVAKIA which are faith, religion and spiritual traditions. The circumstances that prevailed in Slovakia did not allow the Slovruks to prosper materially. As a nation they were humbled and alien rulers repudiated their inherent, God-given rights to freedom and independence. But spiritually, the Slovak nation never was poor but, in fact, wealthier than many other larger nations which were free and independent. The Slo'Vaks preserved their Christian character even under the most adverse conditions, and generation after generation preserved the individualistic traditions of the Slovak s,pirit. Father Furdek knew that the Slovaks in America did not have to surrender their character, their national traditions, but could in fact even develop the spiritual heritage of their forefathers and thus with the treasures of their own spirit contribute to the enrichment of Americam life. Father Furdek always contended that good Slovaks made good American citizens, that a Slovruk who remained loyal to God and his own nation simply could not become an unworthy citizen. Father Stephen Furdek was also a writer and poet of no mean a;bility. In 1891, he began publishing the newspaper "Jednota" (The Union) weekly, and fi'Ve years later the annual "Kalendar Jednota" or Jednota Almanac as it is called. Both are still being published by the First Catholic Slovak Union. Father Furdek not only ecli,ted these ,pu:blication.s, but also contributed heavily to them until his death in 1915. He found time, too, to write for several plllblications in Sloivakia. His was a very popular style; hL5 articles, stories, anecdotes and poems were relished 'by the Slovruks of America amd Europe. In 1910, he pub1'ished the book "S'Vet a jeho zahady" (The World and its Mysteries), an apologetic wurk repudiating the atheistic theories of scientists about the origin of the world and man. The importance vf hruving a school in every ,S lovak parish was highly appreciated and strongly advocated by Father Furdelk. It could be used to great advantage by both the young and the old. The latter could be instructed in English, and the former in SlO'Vak. Furdek aippreciated the fact that children especially .:ould not be expected to �SLOVAKIA 9 love something that was unlknown to them; they could love and a,ppreciate only wha.t they had an opportunity to become acquainted with. His Slovruk grammar and readers for children did much to preserve the Slovak 1-anguage in several generations of Slovaks in America. Father Furdek endearvored to a<!quaint Amerioans with Slovakia and the Slov,a ks, and the latter wi~ America. To win recogmtion for his people and preserve their good name was one of the principle aims of Father FurdeJk. Up to the time that Furdek began to pwblish his "Jedinota" (1891), the Slova,ks were referred to as "Hungarians, Huns, Sla,vish people, Slavonians, Slavs" - in a word, almost anything but what they really were. It was Furdek who insisted on the appellation •~sLOVAKS" and appealed to the readers of the J ednota in particU!lar to do likewise. Father Furdek enjoyed universal popul,a rity and the trust of his people. He was a man of great understanding, tact and diplomacy. Furdek settled many arguments and misunderstandings to the satisfaction of all parties COIIlcerned. An apostle of ,peace and tolerance, Furdek endeavored to a.void whatever might ca.use dissension and misunderstanding a,mong his people. To those who did not know him well, Furdek appeared to be cool, reserved and difficult to appl'Oach. That was Furdek O!Il the outside. Inside, however, beat a heart of gold, in fiact, Father Furdek was all heart. Furdek was not easily irritated, possessing surpr,i sing self-contro'I. even under the most trying circumstances. Hleated debates might be carried O!Il in his presence when, finally, he would be called upon to settle the a:vgument in question. Furdek always spoke little, 1but said very much, carefully weighing every word. He spoke softly, without any show of anger, bitterness or aggravation; he was fair and objectirve towards friend and foe alike in private as well as public relations with them. Father culties and thoroughly, fered what Furdek was not easily discouraged by diffidisappointmoots. He studied every problem presented his views intelligently and then ofhe thought was the best soJution. When he �10 SLOVAKIA decided it was in the best interests of the F,iz,st Oaitholic Slovak Union to change to the reserve system, he kept hammering away at it, appealing and ~laining to the membership and the delegates to the convention until the proposition was approved. We know today that if it had not been, the First CathoUc Slovak Union most liikely would not be in existence today. When Father Furdek thought it was time to seriously think of building a home for the orphaned children of the memlbers of the Je<lnota, he let the membership know rubout it and set himself to the task until the Jednota Home in Middletown, Pa., became a r~ ality in 1914. He also dreamed of building a high school and a uniiversity on the Jednota Home property, and if the good Lord had spared Furdek another decade, he undoubtedly would ha,ve promoted even these worthy objects successfully. Ailing for several years, Father Furdek ga,ve up his soul to its Maiker at 4 :40 p. m., January 18, 1915. The news of his death spread liike fire throughout Slovaik settlements in America; Slov~ks everywhere, Catholics aind non..Catholics alike, were deeply touched and mourned the passing of the greatest Slovaik in America. After the solemn Requiem chanted by the Rt. Rev. Monsignor O'Reilly, Ohancellor of the Diocese of Cleveland, in our Lady of Lourdes church, January 20, 1915, the earthly remains of Father Furdek were laid to rest in ,t he CalV'ary Cemetery. Over 10,000 people, including Bishop J. M. Koudelka of Superior, Wisconsin, 65 priests from Slovaik parishes of America, the Supreme Officers of the First Catholic SlovaJk Union, the Slovak League of America and other Slovak organizations, and many civic leaders, attended the last rites foc Father Furdek. Father Stephen Furdek, worthy son of the land of the majestic Tatras and adopted son of the land of the free and the home of the brave, fought the good fight, finished the course, and kept the faith. He shall live in the 'hearts of the Slovaks forever. Guided by his noble spirit they aire determined to carry on the good fight ''Za Boha a na:rod" until the end of time. � 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 1955, Vol. 5 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 14), March 1955.</li> <li>Issue 2-3 (No. 15-16), June-September 1955.</li> <li>Issue 4 (No. 17), December 1955.</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 1955 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 3 APOSTLE OF A'MErRICAN SLOVAKS THE REV. STEPHEN FURDEK By Phi1ip A . Hrobak Father Stephen Furdek was called to his eternal reward forty years ago, bwt his stature continues to grow with the years. When Furrdek died on January 18, 1915, he was mourned by Slovaks everywhere. Father Furdek was, indeed, a great American, a good Slovak, an exemplary priest of God, a true apostle of Christian charity, a successful organizer and leader of men. Rev. Stephen Furdek was born September 2, 1856, in the village of Trstena, Orava County, S1ovakia, materially probably one of the poorest of the poor communities of the land of the Tatras, which hras 'been inhabited 1zy Slovaks during the past 1500 years. It was there that Furdek completed his primary education as a boy. Then he attended the gymnasium at Banska Bystrica, transferring later to, the one at Nitra; and af.ter that he entered the seminary at Nitra. Completing his studies at Nitra with distinction, Furdek was sent to Pest University, where he became, ill a short time later and returned to Nitra. After recuperating, Fu.rdek taught school for a time in Straznice, Moravia, and then decided to study at the University of Prague. It was here that he studied classical ,philology for three years and became acquainted with Dr. Francis Bauer, rector of the seminary and, later, Cardinal and Archbishop of the Olomouc archbishopric, with whom he corresponded to his death. It was on the advice of Dr. Bauer that Furdek entered the seminary at Prague to complete his priestly studies. But he did not quite complete those there, because as a theologian in his fourth year he answered the call of Bishop Richard Gilmour of Cleveland, Ohio, for priests who could spook and understand Slovak and other SloV'anic languages. Parting wi:tlh his family and acquaintances in Trstena, Furdek set sail for America in March, 1882, and arrived in Cleveland, Ohio, several weelks Irater. ·· 4 SLOVAKIA In Cleveland, Furdek completed his studies for the priesthood and was ordained priest July 1, 1882. His first assignment was a chaplaincy at the Czech parish of St. Wenceslaus. In .Aipril, 1883, Bishop Gilmour appointed him pastor of the newly..founded congregation of Ourr Lady of Lourdes in the East 55th and Broadway section of Cleveland. However, at the end of May, 1883, Bishop Gilmour asked F1ather Furdek to take over the administration of the St. Procopius parish on the West Side, where a disturbance had occurred. Father furdek acquiesced, listened patiently to arguments proferred by the various ''warring" factions, reconciled and set them straight and made the parish a going concern. By February, 1884, Furdek was back at his old post of Our Lady of Lorurdes parish, where he labored successfully until his death in 1915. In the meantime, quite a number of Slorvrukis had settled in the downtown Wood.land-Scorvill-Commercial Avenue section of Cleveland; they attended St. Joseph's church on 23rd and Woodland Arvenue. Since the Franciscan Fathers there did not know Slovak or any related language, the Slov~s begged F'ather Furdek to do something about it. And he did. With the permission of the Bishop and the Franciscans, F'ather Furdek made his appearance regularly at one of the Masses at St. Joseph's to preach and instruct in Slov,aik, while one of the Franci,sca.n Fathers read the Holy Mass. As the number of Slovaik immigrants in Cleveland increased, they asked Father Furdek to help them esta;blish a parish "of our own" - a Slovak parish. This he did in 1888, when a lot, 180 by 180 feet, was bought at the corner of Corwin and Holton Avenues, just below Woodhill Road. IDven the Magyars of the Buckeye Road area contributed so that a wooden church was constructed on the site that same year. That was the start of St. Ladislaus parish. In 1890, at the request of his Bishop, Father Furdek went to Europe to seeGc out priests who would serve the spiritual needs of Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatians of the Cleveland diocese. After completing his mission, Furdek visited Lourdes and Rome and then returned to his parish in Cleveland. SLOVAKIA 5 Father Furdek'.s entire life was a life of dedication to God and his fellowmen. EJarly in life he adopted the slogan "Za Boha a narod" (For God and nation) and adhered to it strictly throughout his life. The motto was adopted by the organizations which Furdek founded: the First Catholic Slovak Union of the United States of America (1890); the First Caitholic Slovak Ladies Union (1892); the Slovak Institute (Slovenska Matica - 1893); the Slovak League of America (1907); the National Fund, the Fund to Preserve our National Heritage. F'u.rdek also organized the St. Ladislaus parish in Cleveland and helped to found many others, including the parish schools which were built later. The First Catholic Slovak Union is undoubtedly the greatest achievement of Father Furdek's fruitful life. The biography of Furdek is substantially the history of the F'irst Catholic Slovak Union. Today this organization is the largest fraternal benefit society of Slovaks in the world. Furdek not only organized it, but was also its guiding spirit throughout his life. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the Slovruks from the Tatra country were literally pouring into America to better their economic lot and escape the political oppression of alien rulers at home. Furdek realized that much more could be acomplished by an organization than by an individual. He also knew that it was only natural for men to band together in a common cause. At the close of the nineteenth century, Slovak immigrants in various cities of the United States had already organized into benefit and social organizations on the local level. Furdek put hi:s sights on a national organization, which would do so much more "for God and nation." And Furdek's dream was realized when representatives of eight such Slovak societies answered his call for a convention at Cleveland, Ohio, September 4, 1890, and established the First Catholic Slovak Union. Today the First Catholic Slovruk Union is worth $22,000,000.00; over 200,000 Slovaks joined it since it was organized; the orgainization paid out some $40,000,000.00 6 SLOV.A,~IA in death benefits to widows and or,phans of its members; another $5,000,000.00 in charity to individuals and institutions; and the Jednota Home for orphans, -opened in 1914, hras taken care of some 2,000 children of its members who lost one or both of their parents. In addition, the organization has paid for the high school education of many boys and girls who otherwise might have been deprived of it, because relatives could not afford to give it to them. Furdek and his followers, the members of the First Catholic Slovak Union, also ·played a major role in establishing some 300 Catholic •Slovak parishes, 150 parochial schools, several high schools; also St. Andrew's A:bbey of Slovruk Benedictines, Cleveland, Ohio, the Slovruk Franciscan Fathers of Clifton, N. J., P1ttsburgh, Pa., and Valparaiso, Ind., the Order of Sisters of Sts. Cyril and 'Methodius, Danville, Pa., the Slovak Dominican Sisters, Oxford, Mich., the Slovak Vincentian Sisters of Perrysville, Pa., and Bedford, Ohio, the Slovak Franciscan Sisters of Bellevue, Pa., Lacon, Ill., Bethlehem, Pa., and the Slovruk Btmedictine Sisters, Tinley Park, Ill. The First Catholic Slov~k Union of the United States and Canada has some 1100 subordinate branches with a total membership of 98,000. There are branches of the organization at practically every Catholic SlovaJk parish, as well as many non~Slovak parishes. Father Stephen Furdek was a man of U!Illblemished character, deep c01nvictions, and keen foresigiht; a man of the highest princtples, intelligent, kind, patient, just, understanding, ever ready to forgive and advise, quick to help and comfort the unfortunate. That is why Furdek was loved and revered by his own people and respected even by the enemies of his Church and nation. Thoroughly familiar with the virtues and failings of his people, Father Furdek did everything in his power to improve their material and spiritual -c ondition. All his labors tended to uplift his Slovak countrymen. His heart and haJnds were in practically every national and religious undertaking of the Slovaks in America. His only oomrplaitnt seemed to be that he could not do enough for his God and SLOVAKIA 7 his people. Not only did he rouse the Slovaks of America and the members of the organization he founded to be up and doing, but he himself led the way, working selflessly and tirelessly, and supporting generously the cause at hand, whether it be a new church, a newly created foundation, a new school, the Holy Father, the domestic and foreign missions, etc. At the same time, however, Father Furdek was ever mindful of the sad plight of the Slovaks beneath the Tatras, the land of his fathers . Not only was he aware of it, but also decided to do something rubout it. He constantly appealed to the sons Ml.d daughters of the Slovak nation who came to the shores of free America not to be ashamed of their Slovak origin, but to proudly proclaim it. He appr~ ciated the blessings of freedom and wished to share them with his less fortunate brethren in Slovakia. How many times did Furdek sigh and pray "Lord, that our Slovak people over there might once enjoy the blessings of freedom that are mine in America!" And Father Furdek and his followers did much to alleviate the oppression of their countrymen at home Mld inspired many others to do likewise. The Slovak League of America, founded by Furdek in J 907, Cleveland, Ohio, is aJso a going concern today. Unlike the Jednota, the Slovaik League of Amerioa is not a fraternal insurance organi'zation, but a cultural and civic organizatioo of Americans of Slovruk desceint. Being an AmericMl institution it is primarily interested in promoting the welfare and security of the United States of America. But it is also interested in creating a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovaik nation, its histery, culture, traditions, achievements, and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. As a truly American organization it is resolutely opposed to the domination and exploitation of t:he Slovak nation by any other nation or political state. Like the other orgamzations founded by Furdek, the Slovruk League consistently repudiates Ml.d condemns Marxist communism. Father Furde'k believed that individuals . and nations could better their lot if they drew their strength from the rich, vital fountains of mO'ral forees, the foundation of 8 SLOVAKIA which are faith, religion and spiritual traditions. The circumstances that prevailed in Slovakia did not allow the Slovruks to prosper materially. As a nation they were humbled and alien rulers repudiated their inherent, God-given rights to freedom and independence. But spiritually, the Slovak nation never was poor but, in fact, wealthier than many other larger nations which were free and independent. The Slo'Vaks preserved their Christian character even under the most adverse conditions, and generation after generation preserved the individualistic traditions of the Slovak s,pirit. Father Furdek knew that the Slovaks in America did not have to surrender their character, their national traditions, but could in fact even develop the spiritual heritage of their forefathers and thus with the treasures of their own spirit contribute to the enrichment of Americam life. Father Furdek always contended that good Slovaks made good American citizens, that a Slovruk who remained loyal to God and his own nation simply could not become an unworthy citizen. Father Stephen Furdek was also a writer and poet of no mean a;bility. In 1891, he began publishing the newspaper "Jednota" (The Union) weekly, and fi'Ve years later the annual "Kalendar Jednota" or Jednota Almanac as it is called. Both are still being published by the First Catholic Slovak Union. Father Furdek not only ecli,ted these ,pu:blication.s, but also contributed heavily to them until his death in 1915. He found time, too, to write for several plllblications in Sloivakia. His was a very popular style; hL5 articles, stories, anecdotes and poems were relished 'by the Slovruks of America amd Europe. In 1910, he pub1'ished the book "S'Vet a jeho zahady" (The World and its Mysteries), an apologetic wurk repudiating the atheistic theories of scientists about the origin of the world and man. The importance vf hruving a school in every ,S lovak parish was highly appreciated and strongly advocated by Father Furdelk. It could be used to great advantage by both the young and the old. The latter could be instructed in English, and the former in SlO'Vak. Furdek aippreciated the fact that children especially .:ould not be expected to SLOVAKIA 9 love something that was unlknown to them; they could love and a,ppreciate only wha.t they had an opportunity to become acquainted with. His Slovruk grammar and readers for children did much to preserve the Slovak 1-anguage in several generations of Slovaks in America. Father Furdek endearvored to a<!quaint Amerioans with Slovakia and the Slov,a ks, and the latter wi~ America. To win recogmtion for his people and preserve their good name was one of the principle aims of Father FurdeJk. Up to the time that Furdek began to pwblish his "Jedinota" (1891), the Slova,ks were referred to as "Hungarians, Huns, Sla,vish people, Slavonians, Slavs" - in a word, almost anything but what they really were. It was Furdek who insisted on the appellation •~sLOVAKS" and appealed to the readers of the J ednota in particU!lar to do likewise. Father Furdek enjoyed universal popul,a rity and the trust of his people. He was a man of great understanding, tact and diplomacy. Furdek settled many arguments and misunderstandings to the satisfaction of all parties COIIlcerned. An apostle of ,peace and tolerance, Furdek endeavored to a.void whatever might ca.use dissension and misunderstanding a,mong his people. To those who did not know him well, Furdek appeared to be cool, reserved and difficult to appl'Oach. That was Furdek O!Il the outside. Inside, however, beat a heart of gold, in fiact, Father Furdek was all heart. Furdek was not easily irritated, possessing surpr,i sing self-contro'I. even under the most trying circumstances. Hleated debates might be carried O!Il in his presence when, finally, he would be called upon to settle the a:vgument in question. Furdek always spoke little, 1but said very much, carefully weighing every word. He spoke softly, without any show of anger, bitterness or aggravation; he was fair and objectirve towards friend and foe alike in private as well as public relations with them. Father culties and thoroughly, fered what Furdek was not easily discouraged by diffidisappointmoots. He studied every problem presented his views intelligently and then ofhe thought was the best soJution. When he 10 SLOVAKIA decided it was in the best interests of the F,iz,st Oaitholic Slovak Union to change to the reserve system, he kept hammering away at it, appealing and ~laining to the membership and the delegates to the convention until the proposition was approved. We know today that if it had not been, the First CathoUc Slovak Union most liikely would not be in existence today. When Father Furdek thought it was time to seriously think of building a home for the orphaned children of the memlbers of the Je<lnota, he let the membership know rubout it and set himself to the task until the Jednota Home in Middletown, Pa., became a r~ ality in 1914. He also dreamed of building a high school and a uniiversity on the Jednota Home property, and if the good Lord had spared Furdek another decade, he undoubtedly would ha,ve promoted even these worthy objects successfully. Ailing for several years, Father Furdek ga,ve up his soul to its Maiker at 4 :40 p. m., January 18, 1915. The news of his death spread liike fire throughout Slovaik settlements in America; Slov~ks everywhere, Catholics aind non..Catholics alike, were deeply touched and mourned the passing of the greatest Slovaik in America. After the solemn Requiem chanted by the Rt. Rev. Monsignor O'Reilly, Ohancellor of the Diocese of Cleveland, in our Lady of Lourdes church, January 20, 1915, the earthly remains of Father Furdek were laid to rest in ,t he CalV'ary Cemetery. Over 10,000 people, including Bishop J. M. Koudelka of Superior, Wisconsin, 65 priests from Slovaik parishes of America, the Supreme Officers of the First Catholic SlovaJk Union, the Slovak League of America and other Slovak organizations, and many civic leaders, attended the last rites foc Father Furdek. Father Stephen Furdek, worthy son of the land of the majestic Tatras and adopted son of the land of the free and the home of the brave, fought the good fight, finished the course, and kept the faith. He shall live in the 'hearts of the Slovaks forever. Guided by his noble spirit they aire determined to carry on the good fight ''Za Boha a na:rod" until the end of time.  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 Rev. Stephen Furdek Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 5, No. 2-3 (15-16), June-September 1955 pp. 3-10 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-September 1955 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/91b571fed5874142104665abf50bd5f2.pdf 90f8ab1d1e391715a4d6c875d90c1db7 PDF Text Text 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- �SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete �90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). �SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of �92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater �SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the �94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that �SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- �96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- �SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete �90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). �SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of �92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater �SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the �94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that �SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- �96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete 90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of 92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the 94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- 96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy.  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (5/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 88-96 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 September-December 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/213">Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), pp. 61-64</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/251">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 59-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/8c8271043711a370d1b4805931454a70.pdf 6e7755d23ce59000907d2f5a4f0ddd75 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs �84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ �SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- � SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs �84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ �SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs 84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper-  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 1856 - Dr. Samuel Czambel - 1956 Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 83-85 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 September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ab896c8bdc403e834ef271b0733764e8.pdf 33c5c5f231f8814ee7372b748226db24 PDF Text Text 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- �64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, �SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- �66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated �SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate �68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one �SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. �70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory �SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. �SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 �SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear �74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak �SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. �76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 �SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, �78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek �SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical �80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over �SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- �82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite �SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs � 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- �64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, �SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- �66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated �SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate �68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one �SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. �70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory �SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. �SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 �SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear �74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak �SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. �76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 �SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, �78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek �SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical �80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over �SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- �82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite �SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- 64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- 66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate 68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. 70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear 74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. 76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, 78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical 80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- 82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs  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 (1/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 63-83 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 September-December 1956 Relation A related resource continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/252">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 53-59</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/3380d34be5fcf938a0d1f7129710a52d.pdf 2f234003418e579f04ecd8bd5ce32a42 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: �60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But �SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central �62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945. � SLOVAKIA 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: �60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But �SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central �62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945. � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: 60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central 62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945.  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 Did Beneš Resign in 1938? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 59-62 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 September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/dc25c9bbc01e9f568ce99331ce6c2f36.pdf 8f902d800812ac58bbf18f3f3c29e691 PDF Text Text 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent �SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- �36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur �SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 �38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. �SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946). � 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent �SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- �36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur �SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 �38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. �SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946). � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- 36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946).  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 Štúr and the Slovak Independence Movement Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 34-39 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 P. A. Hrobak LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cef86da1a0d7c8a36ab6624b98270c26.pdf 1785f6ce0f453000629c9c52c95c445b PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 25 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, �SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- �SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- �28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard �SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- �30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, �SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- �32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak �SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (1) � SLOVAKIA 25 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, �SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- �SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- �28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard �SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- �30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, �SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- �32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak �SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- 28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- 30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- 32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (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 Czecho-Slovakia or Czechoslovakia? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 25-33 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 September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6645d349c78b98e1ec103b8e9a05333e.pdf bf844954816a2fa8e94ac8d831488d08 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned �62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- �SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in �64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~. � SLOVAKIA 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned �62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- �SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in �64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~. � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned 62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in 64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~.  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (4/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 61-64 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 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/222">Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), pp. 57-64</a> <br />continues in <a href="/items/show/197">Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), pp. 88-96</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b364b7e35f27b4085c4f883773cd6a6e.pdf af4c68dde22286a580943431bf08ff28 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 57 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- �58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- �SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 �60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that �SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the �62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is �SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- �64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � SLOVAKIA 57 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- �58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- �SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 �60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that �SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the �62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is �SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- �64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � 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 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</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 1956 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 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- 58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the 62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- 64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy.  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (3/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 57-64 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 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/176">Vol. 5, No. 4 (17), pp. 55-63</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/213">Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), pp. 61-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/7dc3bb2a80b7ecccde225334813a36b2.pdf 655dbddf4c55c09b133a0c019ccebd3e PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 88 The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAK (Continu ed ) During St. Stephen's reign two holy hermits, SS. Andrew-Svorad and Benedict, came to Slovakia from Poland and Jived for a time in the forest near the confluence of the Dunajec and Visla rivers. Later they went to the Benedictine monastery on Mt. Zobor near Nitra. Desiring to continue their lives as hermits even in Slovakia, they left the monastery and retreated to the hills which stretched along the banks of the V ah near Trencin. Many legends have been recorded about these two selfless, holy men. The oldest of these, originating about 1070 A. D., was recorded by the Zobor monk Maurus, who later became bishop of Pee (Patikostolie). The Hungarian State which was gradually being formed in the Danube Basin was not united geographically, racially, or culturally. A large part of the population was of Slovanic origin. We must bear in mind that Slovanic peoples inhabited and developed the territory long before the advent of the Magyars, because the Magyars settled in the central part of the country. It took several centuries before these various parts of the Danube Basin grew together, before the hilly countries were settled and the borders of the Hungarian State spread to the highest crests of the Carpathian Mountain range which enclosed the Danube Basin. In such a political formation Slovakia did not lose her independence suddenly, but preserved her individuality even in the new State. The historical nucleus of Slovakia was from the beginning that part of the Slovak country which already in the first half of the ninth century appeared in history as the Nitra principality of Pribina, which even during the reign of Rastislav in Great Moravia had its own ruler - Svatopluk - and which during the latter's reign had its own bishop. The historical Slovakia, whose main citadel was Nitra, extended from the Danube to the north �SLOVAKIA 89 deep into the Slovak mountains and in the east spread even beyond the river Hron. Within the framework of the Hungarian State, Slovakia became the terrritory of the Ostrihom archbishopric and formed a part of the separate grant principality which was ruled by the sons or the younger brothers of the Hungarian king. In size, the territory was about one-third that of the entire Hungarian kingdom and was made up of two parts: In the east, near the upper end of the Tisa river, Bihar belonged to it, and, in the west, the western half of present-day Slovakia, that is historic Slovakia with Nitra as its stronghold. Slovakia, which was more mature even culturally, had a greater political significance than Bihar. Due to frequent struggles for the throne among the rulers of Hungary and the other members of the Arpad clan, the vassal princes who governed Slovakia had an opportunity to make close ties with their neighbors, especially with the Slovanic States. The grant princes resided in Nitra and often sought the aid of Polish, Czech and Russian rulers with whom they were on friendly terms and to whom they were related. Since German emperors, who sought to strengthen their rule in Hungary, often intervened in the internal struggles of Hungary, the territory of Slovakia in the eleventh century was the scene of many bloody battles. Emery, St. Stephen's son, was the first of the vassal princes to rule Slovakia; he also was the Crown Prince of Hungary. Because Emery died before his illustrious father, Vazul, the eldest member of the Arpad dynasty, was destined to be the successor to the throne of Hungary. Vazul, however, did not excel in Christian virtues, lived as a pagan and was imprisoned in the Nitra Castle, where even today the "Tower of Vazul" bears memory to that prince. Vazul's sons - Andrew, Bela and Levanta - were still pagans. When their father was blinded, they fled the country. Andrew and Levanta escaped to Russia, while Bela sought refuge at the court of the Czech King Bretislav. When Henry, the German Emperor, invaded Slovakia in 1042 A. D. to force the Hungarian king to acknowledge the supremacy of the German Empire, Bretislav came to �90 SLOVAKIA the aid of the Emperor with a large Czech army. Bela, who fought on the side of the victors, was made ruler of Slovakia. But Bela's reign did not last long; the Hungarian king drove him out of the principality soon after Henry returned to Germa.ny. Bela then sought the asylum of the court of King Casimir of Poland. The Polish monarch, engaged in a war with the Prussians and Lithuanians, welcomed Bela's aid. Bela won renown as an intrepid fighter. Shortly thereafter he was baptized, receiving the name of Adalbert, and wed to a Polish princess. In the meantime Bela's brother, Andrew, was baptized at the Russian court. The burden of kingship fell upon his shoulders in 1047. But at that time another rebellion was stirred up by the pagan Magyars in Hungary who wanted to destroy all vestiges of Christianity and institute paganism in the State. When Andrew took over the throne of Hungary, he called Bela from Poland and appointed him ruler of the principality of Slovakia. Bela was subject to his brother, but had his own court, coined his own money and in all respects was the ruler of his country. Since the German emperor never gave up the idea of subjecting Hungary to his rule, Bela often had to fight the Germans who invaded Slovakia. Andrew died in 1060 and Bela succeeded him as King of Hungary. Geza, his eldest son, was made prince regent of Slovakia, and Ladislaus, a younger son, was made ruler of Bihar. Geza proved himself an exceptional ruler, successfully defending his land against all neighbors, even against Salamon who became King of Hungary after Bela's death. In 1069 Geza repulsed the Czechs who had invaded Slovakia and occupied the land as far as Trencin. The following year Geza took the offensive and invaded Moravia. Heading Slovak divisions Geza often fought against the Hungarian king and the German emperor, Henry IV. In 1074 Geza defeated Salamon decisively and forced him into exile. When Geza ascended the throne of Hungary, he appointed Ladislaus regent of Slovakia. Geza, as a vassal prince, had founded the Abbey of St. Benedict in the Hron valley and endowed it with extensive lands in 1075. While in Nitra, he became a great �SLOVAKIA 91 devotee of St. (Andrew) Svorad and St. Benedict. He prized highly the iron chain which the saintly Svorad had worn and which had been given him by the abbot of Mt. Zobor Monastery. As the ruler of Nitra, he saw to it that the Episcopal See of Nitra was re-established. When Geza died in 1077, Ladislaus became King of Hungary. Lampert, a younger brother, was given the title of grant prince, but Ladislaus himself ruled over the entire State. At the end of the eleventh century Slovakia vanished as a grant principality, but even then did not lose its individual status in the Hungarian State. When Slovakia lost its status as a grant principality at the end of the eleventh century and was absorbed in the rest of the Hungarian kingdom, she ceased to play for a time an independent role within the state. In the political development of Hungary, Slovakia in the twelfth century did not have an independent significance not only because it did not form a political unit, but also because in those times the balance of political life in Hungary gravitated toward the South. At the beginning of the twelfth century the Hungarian lords gained the territories of Croatia and Dalmatia, strengthened their positions in those countries and came under the influence of the Byzantine Empire with which they established close contacts. Christian Europe was aroused to a high pitch of religious fervor and enthusiasm at the end of the eleventh century; the urge to liberate the Holy Land from the Mohammedan Turks was widespread on the entire continent. The Pope himself called upon all Christian rulers of Europe to march against the enemies of Christianity with the banner of the Cross as their standard. The first crusading expedition set out already in 1096 A.D. While the main forces of the crusade hurried by land or by sea to Asia to free the holy places from the infidels, motley contingents of adventurers, who ruthlessly pillaged their way across Europe, came after them. One wing of such an undisciplined group of French and German soldiers, under the leadership of Folkmar, raced through Bohemia and Moravia into Slovakia and looted the whole country. The inhabitants of the Vah valley and Nitra fought these adventurous despoilers. �92 SLOVAKIA They defeated a large part of Folkmar's warriors and put the rest to flight; but Folkmar continued to trail the Crusaders with his warriors. Similar catastrophies befell Slovakia in the twelfth century, when German emperors aided by Czech rulers threatened the independence of Hungary. Thus, in 1108, Emperor Henry V set out against Hungary to make war on the erudite King Koloman (1095--1116). The Czech Svatopluk took part in the expedition. When Emperor Henry besieged Bratislava, Svatopluk tore into Slovakia through Moravia to help him devastate the land. The Czech armies laid waste the V ah valley area from Trencin to the Danube, but could not aid the Emperor in Hungary proper, because Svatopluk was forced to return to Bohemia by domestic issues. Svatopluk again invaded Slovakia the following year, devastated the entire country as far as Nitra, but failed to take the castle there. Enraged by this failure, Svatopluk's warriors swooped down on the vicinity, burnt many villages and then returned to their country with much loot. Hostil~ relations between Hungary and Bohemia invariably were the cause of much bloodshed and misery in Slovakia. Therefore, Slovakia welcomed a much needed breathing spell after the defeat of King Stephen II (11161131) by the Czechs on the Moravian-Slovak border,when his successor Bela II (1131-1141), made peace with Sobeslav (1125-1140), the Czech king. War in the west between Hungary and Bohemia caused much suffering in western Slovakia, while hostilities in the east between Hungary and Poland brought disaster to eastern Slovakia. Peace was restored only after several campaigns and Slovakia lived in peace in the twelfth century. While political conditions in Slovakia were more stabilized in the twelfth century, important changes took place in the religious and cultural life of Slovakia. Already in 1083 A.D., during the reign of the saintly monarch Ladislaus, the hermits Andrew Svorad and Benedict were canonized and their remains were buried with great solemnity in St. Emeram's Church in Nitra. The Nitra bishopric, restored during Koloman's reign, included the central Vah �SLOVAKIA 93 and the Kysuca valleys, the region which later became the County of Trencin. King Koloman (Colman) issued a decree establishing ecclesiastical courts in Bratislava and Nitra. Probably at this time, too, the Benedictine abbeys of St. Mary in Kliz (upper Nitra) and Sts. Cosmas and Damian in Ludanice (Topolcany district) were founded. In the forest areas of central Slovakia, in 1135 A.D., an abbey of Premonstratentians was founded in Bzovik by the Slovak nobleman Lampert, who was a descendant of the ancient Hunt family. St. Stephen's abbey, church properties of which were near the Krupina and Ipel (Eipel) rivers, became an important center of cultural and religious life in this territory. The Spis prepositure also was established at the beginning of the twelfth century; it had jurisdiction over that part of the Ostrihom (Esztergom) archdiocese on the Slovak-Polish boundary. About the same time the Knight Templars also founded several monasteries in Slovakia. The Slovaks called the Templars "Red Monks" because of the red cross on their white cloaks. There were several Templar monasteries in Turiec and Liptov where many legends about the "Red Monks" are preserved even to this day. SLOVAKIA BEFORE THE INVASION OF THE TURKS The catastrophies which befell Slovakia from the ninth century were responsible for the fact that Slovakia lost its independence and finally became a part of the Hungarian State. But Slovakia, even after its incorporation into the Hungarian State, became the stage for constant warfare waged between Hungary and its neighbors. Slovakia suffered economically and its population was depleted. Yet it weathered all these storms and survived. Slovakia never ceased to be the country of the Slovak nation and the people, even under most adverse conditions, never left their homeland for others to move in. Of course, Slovakia was not as densely populated from the tenth to the twelfth centuries as it is today. Where the fertility of the soil assured a livehood, there people would settle. The most fertile regions were the lowlands of western and southern Slovakia along the banks of the Vah, �94 SLOVAKIA Nitra, Hron and Ipel rivers and, consequently, these regions attracted more people. From these areas the population advanced up the river valleys into the forest regions of northern and central Slovakia and, in the 11th and 12th centuries, established new colonies in the river basins and mountain velleys whereever it could till the soil and devote itself to animal husbandry. Already in the 11th century a stream of settlers, which advanced against the current of the Nitra, got as far as Turiec, where they came upon several older settlements which had existed since the times of Great Moravia. It was there that this group met up with another which was advancing up the Vah. From the confluence of the Turiec and Vah rivers, the population penetrated farther to the east, so that already in the 12th century Liptov was settled, whence the Slovaks gradually spread into the neighboring valleys. In the south, the Slovaks settled in the foothills of the Slovak mountains, penetrated into the northern part of the valley between the Danube and the Tisa, settled on the right bank of the Danube, where already in the 9th century there were several Slovak settlements, occupied th country along the north bank of the Tisa River and continued against the current of its tributaries into the fertile lowlands of eastern Slovakia, where they met with colonists who had come there from the west. Among the settled areas of Slovakia were the extensive mountainous regions which at that time were covered by a dense forest. Such a forest spread between the Hron and Ipel rivers (the Hont Forest), near the upper flow of the Hron (the Zvolen Forest), and near the upper flow of the Hornad (the Spis Forest). In these forest regions there were only small colonies which subsisted by hunting and animal husbandry. The greater the increase in population in the fertile areas of western and southern Slovakia, the greater was the stream of settlers which pressed into the mountainous regions. In those times countries and states did not have any accurate boundaries. Ordinarily the boundary was a forest which covered especially the hilly regions and descended �SLOVAKIA 95 down the slopes deeply into the valleys and plains. The broad belt of a dense forest was the safest border and, of course, the most reliable defense against an enemy. But even individual regions were separated from each other by forests. The western boundary of Slovakia was such a forest which covered the Small and the White Carpathian Mountains, stretched as far west as the Morava river and in places in the east came very close to the river Vah. The northern boundary of Slovakia ran along the forest which covered the crests of the Carpathian s and extended deeply on the north and south into the Slovak valleys. Such forests also separated the Nitra river valley from the Turiec Basin, Turiec from the Hron area and Liptov from Spis. HIGHWAYS OF SLOVAKIA Roads cutting through these forests connected the individual areas of Slovakia, and Slovakia with its neighbors as well. At the point where the roads led out of the bordering forest huge gates were erected. In times of danger these gates would be barricaded with huge trees. Sentry outposts were established near the frontier gates; it was their duty to defend the country against enemy attacks. When frontier guards noticed that a hostile army had entered the forest, they would barricade the gate and ma,ke a fire on the hill to signal that danger threatened . Geographic al terms, all relating to the word "gate" (brana)-li ke Brana, Branka, Branc, Branisko, Podbranc, Zavory, Zelezne vrata, Kamenne vrata, Vratna - indicate the places where such gates were erected. But outpost settlements were established not only near the frontier gates, but also along the entire frontier and near all roads. The memory of these sentry outposts has been preserved in such names as Hradiste, Hradok, Vysehrad, Hradec, Hradova, Hradna, Hradecnica (all from "hrad" - castle, fortress, citadel), Straz (guard), Straza, Straze, Strazisko, Straziste, Strazka, Strazky, Strazov, Straznica, Strazna hora, Strazske, Strehova. Sentry duty at these gates, along the frontier and near the roads, was often done by warlike foreigners, such as the Plavci, Pecheni and the Sikuli, who began to settle in Hungary in the 11th century. These tribes were by their origin, nature and tongue related to �li6 SLOVAKIA the Magyars with whom they later fused. In some Slovak areas even the Magyars settled as frontier guards. 'fhe names of villages, such as Sekule, Pecenady, Pecenice, Pecenany, Besenov, Besenova, Uhorska Ves, Plavec, tell us just where garrisons of foreign warriors did sentry duty. In many places only the "graves of pagans" are recalled as testimonials to these sentry posts. The most important roads which connected Slovakia with neighboring countries were: 1. The Bohemian highway, which led from Germany to Prague, passed through Brno, and near Holic entered Slovak territory. Through Sastin it led to Jablonica, where there was an outpost gate guarded on the east and west by a border garrison. Bi:ksad, Smolenice and Boleraz were outposts of this kind. This road then went through Trnava, crossed the river Vah near Sintava and continued on to Ostrihom, Vacov and Budin. 2. A second highway led from Znojmo in Moravia through Breclav into Brodsky, then through Straz and Sastin into Senice, and thence into Krajny where it entered the regions of the Vah Valley. 3. Another road crossed these roads near Sastin which led to Olomouc, Uhorske Hradiste, Straznice in Slovakia and then went along the left bank of the Morava into Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. 4. On the northeastern tip of the Alps near the Danube, at the southern spurs of the Carpathians, there was a famous gate through which the road branched out on both banks of the Danube to the east. From Bratislava one of these roads led to Nitra through Senec and Sintava, while the other passed through Trnava on its way up the Vah to northern Slovakia. This was the Vah valley road, which detoured through the Vlar pass into Moravia, through the Jablunkov defile to the Morava Gate, and thence into Poland, while another side road went along the Orava river to the Visla. From the Vah highway a side road went through Hlohovec into Nitra and through Turiec, below the castle of Vysehrad, toward the upper flow of the Nitra. (To be continued) � SLOVAKIA 88 The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAK (Continu ed ) During St. Stephen's reign two holy hermits, SS. Andrew-Svorad and Benedict, came to Slovakia from Poland and Jived for a time in the forest near the confluence of the Dunajec and Visla rivers. Later they went to the Benedictine monastery on Mt. Zobor near Nitra. Desiring to continue their lives as hermits even in Slovakia, they left the monastery and retreated to the hills which stretched along the banks of the V ah near Trencin. Many legends have been recorded about these two selfless, holy men. The oldest of these, originating about 1070 A. D., was recorded by the Zobor monk Maurus, who later became bishop of Pee (Patikostolie). The Hungarian State which was gradually being formed in the Danube Basin was not united geographically, racially, or culturally. A large part of the population was of Slovanic origin. We must bear in mind that Slovanic peoples inhabited and developed the territory long before the advent of the Magyars, because the Magyars settled in the central part of the country. It took several centuries before these various parts of the Danube Basin grew together, before the hilly countries were settled and the borders of the Hungarian State spread to the highest crests of the Carpathian Mountain range which enclosed the Danube Basin. In such a political formation Slovakia did not lose her independence suddenly, but preserved her individuality even in the new State. The historical nucleus of Slovakia was from the beginning that part of the Slovak country which already in the first half of the ninth century appeared in history as the Nitra principality of Pribina, which even during the reign of Rastislav in Great Moravia had its own ruler - Svatopluk - and which during the latter's reign had its own bishop. The historical Slovakia, whose main citadel was Nitra, extended from the Danube to the north �SLOVAKIA 89 deep into the Slovak mountains and in the east spread even beyond the river Hron. Within the framework of the Hungarian State, Slovakia became the terrritory of the Ostrihom archbishopric and formed a part of the separate grant principality which was ruled by the sons or the younger brothers of the Hungarian king. In size, the territory was about one-third that of the entire Hungarian kingdom and was made up of two parts: In the east, near the upper end of the Tisa river, Bihar belonged to it, and, in the west, the western half of present-day Slovakia, that is historic Slovakia with Nitra as its stronghold. Slovakia, which was more mature even culturally, had a greater political significance than Bihar. Due to frequent struggles for the throne among the rulers of Hungary and the other members of the Arpad clan, the vassal princes who governed Slovakia had an opportunity to make close ties with their neighbors, especially with the Slovanic States. The grant princes resided in Nitra and often sought the aid of Polish, Czech and Russian rulers with whom they were on friendly terms and to whom they were related. Since German emperors, who sought to strengthen their rule in Hungary, often intervened in the internal struggles of Hungary, the territory of Slovakia in the eleventh century was the scene of many bloody battles. Emery, St. Stephen's son, was the first of the vassal princes to rule Slovakia; he also was the Crown Prince of Hungary. Because Emery died before his illustrious father, Vazul, the eldest member of the Arpad dynasty, was destined to be the successor to the throne of Hungary. Vazul, however, did not excel in Christian virtues, lived as a pagan and was imprisoned in the Nitra Castle, where even today the "Tower of Vazul" bears memory to that prince. Vazul's sons - Andrew, Bela and Levanta - were still pagans. When their father was blinded, they fled the country. Andrew and Levanta escaped to Russia, while Bela sought refuge at the court of the Czech King Bretislav. When Henry, the German Emperor, invaded Slovakia in 1042 A. D. to force the Hungarian king to acknowledge the supremacy of the German Empire, Bretislav came to �90 SLOVAKIA the aid of the Emperor with a large Czech army. Bela, who fought on the side of the victors, was made ruler of Slovakia. But Bela's reign did not last long; the Hungarian king drove him out of the principality soon after Henry returned to Germa.ny. Bela then sought the asylum of the court of King Casimir of Poland. The Polish monarch, engaged in a war with the Prussians and Lithuanians, welcomed Bela's aid. Bela won renown as an intrepid fighter. Shortly thereafter he was baptized, receiving the name of Adalbert, and wed to a Polish princess. In the meantime Bela's brother, Andrew, was baptized at the Russian court. The burden of kingship fell upon his shoulders in 1047. But at that time another rebellion was stirred up by the pagan Magyars in Hungary who wanted to destroy all vestiges of Christianity and institute paganism in the State. When Andrew took over the throne of Hungary, he called Bela from Poland and appointed him ruler of the principality of Slovakia. Bela was subject to his brother, but had his own court, coined his own money and in all respects was the ruler of his country. Since the German emperor never gave up the idea of subjecting Hungary to his rule, Bela often had to fight the Germans who invaded Slovakia. Andrew died in 1060 and Bela succeeded him as King of Hungary. Geza, his eldest son, was made prince regent of Slovakia, and Ladislaus, a younger son, was made ruler of Bihar. Geza proved himself an exceptional ruler, successfully defending his land against all neighbors, even against Salamon who became King of Hungary after Bela's death. In 1069 Geza repulsed the Czechs who had invaded Slovakia and occupied the land as far as Trencin. The following year Geza took the offensive and invaded Moravia. Heading Slovak divisions Geza often fought against the Hungarian king and the German emperor, Henry IV. In 1074 Geza defeated Salamon decisively and forced him into exile. When Geza ascended the throne of Hungary, he appointed Ladislaus regent of Slovakia. Geza, as a vassal prince, had founded the Abbey of St. Benedict in the Hron valley and endowed it with extensive lands in 1075. While in Nitra, he became a great �SLOVAKIA 91 devotee of St. (Andrew) Svorad and St. Benedict. He prized highly the iron chain which the saintly Svorad had worn and which had been given him by the abbot of Mt. Zobor Monastery. As the ruler of Nitra, he saw to it that the Episcopal See of Nitra was re-established. When Geza died in 1077, Ladislaus became King of Hungary. Lampert, a younger brother, was given the title of grant prince, but Ladislaus himself ruled over the entire State. At the end of the eleventh century Slovakia vanished as a grant principality, but even then did not lose its individual status in the Hungarian State. When Slovakia lost its status as a grant principality at the end of the eleventh century and was absorbed in the rest of the Hungarian kingdom, she ceased to play for a time an independent role within the state. In the political development of Hungary, Slovakia in the twelfth century did not have an independent significance not only because it did not form a political unit, but also because in those times the balance of political life in Hungary gravitated toward the South. At the beginning of the twelfth century the Hungarian lords gained the territories of Croatia and Dalmatia, strengthened their positions in those countries and came under the influence of the Byzantine Empire with which they established close contacts. Christian Europe was aroused to a high pitch of religious fervor and enthusiasm at the end of the eleventh century; the urge to liberate the Holy Land from the Mohammedan Turks was widespread on the entire continent. The Pope himself called upon all Christian rulers of Europe to march against the enemies of Christianity with the banner of the Cross as their standard. The first crusading expedition set out already in 1096 A.D. While the main forces of the crusade hurried by land or by sea to Asia to free the holy places from the infidels, motley contingents of adventurers, who ruthlessly pillaged their way across Europe, came after them. One wing of such an undisciplined group of French and German soldiers, under the leadership of Folkmar, raced through Bohemia and Moravia into Slovakia and looted the whole country. The inhabitants of the Vah valley and Nitra fought these adventurous despoilers. �92 SLOVAKIA They defeated a large part of Folkmar's warriors and put the rest to flight; but Folkmar continued to trail the Crusaders with his warriors. Similar catastrophies befell Slovakia in the twelfth century, when German emperors aided by Czech rulers threatened the independence of Hungary. Thus, in 1108, Emperor Henry V set out against Hungary to make war on the erudite King Koloman (1095--1116). The Czech Svatopluk took part in the expedition. When Emperor Henry besieged Bratislava, Svatopluk tore into Slovakia through Moravia to help him devastate the land. The Czech armies laid waste the V ah valley area from Trencin to the Danube, but could not aid the Emperor in Hungary proper, because Svatopluk was forced to return to Bohemia by domestic issues. Svatopluk again invaded Slovakia the following year, devastated the entire country as far as Nitra, but failed to take the castle there. Enraged by this failure, Svatopluk's warriors swooped down on the vicinity, burnt many villages and then returned to their country with much loot. Hostil~ relations between Hungary and Bohemia invariably were the cause of much bloodshed and misery in Slovakia. Therefore, Slovakia welcomed a much needed breathing spell after the defeat of King Stephen II (11161131) by the Czechs on the Moravian-Slovak border,when his successor Bela II (1131-1141), made peace with Sobeslav (1125-1140), the Czech king. War in the west between Hungary and Bohemia caused much suffering in western Slovakia, while hostilities in the east between Hungary and Poland brought disaster to eastern Slovakia. Peace was restored only after several campaigns and Slovakia lived in peace in the twelfth century. While political conditions in Slovakia were more stabilized in the twelfth century, important changes took place in the religious and cultural life of Slovakia. Already in 1083 A.D., during the reign of the saintly monarch Ladislaus, the hermits Andrew Svorad and Benedict were canonized and their remains were buried with great solemnity in St. Emeram's Church in Nitra. The Nitra bishopric, restored during Koloman's reign, included the central Vah �SLOVAKIA 93 and the Kysuca valleys, the region which later became the County of Trencin. King Koloman (Colman) issued a decree establishing ecclesiastical courts in Bratislava and Nitra. Probably at this time, too, the Benedictine abbeys of St. Mary in Kliz (upper Nitra) and Sts. Cosmas and Damian in Ludanice (Topolcany district) were founded. In the forest areas of central Slovakia, in 1135 A.D., an abbey of Premonstratentians was founded in Bzovik by the Slovak nobleman Lampert, who was a descendant of the ancient Hunt family. St. Stephen's abbey, church properties of which were near the Krupina and Ipel (Eipel) rivers, became an important center of cultural and religious life in this territory. The Spis prepositure also was established at the beginning of the twelfth century; it had jurisdiction over that part of the Ostrihom (Esztergom) archdiocese on the Slovak-Polish boundary. About the same time the Knight Templars also founded several monasteries in Slovakia. The Slovaks called the Templars "Red Monks" because of the red cross on their white cloaks. There were several Templar monasteries in Turiec and Liptov where many legends about the "Red Monks" are preserved even to this day. SLOVAKIA BEFORE THE INVASION OF THE TURKS The catastrophies which befell Slovakia from the ninth century were responsible for the fact that Slovakia lost its independence and finally became a part of the Hungarian State. But Slovakia, even after its incorporation into the Hungarian State, became the stage for constant warfare waged between Hungary and its neighbors. Slovakia suffered economically and its population was depleted. Yet it weathered all these storms and survived. Slovakia never ceased to be the country of the Slovak nation and the people, even under most adverse conditions, never left their homeland for others to move in. Of course, Slovakia was not as densely populated from the tenth to the twelfth centuries as it is today. Where the fertility of the soil assured a livehood, there people would settle. The most fertile regions were the lowlands of western and southern Slovakia along the banks of the Vah, �94 SLOVAKIA Nitra, Hron and Ipel rivers and, consequently, these regions attracted more people. From these areas the population advanced up the river valleys into the forest regions of northern and central Slovakia and, in the 11th and 12th centuries, established new colonies in the river basins and mountain velleys whereever it could till the soil and devote itself to animal husbandry. Already in the 11th century a stream of settlers, which advanced against the current of the Nitra, got as far as Turiec, where they came upon several older settlements which had existed since the times of Great Moravia. It was there that this group met up with another which was advancing up the Vah. From the confluence of the Turiec and Vah rivers, the population penetrated farther to the east, so that already in the 12th century Liptov was settled, whence the Slovaks gradually spread into the neighboring valleys. In the south, the Slovaks settled in the foothills of the Slovak mountains, penetrated into the northern part of the valley between the Danube and the Tisa, settled on the right bank of the Danube, where already in the 9th century there were several Slovak settlements, occupied th country along the north bank of the Tisa River and continued against the current of its tributaries into the fertile lowlands of eastern Slovakia, where they met with colonists who had come there from the west. Among the settled areas of Slovakia were the extensive mountainous regions which at that time were covered by a dense forest. Such a forest spread between the Hron and Ipel rivers (the Hont Forest), near the upper flow of the Hron (the Zvolen Forest), and near the upper flow of the Hornad (the Spis Forest). In these forest regions there were only small colonies which subsisted by hunting and animal husbandry. The greater the increase in population in the fertile areas of western and southern Slovakia, the greater was the stream of settlers which pressed into the mountainous regions. In those times countries and states did not have any accurate boundaries. Ordinarily the boundary was a forest which covered especially the hilly regions and descended �SLOVAKIA 95 down the slopes deeply into the valleys and plains. The broad belt of a dense forest was the safest border and, of course, the most reliable defense against an enemy. But even individual regions were separated from each other by forests. The western boundary of Slovakia was such a forest which covered the Small and the White Carpathian Mountains, stretched as far west as the Morava river and in places in the east came very close to the river Vah. The northern boundary of Slovakia ran along the forest which covered the crests of the Carpathian s and extended deeply on the north and south into the Slovak valleys. Such forests also separated the Nitra river valley from the Turiec Basin, Turiec from the Hron area and Liptov from Spis. HIGHWAYS OF SLOVAKIA Roads cutting through these forests connected the individual areas of Slovakia, and Slovakia with its neighbors as well. At the point where the roads led out of the bordering forest huge gates were erected. In times of danger these gates would be barricaded with huge trees. Sentry outposts were established near the frontier gates; it was their duty to defend the country against enemy attacks. When frontier guards noticed that a hostile army had entered the forest, they would barricade the gate and ma,ke a fire on the hill to signal that danger threatened . Geographic al terms, all relating to the word "gate" (brana)-li ke Brana, Branka, Branc, Branisko, Podbranc, Zavory, Zelezne vrata, Kamenne vrata, Vratna - indicate the places where such gates were erected. But outpost settlements were established not only near the frontier gates, but also along the entire frontier and near all roads. The memory of these sentry outposts has been preserved in such names as Hradiste, Hradok, Vysehrad, Hradec, Hradova, Hradna, Hradecnica (all from "hrad" - castle, fortress, citadel), Straz (guard), Straza, Straze, Strazisko, Straziste, Strazka, Strazky, Strazov, Straznica, Strazna hora, Strazske, Strehova. Sentry duty at these gates, along the frontier and near the roads, was often done by warlike foreigners, such as the Plavci, Pecheni and the Sikuli, who began to settle in Hungary in the 11th century. These tribes were by their origin, nature and tongue related to �li6 SLOVAKIA the Magyars with whom they later fused. In some Slovak areas even the Magyars settled as frontier guards. 'fhe names of villages, such as Sekule, Pecenady, Pecenice, Pecenany, Besenov, Besenova, Uhorska Ves, Plavec, tell us just where garrisons of foreign warriors did sentry duty. In many places only the "graves of pagans" are recalled as testimonials to these sentry posts. The most important roads which connected Slovakia with neighboring countries were: 1. The Bohemian highway, which led from Germany to Prague, passed through Brno, and near Holic entered Slovak territory. Through Sastin it led to Jablonica, where there was an outpost gate guarded on the east and west by a border garrison. Bi:ksad, Smolenice and Boleraz were outposts of this kind. This road then went through Trnava, crossed the river Vah near Sintava and continued on to Ostrihom, Vacov and Budin. 2. A second highway led from Znojmo in Moravia through Breclav into Brodsky, then through Straz and Sastin into Senice, and thence into Krajny where it entered the regions of the Vah Valley. 3. Another road crossed these roads near Sastin which led to Olomouc, Uhorske Hradiste, Straznice in Slovakia and then went along the left bank of the Morava into Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. 4. On the northeastern tip of the Alps near the Danube, at the southern spurs of the Carpathians, there was a famous gate through which the road branched out on both banks of the Danube to the east. From Bratislava one of these roads led to Nitra through Senec and Sintava, while the other passed through Trnava on its way up the Vah to northern Slovakia. This was the Vah valley road, which detoured through the Vlar pass into Moravia, through the Jablunkov defile to the Morava Gate, and thence into Poland, while another side road went along the Orava river to the Visla. From the Vah highway a side road went through Hlohovec into Nitra and through Turiec, below the castle of Vysehrad, toward the upper flow of the Nitra. (To be continued) � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 88 The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAK (Continu ed ) During St. Stephen's reign two holy hermits, SS. Andrew-Svorad and Benedict, came to Slovakia from Poland and Jived for a time in the forest near the confluence of the Dunajec and Visla rivers. Later they went to the Benedictine monastery on Mt. Zobor near Nitra. Desiring to continue their lives as hermits even in Slovakia, they left the monastery and retreated to the hills which stretched along the banks of the V ah near Trencin. Many legends have been recorded about these two selfless, holy men. The oldest of these, originating about 1070 A. D., was recorded by the Zobor monk Maurus, who later became bishop of Pee (Patikostolie). The Hungarian State which was gradually being formed in the Danube Basin was not united geographically, racially, or culturally. A large part of the population was of Slovanic origin. We must bear in mind that Slovanic peoples inhabited and developed the territory long before the advent of the Magyars, because the Magyars settled in the central part of the country. It took several centuries before these various parts of the Danube Basin grew together, before the hilly countries were settled and the borders of the Hungarian State spread to the highest crests of the Carpathian Mountain range which enclosed the Danube Basin. In such a political formation Slovakia did not lose her independence suddenly, but preserved her individuality even in the new State. The historical nucleus of Slovakia was from the beginning that part of the Slovak country which already in the first half of the ninth century appeared in history as the Nitra principality of Pribina, which even during the reign of Rastislav in Great Moravia had its own ruler - Svatopluk - and which during the latter's reign had its own bishop. The historical Slovakia, whose main citadel was Nitra, extended from the Danube to the north SLOVAKIA 89 deep into the Slovak mountains and in the east spread even beyond the river Hron. Within the framework of the Hungarian State, Slovakia became the terrritory of the Ostrihom archbishopric and formed a part of the separate grant principality which was ruled by the sons or the younger brothers of the Hungarian king. In size, the territory was about one-third that of the entire Hungarian kingdom and was made up of two parts: In the east, near the upper end of the Tisa river, Bihar belonged to it, and, in the west, the western half of present-day Slovakia, that is historic Slovakia with Nitra as its stronghold. Slovakia, which was more mature even culturally, had a greater political significance than Bihar. Due to frequent struggles for the throne among the rulers of Hungary and the other members of the Arpad clan, the vassal princes who governed Slovakia had an opportunity to make close ties with their neighbors, especially with the Slovanic States. The grant princes resided in Nitra and often sought the aid of Polish, Czech and Russian rulers with whom they were on friendly terms and to whom they were related. Since German emperors, who sought to strengthen their rule in Hungary, often intervened in the internal struggles of Hungary, the territory of Slovakia in the eleventh century was the scene of many bloody battles. Emery, St. Stephen's son, was the first of the vassal princes to rule Slovakia; he also was the Crown Prince of Hungary. Because Emery died before his illustrious father, Vazul, the eldest member of the Arpad dynasty, was destined to be the successor to the throne of Hungary. Vazul, however, did not excel in Christian virtues, lived as a pagan and was imprisoned in the Nitra Castle, where even today the "Tower of Vazul" bears memory to that prince. Vazul's sons - Andrew, Bela and Levanta - were still pagans. When their father was blinded, they fled the country. Andrew and Levanta escaped to Russia, while Bela sought refuge at the court of the Czech King Bretislav. When Henry, the German Emperor, invaded Slovakia in 1042 A. D. to force the Hungarian king to acknowledge the supremacy of the German Empire, Bretislav came to 90 SLOVAKIA the aid of the Emperor with a large Czech army. Bela, who fought on the side of the victors, was made ruler of Slovakia. But Bela's reign did not last long; the Hungarian king drove him out of the principality soon after Henry returned to Germa.ny. Bela then sought the asylum of the court of King Casimir of Poland. The Polish monarch, engaged in a war with the Prussians and Lithuanians, welcomed Bela's aid. Bela won renown as an intrepid fighter. Shortly thereafter he was baptized, receiving the name of Adalbert, and wed to a Polish princess. In the meantime Bela's brother, Andrew, was baptized at the Russian court. The burden of kingship fell upon his shoulders in 1047. But at that time another rebellion was stirred up by the pagan Magyars in Hungary who wanted to destroy all vestiges of Christianity and institute paganism in the State. When Andrew took over the throne of Hungary, he called Bela from Poland and appointed him ruler of the principality of Slovakia. Bela was subject to his brother, but had his own court, coined his own money and in all respects was the ruler of his country. Since the German emperor never gave up the idea of subjecting Hungary to his rule, Bela often had to fight the Germans who invaded Slovakia. Andrew died in 1060 and Bela succeeded him as King of Hungary. Geza, his eldest son, was made prince regent of Slovakia, and Ladislaus, a younger son, was made ruler of Bihar. Geza proved himself an exceptional ruler, successfully defending his land against all neighbors, even against Salamon who became King of Hungary after Bela's death. In 1069 Geza repulsed the Czechs who had invaded Slovakia and occupied the land as far as Trencin. The following year Geza took the offensive and invaded Moravia. Heading Slovak divisions Geza often fought against the Hungarian king and the German emperor, Henry IV. In 1074 Geza defeated Salamon decisively and forced him into exile. When Geza ascended the throne of Hungary, he appointed Ladislaus regent of Slovakia. Geza, as a vassal prince, had founded the Abbey of St. Benedict in the Hron valley and endowed it with extensive lands in 1075. While in Nitra, he became a great SLOVAKIA 91 devotee of St. (Andrew) Svorad and St. Benedict. He prized highly the iron chain which the saintly Svorad had worn and which had been given him by the abbot of Mt. Zobor Monastery. As the ruler of Nitra, he saw to it that the Episcopal See of Nitra was re-established. When Geza died in 1077, Ladislaus became King of Hungary. Lampert, a younger brother, was given the title of grant prince, but Ladislaus himself ruled over the entire State. At the end of the eleventh century Slovakia vanished as a grant principality, but even then did not lose its individual status in the Hungarian State. When Slovakia lost its status as a grant principality at the end of the eleventh century and was absorbed in the rest of the Hungarian kingdom, she ceased to play for a time an independent role within the state. In the political development of Hungary, Slovakia in the twelfth century did not have an independent significance not only because it did not form a political unit, but also because in those times the balance of political life in Hungary gravitated toward the South. At the beginning of the twelfth century the Hungarian lords gained the territories of Croatia and Dalmatia, strengthened their positions in those countries and came under the influence of the Byzantine Empire with which they established close contacts. Christian Europe was aroused to a high pitch of religious fervor and enthusiasm at the end of the eleventh century; the urge to liberate the Holy Land from the Mohammedan Turks was widespread on the entire continent. The Pope himself called upon all Christian rulers of Europe to march against the enemies of Christianity with the banner of the Cross as their standard. The first crusading expedition set out already in 1096 A.D. While the main forces of the crusade hurried by land or by sea to Asia to free the holy places from the infidels, motley contingents of adventurers, who ruthlessly pillaged their way across Europe, came after them. One wing of such an undisciplined group of French and German soldiers, under the leadership of Folkmar, raced through Bohemia and Moravia into Slovakia and looted the whole country. The inhabitants of the Vah valley and Nitra fought these adventurous despoilers. 92 SLOVAKIA They defeated a large part of Folkmar's warriors and put the rest to flight; but Folkmar continued to trail the Crusaders with his warriors. Similar catastrophies befell Slovakia in the twelfth century, when German emperors aided by Czech rulers threatened the independence of Hungary. Thus, in 1108, Emperor Henry V set out against Hungary to make war on the erudite King Koloman (1095--1116). The Czech Svatopluk took part in the expedition. When Emperor Henry besieged Bratislava, Svatopluk tore into Slovakia through Moravia to help him devastate the land. The Czech armies laid waste the V ah valley area from Trencin to the Danube, but could not aid the Emperor in Hungary proper, because Svatopluk was forced to return to Bohemia by domestic issues. Svatopluk again invaded Slovakia the following year, devastated the entire country as far as Nitra, but failed to take the castle there. Enraged by this failure, Svatopluk's warriors swooped down on the vicinity, burnt many villages and then returned to their country with much loot. Hostil~ relations between Hungary and Bohemia invariably were the cause of much bloodshed and misery in Slovakia. Therefore, Slovakia welcomed a much needed breathing spell after the defeat of King Stephen II (11161131) by the Czechs on the Moravian-Slovak border,when his successor Bela II (1131-1141), made peace with Sobeslav (1125-1140), the Czech king. War in the west between Hungary and Bohemia caused much suffering in western Slovakia, while hostilities in the east between Hungary and Poland brought disaster to eastern Slovakia. Peace was restored only after several campaigns and Slovakia lived in peace in the twelfth century. While political conditions in Slovakia were more stabilized in the twelfth century, important changes took place in the religious and cultural life of Slovakia. Already in 1083 A.D., during the reign of the saintly monarch Ladislaus, the hermits Andrew Svorad and Benedict were canonized and their remains were buried with great solemnity in St. Emeram's Church in Nitra. The Nitra bishopric, restored during Koloman's reign, included the central Vah SLOVAKIA 93 and the Kysuca valleys, the region which later became the County of Trencin. King Koloman (Colman) issued a decree establishing ecclesiastical courts in Bratislava and Nitra. Probably at this time, too, the Benedictine abbeys of St. Mary in Kliz (upper Nitra) and Sts. Cosmas and Damian in Ludanice (Topolcany district) were founded. In the forest areas of central Slovakia, in 1135 A.D., an abbey of Premonstratentians was founded in Bzovik by the Slovak nobleman Lampert, who was a descendant of the ancient Hunt family. St. Stephen's abbey, church properties of which were near the Krupina and Ipel (Eipel) rivers, became an important center of cultural and religious life in this territory. The Spis prepositure also was established at the beginning of the twelfth century; it had jurisdiction over that part of the Ostrihom (Esztergom) archdiocese on the Slovak-Polish boundary. About the same time the Knight Templars also founded several monasteries in Slovakia. The Slovaks called the Templars "Red Monks" because of the red cross on their white cloaks. There were several Templar monasteries in Turiec and Liptov where many legends about the "Red Monks" are preserved even to this day. SLOVAKIA BEFORE THE INVASION OF THE TURKS The catastrophies which befell Slovakia from the ninth century were responsible for the fact that Slovakia lost its independence and finally became a part of the Hungarian State. But Slovakia, even after its incorporation into the Hungarian State, became the stage for constant warfare waged between Hungary and its neighbors. Slovakia suffered economically and its population was depleted. Yet it weathered all these storms and survived. Slovakia never ceased to be the country of the Slovak nation and the people, even under most adverse conditions, never left their homeland for others to move in. Of course, Slovakia was not as densely populated from the tenth to the twelfth centuries as it is today. Where the fertility of the soil assured a livehood, there people would settle. The most fertile regions were the lowlands of western and southern Slovakia along the banks of the Vah, 94 SLOVAKIA Nitra, Hron and Ipel rivers and, consequently, these regions attracted more people. From these areas the population advanced up the river valleys into the forest regions of northern and central Slovakia and, in the 11th and 12th centuries, established new colonies in the river basins and mountain velleys whereever it could till the soil and devote itself to animal husbandry. Already in the 11th century a stream of settlers, which advanced against the current of the Nitra, got as far as Turiec, where they came upon several older settlements which had existed since the times of Great Moravia. It was there that this group met up with another which was advancing up the Vah. From the confluence of the Turiec and Vah rivers, the population penetrated farther to the east, so that already in the 12th century Liptov was settled, whence the Slovaks gradually spread into the neighboring valleys. In the south, the Slovaks settled in the foothills of the Slovak mountains, penetrated into the northern part of the valley between the Danube and the Tisa, settled on the right bank of the Danube, where already in the 9th century there were several Slovak settlements, occupied th country along the north bank of the Tisa River and continued against the current of its tributaries into the fertile lowlands of eastern Slovakia, where they met with colonists who had come there from the west. Among the settled areas of Slovakia were the extensive mountainous regions which at that time were covered by a dense forest. Such a forest spread between the Hron and Ipel rivers (the Hont Forest), near the upper flow of the Hron (the Zvolen Forest), and near the upper flow of the Hornad (the Spis Forest). In these forest regions there were only small colonies which subsisted by hunting and animal husbandry. The greater the increase in population in the fertile areas of western and southern Slovakia, the greater was the stream of settlers which pressed into the mountainous regions. In those times countries and states did not have any accurate boundaries. Ordinarily the boundary was a forest which covered especially the hilly regions and descended SLOVAKIA 95 down the slopes deeply into the valleys and plains. The broad belt of a dense forest was the safest border and, of course, the most reliable defense against an enemy. But even individual regions were separated from each other by forests. The western boundary of Slovakia was such a forest which covered the Small and the White Carpathian Mountains, stretched as far west as the Morava river and in places in the east came very close to the river Vah. The northern boundary of Slovakia ran along the forest which covered the crests of the Carpathian s and extended deeply on the north and south into the Slovak valleys. Such forests also separated the Nitra river valley from the Turiec Basin, Turiec from the Hron area and Liptov from Spis. HIGHWAYS OF SLOVAKIA Roads cutting through these forests connected the individual areas of Slovakia, and Slovakia with its neighbors as well. At the point where the roads led out of the bordering forest huge gates were erected. In times of danger these gates would be barricaded with huge trees. Sentry outposts were established near the frontier gates; it was their duty to defend the country against enemy attacks. When frontier guards noticed that a hostile army had entered the forest, they would barricade the gate and ma,ke a fire on the hill to signal that danger threatened . Geographic al terms, all relating to the word "gate" (brana)-li ke Brana, Branka, Branc, Branisko, Podbranc, Zavory, Zelezne vrata, Kamenne vrata, Vratna - indicate the places where such gates were erected. But outpost settlements were established not only near the frontier gates, but also along the entire frontier and near all roads. The memory of these sentry outposts has been preserved in such names as Hradiste, Hradok, Vysehrad, Hradec, Hradova, Hradna, Hradecnica (all from "hrad" - castle, fortress, citadel), Straz (guard), Straza, Straze, Strazisko, Straziste, Strazka, Strazky, Strazov, Straznica, Strazna hora, Strazske, Strehova. Sentry duty at these gates, along the frontier and near the roads, was often done by warlike foreigners, such as the Plavci, Pecheni and the Sikuli, who began to settle in Hungary in the 11th century. These tribes were by their origin, nature and tongue related to li6 SLOVAKIA the Magyars with whom they later fused. In some Slovak areas even the Magyars settled as frontier guards. 'fhe names of villages, such as Sekule, Pecenady, Pecenice, Pecenany, Besenov, Besenova, Uhorska Ves, Plavec, tell us just where garrisons of foreign warriors did sentry duty. In many places only the "graves of pagans" are recalled as testimonials to these sentry posts. The most important roads which connected Slovakia with neighboring countries were: 1. The Bohemian highway, which led from Germany to Prague, passed through Brno, and near Holic entered Slovak territory. Through Sastin it led to Jablonica, where there was an outpost gate guarded on the east and west by a border garrison. Bi:ksad, Smolenice and Boleraz were outposts of this kind. This road then went through Trnava, crossed the river Vah near Sintava and continued on to Ostrihom, Vacov and Budin. 2. A second highway led from Znojmo in Moravia through Breclav into Brodsky, then through Straz and Sastin into Senice, and thence into Krajny where it entered the regions of the Vah Valley. 3. Another road crossed these roads near Sastin which led to Olomouc, Uhorske Hradiste, Straznice in Slovakia and then went along the left bank of the Morava into Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. 4. On the northeastern tip of the Alps near the Danube, at the southern spurs of the Carpathians, there was a famous gate through which the road branched out on both banks of the Danube to the east. From Bratislava one of these roads led to Nitra through Senec and Sintava, while the other passed through Trnava on its way up the Vah to northern Slovakia. This was the Vah valley road, which detoured through the Vlar pass into Moravia, through the Jablunkov defile to the Morava Gate, and thence into Poland, while another side road went along the Orava river to the Visla. From the Vah highway a side road went through Hlohovec into Nitra and through Turiec, below the castle of Vysehrad, toward the upper flow of the Nitra. (To be continued)  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 (4/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), September-December 1957 pp. 88-96 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 September-December 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/241">Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), pp. 57-64</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/278">Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), pp. 60-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/19cc29dc671ed57026f77a344cd990a3.pdf c767cd80b279ce3ed0fb10eb30272023 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 69 Mr. Secretary, and Mr. Ambassador, your personal as well as official support. As loyal sons and daughters of this great Republic, we beseech God's blessings upon You and your efforts to bring about His greater honor and glory, and we convey to each of You our sincerest and warmest personal regards. In witness whereof, we have unanimously adopted the above sentiments at this historic 35th Congress at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1957, the 50th anniversary of the first enunciation of these principles by our predecessors, of happy memory, our founding fathers and the organizers of the Slovak League of America. The Memorandum Committee of the Slovak League: (Signatures) JOHN J. SIROTNAK (Pa.) JOHN J . LESKOVJANSKY (Ohio) EDWARD J. BEHUNCIK (Conn.) JOHN B. HASSAY (Ohio) ELIZABETH ANDREJKO (Pa.) PHILIP A. HROBAK, President The Slovak League of America • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.HROBAK CHAPTER XVI - "Education in a Democracy" - by Francis H . Stuerm, Ph.D.; "Member, faculty of New York University; educated in Switzerland and the United States; Ph.D., New York University; author of Training in Democracy: The New Schools of Czechoslovakia (1938), published under the auspices of the Progressive Education Association." Another "progressive" report by a "progressive" professor! Thirteen pages, all of them devoted to the Czechs (Bohemia-Moravia), except this single paragraph which contained the word "Slovakia": "One of the Republic's lar gest educational tasks was to set up a complete system of education in the provinces of Slovakia and Sub- �70 SLOVAKIA Carpathian Ruthenia. In these former had been no universities or secondary cular, and not enough primary schools teach more than half the population for provinces of Hungary there schools taught in the vernaconducted in any language to four school years" - (p. 305). How many universities and secondary schools "taught in the vernacular" there were in Slovakia twenty years after the Czechs took over, Mr. Stuerm strangely fails to disclose which in itself is quite significant. The fact is that there was only one, the Comenius University in Bratislava, and this "only one" was completely under CZECH control! • • • "When the Czechoslovak Republic took over the schools of the former provinces of Austria-Hungary from which it was formed, its CZECH citizens were already democrats through inclination and generations of training. However, this training had not been gained in the schools. The CZECHS were democratic because their former Habsburg ruler had made them classless, three centuries before, by decimating their nobility and because for generations they had learned cooperation in united opposition to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). The fact is that the "Czechoslovak Republic" did not take any schools over, but the CZECHS did and made them over in the CZECH image. "United opposition" to the Habsburgs? The historical fact is that the Czechs served the Habsburgs most loyally! The non-Czech citizens evidently were not "democratic" according to Mr. Stuerm. We know how the " democracy" of the Benes Czechs dealt with them. • • • "The Austrian schools had been developed under a central administration determined tu discipline the young people for satisfied subjection to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). In like manner, the Czecho-Slovak schools had been developed under a central administration from Prague determined to discipline the young people of the various nations of the Republic for satisfied subjection to the Czechs. The "progressive" Czechs, however, went wide of their determination and found to their regret that young Slovaks were discipilined for dissatisfied subjection to the Czechs, upholding the principle that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Result? A greater degree of Slovak nationalism - Slovak solidarity! • • • "One of the fruits of CZECH political victories had been a continual expansion of the number of CZECH schools in which instruc- �SLOVAKIA 71 tion was given in the CZECH language . .. CZECH teachers had led the empire's educators in studying and advocating innovations of method (p. 303).... After the Republic was established, (CZECH) teachers who were interested in liberalization of method soon took advantage of their newly gained freedom to make study trips abroad. They attended PROGRESSIVE schools of pedagogy and observed PROGRESSIVE teaching in the United States, Switzerland, Belgium, Denmark, England, and in the NEW RUSSIA. They returned home filled with ideas and enthusiasm (p. 304). . . . During the Republic's early years there was a young CZECH educator, dr. Vaclav Prihoda, who was studying in the United States (Chicago U.; Columbia U.). . . . and became profoundly influenced by the ideas of Dewey and Thorndike . .. (he) was appointed chairman of this governmental committee (Reform Committee at the School of Higher Pedagogical Studies) (pp. 306-307).... The CZECHS have always considered the maintenance of the national culture as a duty sacred in its importance. . . . It was this strong practical strain in the CZECH character which caused initial reluctance among the citizens to permit changes in schools which they knew were good (pp. 308-309) . . .. During the golden age of CZECH democracy under the Republic, children cooperated freely in their classroom in the singing of (Czech) patriotic songs and in the artistic speaking chorus, all which heightened their feeling of national unity (p. 311).... The emotional basis of CZECH democracy was the same inherent staying power which had maintained the nation in its precarious geographical situation since early tribal times (p. 313).. . the CZECHS had built up in their character centuries-old habits of independent individual thought and public cooperation. . . . In Austrian times, the training in the schools overlaid the CZECH'S democratic character with a surface attitude of acquiescent passivity. When the establishment of the Republic gave CZECH democracy opportunity to flourish unhampered in its action, PROGRESSIVE educators developed a new method, which gave it direct expression" (p. 314). Mr. Stuerm certainly was hep on the "progressive" CZECH business, the only thing, according to him, and others, which figured in the "CZECH democracy" of Czecho-Slovakia - in which the progressive "truth" of Masaryk-Benes prevailed. In the end "CZECH democracy" had no trouble in becoming CZECH "PEOPLE'S Democracy!" • • • CHAPTER XVII "Czechoslovakia's Contribution to Science" - by Gerald Druce, D.R.N., M.Sc.; Fellow London Chemical Society (1915-) ; Fellow Institute of Chemistry (1925-) ; honorary and foreign member Masaryk Academy of Work (1928-) ; M.Sc., University of London; D.R.N., Charles University, Prague; authority on CZECH science; author of books and articles, among them: Wan- �72 SL'.) VAKIA derings in Czechoslovakia (1930) In the Heart of Europe - Life in Czechoslovakia (1936). Another misnomered chapter which should be entitled: CZECH contribution to science. The very first sentence of Mr. Druce's contribution to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" has no historical basis in fact; in it he claims that "the Czechoslovak State REGAINED its independence in 1918" - the ridiculous story the Benes Czechs promoted and still propagate. The "Czecho-Slovak State" never existed until 1918 ! A few samplings for the edification of historians interested in the history of the Slovaks and Czechs: " . ... contemporary mineralogical and alchemical works in the CZECH language . .. the greatest CZECH educator, Comenius ... the CZECH national revival . . . The National Museum . . . widened its scope to become a rallying point of all CZECH culture .... Purkyne lectured in CZECH ... CZECH men of science ... distinguished CZECH chemists ... CZECH scientific literature . . . Modern scientific and technical works in CZECH . .. . It was in the biological sciences that CZECH men of science made noteworthy advances a century ago . .. . Count Kaspar Sternberg ... was a patron of CZECH science at the time of the national awakening .. . ." The CZECH men of science get all the play; General Milan Stefanik, "the Slovak astronomer," was the only Slovak to rate - one sentence! The "selected Bibliography" at the end of the chapter is strictly CZECH. So, "Czechoslovakia's Contributions to Science" really winds up to be: CZECH contributions to science - according to the formula of the Benes Czechs. • • • CHAPTER XVIII - "Czechoslovak Music, Art, and by Jaroslav E. Vojan, J.D.; "President, Literature" Bohemian Arts Club (1912-); J.D., Charles University, Prague; Professor of Economics, College of Commerce, Prague (1899); editor, NEW CZECH Review (Prague, 1903-1904) ; editor, Svojan, (1928-) ; editor, Free Czechoslovakia (1939-) ; author of Czech-American Epistles (1910) ... " As one might suspect, in this chapter, too, just about everything "Czechoslovak" means "CZECH": composers, artists, sculptors, writers, poets, et al. Slovaks, however, rate a bit better than they did in the previous chapter (by �SLOVAKIA 73 Druce): Mr. Vojan generously allows them three sentences in a total of 18 pages ! • • • CHAPTER XIX - "Diplomatic Origins and Foreign Policy" - by Felix J. Vondracek, Ph.D.; "Professor of European History University of North Dakota; Ph.D. , Columbia University; author of "The Foreign Policy of Czechoslovakia (1937) ." "The best efforts of a vigilant Austro-Hungarian police and spy system had not been able to prevent patriotic Czechoslovaks in the homelands from communicating with the exiles through the efficient (Czech) 'Maffia' organization. Both groups of patriots well knew that success could be attained only through cooperation" (pp. 349-350). Professor Vondracek, like other Benes Czechs and their hired propagandists, promotes the false thesis of a "united CZECHOSLOVAK nation." What "patriotic Czechoslovaks" at a time when the Republic of Czecho-Slovakia did not exist? Why then talk about "both groups" of patriots? Who were the "SLOVAK patriots" who communicated with the CZECH exiles (Masaryk and Benes) through the CZECH "MAFFIA"? We know that most Slovak patriots and many CZECH patriots knew practically nothing about what Masaryk and Benes were cooking up for them in exile. Masaryk and Benes themselves figured that the fewer Slovak and Czech "patriots" in on their plan, the better the chances for the success of their CZECH cause, promoted under the guise of a "CZECHOSLOVAK" cause. Mr. Vondracek, CZECH "expert" on CZECHO-SLOVAK diplomacy and foreign policy, hinted at this when he said: "The efforts of the predominantly CZECH revolutionary leaders in Paris and Prague were supported by other Slavic groups" (p. 350). Of course, Mr. Vondracek very conveniently forgot to spell out the "other Slavic groups" who really knew something about the efforts of Benes, Masaryk, and the CZECH "Maffia" at that time . "On June • • • 30, 1918, American-CZECH and American-SLOVAK leaders in the United States signed the DECLARATION OF PITTSBURGH, whereby, in the Czechoslovakia-to-be, THE SLOVAK PEO- �74 SLOVAKIA PLE WERE GUARANTEED THEIR OWN ASSEMBLY, COURTS, AND ADMINISTRATION. Similarly, by the D'l!daration of Turcian• sky Sv. Martin, signed on October 30, the :ilovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the new State" - (p . 350). The Pittsburgh Convention or Agree!nent was drafted and signed by T. G. Masaryk and representatives of American Slovak and Czech organizations on May 30, 1918 - and not on JUNE 30, 1918 (See Chapter IX above). It is significant that :M:r. Vondracek fails to mention the historic:11 fact tha: Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Conver.tion, calling it but a "scrap of paper." And note th:1t the 'Slovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the ~ew State" TWO DAYS AFTER the Prague declaration of independence! This is evidence of how much "Slovak patriots" really knew about what was cooking in the CZECH kitchen of Masaryk and Benes! • • • "At the termination of the war, Cechoslovak forces totaled 182,000 men, of which number 12,000 were serving in France, 78,000 in Italy, and 92,000 in Russia. The last of these armies had been particularly valuable to the Allies" - (p. 351). The figures are undoubtedly based on CZECH mathematics authored by the Benes Czechs, which is based on the principle of at least "doubling" numbers in such cases. And the fact is that the "Czechoslovak forces" in Russia were not at all valuable to the Allies since they refused to follow their orders. Masaryk conjured the "Siberian rabbit" out of his black felt hat to create a favorable impression in America. Czechs and pro-Czechs love to indulge in the legend cooked up by Masaryk. But the truth is something else again. "The Czechs," Robert Ingrim tells us ("After Hitler Stalin?"), "were offered the 'short route' to France, via Murmansk and Archangel, but they preferred the long way via Siberia to Vladivostok. . . . They were not interested in fighting the Bolsheviks or anyone else. . . . Their policy was, as their spokesman said, 'the railroad and to go home'.... They did very little fighting, and when the Reds had overcome their initial disorganization and had become a serious military force, the Czechs withdrew eastward." Just how the "Czechoslovak army performed for the Allies services more valuable than the same forces could �SLOVAKIA 75 have rendered in France ... through control of the Volga area and the Transsiberian Railway," Mr. Vondracek does · not explain. We know that Masaryk and Benes did not want their Czech legions in Siberia to fight the Bolsheviks. We also know that the Allies insisted that "the Czechs stop their retreat and support the Regent," Admiral Koltschak, supreme commander of the anti-Bolshevik forces - "otherwise they would not get ships over the Pacific." The Czechs yielded to this threat reluctantly, but when the Reds had shown their superiority, "the Czechs helped them capture the admiral"! Mr. Vondracek, in typical Czech fashion, tells us, however, that: "Enmeshed in the Russian domestic chaos, and forced to continue the struggle against the Bolsheviks after the World War had terminated, the Czechoslovak Legions became unwilling tools of a French and British diplomacy that wished to keep them in Siberia indefinitely." Why British and French diplomacy really wanted to keep the "Czechoslovak" Legions in Siberia INDEFINITELY, Mr. Vondracek does not say. We know, however, for that British and, particularly, French diplomacy which Masaryk and Benes became WILLING TOOLS had very much to do with the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. • • • How Benes felt about the Soviet Union is, surprisingly, factually reported by Mr. Vondracek (pp. 356-362): "Benes was a pioneer in advocating the recognition of Soviet Russia long before public opinion either in Czechoslovakia or elsewhere in Europe became converted to such a step." The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia was Dr. Eduard Benes, and Benes, a thorough Socialist, was completely pro-Soviet and for the socialistic system of the U. S. S. R. His policy led to the logical conclusion we all witnessed after the war (1945-1948): a complete surrender to Communism. Benes and Masaryk undoubtedly persuaded their people, the Czechs, to recognize Soviet Russia, but they certainly could not persuade the Slovaks to do so. The Slovak nation, as a whole, remained faithful to its thoroughly Christian tradition, opposing collaboration with the godless forces of the Soviet Union to the very bitter end. �76 SLOVAKIA The Munich debacle is treated in the typical fashion of the Benes Czechs by Mr. Vondracek: Benes and his Czechs were above reproach; the culprits were Britain, France, the Germans, the Slovaks, Poles, Magyars, and Ruthenes (pp. 364-366). "Faced with the ruin of his life's work, Benes wisely resigned and went into voluntary exile," Mr. Vondracek says tersely, but nary a word that Benes had surrendered his country to Hitler without consulting parliament and thereby had incurred the just wrath of both Slovaks and Czechs, who probably would have hung him had he not fled to England. The fact is that Benes was a coward; the surrender of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, without consulting the representatives of the nations concerned, was criminal. The Benes Czechs did not and still do not want the world to know the truth why Benes did capitulate to Hitler. Robert Ingrim, however, hit the nail on the head when he said: "The allegation that the Czechs surrendered without firing a shot, because England and France asked them to do so, is purely fictitious. They chose to surrender 'at the behest of their faithless friends,' because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the German-Slovak-Magyar-Polish-Ruthenian majority of the population was not prepared to die for a State that had treated them as second-class citizens." • • • After Hitler attacked Poland, Great Britain and France declared war on Germany, and World War II was on, "for which," Mr. Vondracek says, "many CZECHOSLOVAKS had been praying as their one hope of salvation after Munich." But this is only Mr. Vondracek's opinion and not fact. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Slovaks did not pray for war but for peace. Mr. Vondracek has no proof to offer that even many Czechs, the majority of whom, we are told, are Catholics, prayed for war either. And he undoubtedly knew that the Slovak Republic, after the legal autonomous Slovak Government had declared Slovakia an independent State (March 14, 1939), was recognized DE JURE and./or DE FACTO by twenty-seven states, yet, in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," he chose to write the following historical lie: "The Czechoslovak Republic continued to exist de jure, if not de facto. The United States, Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia and Poland in particular had not recognized the annexation by Germany". �SLOVAKIA 77 The historical truth is that Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia, as well as Poland (until Hitler attacked it, September 1, 1939) - and twenty-three other countries - did recognize the independent Slovak State and, hence, must have also recognized the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia. The U. S., it is true, did not recognize independent Slovakia, but the Slovaks were quite certain that it would, if war did not break out for another year or two - and that is what they were praying for at that time. They were through with Benes's 'Czechoslovak" democracy then and did not want his "new Czechoslovakia" - the "people's democracy" in 1945. They are adamantly opposed to her today and will be as long as she exists! • • • CHAPTER XX - "The Little Entente and the Balkan Entente" - by Harry Nicholas Howard, Ph.D., "Professor of History, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio; Ph.D., University of California; member, Institut Balkanique (Belgrade; American contributing editor, Bibliographie Balkanique (Paris)," etc. Professor Howard, like the many other distinguished scholars who contributed chapters to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," succumbed to the charms of the Masaryk and Benes Czechs, lapped up their propaganda, then presented it as "history." The Little Entente was formed, Mr. Howard states, "in the light of such a practical philosophy" - the latter being expressed by Dr. Eduard Benes (p. 372). Of course, neither Benes nor Mr. Howard could even dare mention a cordon sanitaire against Germany! Having adopted Benes's "practical philosophy" for the formation of the Little Entente, Mr. Howard continued: " One of the keystones of the foreign policy of Czechoslovakia was the organization in 1920-1921 of the Little Entente, composed of Czechoslovakia, Jugoslavia and Rumania. Czechoslovakia played a principal and even a dominant role in the Little Entente .... Dr. Eduard Benes, as foreign minister and later as president of Czechoslovakia, was the major statesman of the Little Entente, not only within its inner circles, but in the League of Nations, and, therefore, in the councils of European diplomacy" - (p. 368). Big Socialist and little man Benes played " big" politics in the Little Entente, while Czecho-Slovakia, outside of being Benes's kingdom, meant little. The "major statesman" was �78 SLOVAKIA deflated completely by the first great crisis ·that hit CzechoSlovakia and the Little Entente. Mr. Howard knew that but he continued to ramble on: "When the great crisis came in September, 1938, it is interesting to note that both Jugoslavia, thanks to popular pressure on behalf of Czechoslovakia, and Rumania, as members of the Little Entente, rallied to the support of the harassed Republic. They remained true to their obligations, and were ready to stand to arms, as long as they had any confidence in France and Great Britain . .. Only the Munich 'Accord' of September 29-30 finally destroyed the Little Entente" - (p. 383). "The Little Entente, despite determined efforts, was unable to organize an effective, inclusive political and economic collaboration in central Europe, embracing Auslria and Hungary" - (p. 384). We are supposed to believe that without the "Munich Accord" the Little Entente would not have been destroyed, according to Mr. Howard. The Little Entente, Mr. Howard could have told us if he were honest, was just so much horse play. Why embrace only Austria and Hungary (as if Benes wanted to!) to organize effective collaboration in Central Europe, and not the rest of the countries "in that area? The fact is that after twenty years of Benes foreign policy, not a single neighboring country was really on friendly terms with Czecho-Slovakia. Jingos and chauvinists usually wear blinkers. The French (Clemenceau and Poincare), however, were not blind to the new dangers of the new distribution of power on the European Continent. When they decided to destroy Austria-Hungary, they undoubtedly were familiar with the objections to this program: their plan was to replace Austro-German and Magyar leadership on the Danube by Czech imperialism, combined with the Serbian and Rumanian brands. Years later the result was the Little Entente (Czecho-Slovakia, Rumania, Yugoslavia), "the memory of which," according to Robert Ingrim, "produces a smile an every European's lips, a smile tinged with scorn," because "you cannot square a circle, and, unlike distant Americans, people on the spot could not be persuaded to admire as progress the replacement of one mixed state by three no less mixed ones." Viscount D' Abernon, showing how Versailles had destroyed Europe's equilibrium- ("An Ambassador of Peace" - 1929), predicted: "The Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon �SLOVAKIA 79 as disturbing forces cease to operate as powerfully as today." We know that he was right. When the "big crisis" came the Little Entente, including Benes's Czecho-Slovakia, folded up. • • • CHAPTER XXI - "Hitler and Hitlerism" - by (Henry) Wickham Steed, LL.D., "Editor, London Times (19191922); correspondent, London Times, at Berlin (1896); at Rome (1897-1902); at Vienna (1902-1913); foreign editor (1914-1919); proprietor and editor, The Review of Reviews (1923-1930); educated at universities of Jena, Berlin, and Paris; LL.D., universities of Strasbourg and Cluj; Lecturer on Central European History, King's College, University of London (1925-1938); author of numerous books and articles ... ", etc. Probably no individual helped T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes - and their "CZECH cause" - as much as Mr. Steed of London, man of letters and contacts and, therefore, a man of great influence. With his valuable assistance and the backing of the "progressive" forces of Socialism and Freemasonry, Masaryk and Benes, who were political unknowns before World War I, in a very short time became "political wizards, outstanding statesmen, experts on Central Europe and Germany and Russia, and pre-eminently political philosophers." It all came about by propaganda - as did Czecho-Slovakia, the political monstrosity of Masaryk and Benes. And Mr. H. Wickham Steed was quite a propagandist for a new order in "Christian" Europe - an order divorced from things eternal, from God Himself. His attempt to help Masaryk and Benes "remake" the history of the Slovak and Czech nations to suit the pattern of "the ideas of Masaryk" is quite obvious in his chapter of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": "The Czechoslovak State had been fashioned and inspired by the ideas of Thomas G. Masaryk. . . . Masaryk looked upon that war (1914-1918) as a struggle between the ideas of the West and the ideas of Germany. The ideas of the West, he argued, are legacies of the Renaissance and the Reformation with their outcome in the English, American, and French revolutions, the parents of democra• cy. He defined democracy as an attempt to organize mankind intensively, as distinguished from the theocracy of the Holy Roman Empire which tried to organize European mankind extensively" (p. 402). �80 SLOVAKIA This probably explains why Czecho-Slovakia collapsed in 1938: the ideas of T. G. Masaryk were of themselves insufficient for the life of the nations contained within Masaryk's "CZECH" democracy. It is significant that even the Czechs did not fire a shot in the defense of Masaryk's democracy in 1938 or in 1948 ! • • • his World Revolution, Masaryk declared that there is only one remedy for abuses and defects in the life of the State truth and truthfulness, coupled with freedom to speak and to write the truth. Democracy, he insisted, should mean moral renovation in politics, in education, and throughout the whole range of public and private life" - (p. 405). "In This sounds regular, coming from an admirer and promoter of Masaryk, but the fact remains that T. G. M. often did not do as he preached. What did he say and write about the Slovaks and their country? Why did he deceive them and defraud them of the autonomy he and Benes had promised in Czecho-Slovakia? What about the "Siberian legend"? And White Mountain? Moral renovation? Based on what fundamentals? The state built by Masaryk and Benes was a fraud, because they were frauds at war with the Author of all genuine truth, justice, and morality. • • • "Peace can be founded only upon a community of free, democratic, and ethically minded peoples resolved to work together as equals in the spirit of Masaryk's faith. Hitlerism, in the broadest sense, is the foe of civilized humanity; and in nothing was Masaryk greater than in his insistance that the idea of his people must be : "Jesus, not Caesar" - (p. 408). Even if the whole world works "in the spirit of Masaryk's faith," no true and lasting peace will ever result. There was no genuine peace in Masaryk's own State. And what was the difference between Masarykism and Hitlerism? Hitler promoted German National Socialism, while Masaryk and Benes promoted CZECH National Socialism. Masarky did use the slogan "Jesus, not Caesar," but he did not live up to it, serving rather the enemies of Jesus, the Caesars of the forces of darkness. The cross of Jesus was forcefully removed from schools, the Marian Column was torn down in Prague, and the Church established by Jesus, the Roman Catholic Church, was harrassed and persecu- �SLOVAKlA 81 ted by Masaryk and his followers, who promoted the Czech National Church and shrieked: "Away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and convicted!" Democracy, Masaryk said, 'is not alone a form of State and of administration. It is a philosophy of life and an outlook upon the world" ( (p. 406). What was the ethical basis of his politics? T. G. M. said: "The ethical basis of all politics is humanity, and humanity is an international program. It is a new word for the old love of our fellow-men" (p. 406). Humanity, "the new word," was then substituted by Masaryk for the old word, God and Jesus, as the ethical basis of his politics. We know what it led to: Chaos and ruin. • • • CHAPTER XXII - "The Road to Munich and Beyond" - by Bernadotte E. Schmitt, Ph.D. , "Andrew MacLeish Distinguished Service Professor of Modern History, University of Chicago; B.A., M.A., Oxford (Rhodes Scholar from Tennessee); Ph.D., Wisconscin; Guggenheim Fellow (1927) ; Pulitzer Prize winner (1931) ; editor, Journal of Modern History, Chicago, 1929-) ," etc. This chapter, in the main, follows the usual line of the Benes Czechs: Benes was clean; the Czechs were "ready, even eager, to fight," but Great Britain and France would not let them; "IF Dr. Benes, with whom the ultimate decision rested, yielded to the demands of Britain and France, the explanation appears to be two-fold - Benes wished to spare his people the horrors of war and, then, he feared, "if Czechoslovakia fought only with Russia as an ally she would be labeled as a RED state (however preposterous that might seem) ... " As for the Slovaks: Hlinka's autonomists supported the demands of the Sudeten German Party, while the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938 "was satisfactory to the Czechs and to a majority of the Slovaks, but not to a considerable section of the German and Magyar minorities, the inclusion of whom was necessary to make the State economically viable." The truth is that the majority of the Slovaks were not satisfied with the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938. • • • CHAPTER XXIII - "Czechoslovak Democracy: Was It Worth While?" - by James T. Shotwell, Ph.D., LL.D., �82 SLOVAKIA "Bryce Professor of the History of International Relations, Columbia University . .. president League of Nations Association (1935-) ... commander, Order of the White Lion (Czechoslovak ia) ... " etc. (about a half page!). Mr. Shotwell is another of the "Masaryk-Ben es-coulddo-no-wrong" chain gang. The majority of the population of Czecho-Slovak ia was opposed to "Czechoslovak" democracy - a pseudodemoc racy - but Shotwell says it was worth while, stating categorically: "There can be no doubt that the history of Europe and of Western civilization has been immensely enriched by the philosophy and statesmanship of President Masaryk. Neither can there be any doubt that the Czechoslovak Republic has left a remarkable record in the annals of history; one which, with all its mis- takes - and they must be admitted - proved the competence of this branch of the Slavic peoples in the art and science of government" - (p. 441). The fact is, however, that the socialistic State of Czecho-Slovakia proved beyond a doubt that it does not pay to collaborate with the Soviet Union and the Reds. The world would be healthier today minus the "philosophy and statesmanship " of Masaryk who falsified and distorted Czech and Slovak history to create the political monstrosity of Czecho-Slovakia. Another of Shotwell's "facts": "His (Masaryk's) effort to teach the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson not only to his own people but to the others of east-central Europe did not wholly succeed; for the task was well-nigh impossible. The Austrian system of government under which the Czechs had lived, and still more Hungary's rule of the Slavs within its frontiers, were both far removed from the American democratic federalism, which was the basis of Masaryk's political philosophy. Although the Habsburg's had been forced to recognize the different national stocks which composed their varied empire, the bureaucracy and the army held these peoples together in a way which failed utterly to satisfy their aspirations for political self-expression. True federalism flourishes only under a regime of liberty, and that was something foreign to the Habsburg tradition" - (pp. 446-447). Masaryk's Czecho-Slovakia, however, proved that Masaryk was not interested in or impressed by "American democratic federalism." The "Czechoslova k" democratic system was as far removed from American democratic federalism as were the Austrian and Hungarian systems. The Czech bureaucracy and chauvinism of Masaryk and Benes �SLOVAKIA 83 failed utterly to satisfy the aspirations of the Slovaks and other non-Czech nations of Czecho-Slovakia for political self-expression. Twenty years of Masaryk-Benes rule in Czecho-Slovakia definitely proved that true liberty was more foreign to the Masaryk and Benes regimes than it was to the Habsburgs, hence, the seed of federalism was not even planted by them. Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be patterned after Switzerland or the United States, but the fact is that she was not. (The End.) • • • THE SLOVAKS WERE THERE : MAJOR JOHN L. POLERECKY FOUGHT FOR AMERICA'S INDEPENDENCE In 1781, when the defeated army of Cornwallis surrendered its arms to General George Washington at Yorktown, Va., among the "French Hussars" who encircled the defeated, as the ceremony of "surrendering arms" took place, was a son of Slovakia, Major John L. Polerecky, whose father hailed from Polerieka, Turiec Province, Slovakia. The story of John Polerecky's participation in the American Revolution for the independence of America was unfolded by Dr. Joseph Cincik, Ph.D., professor of history and art, Cleveland, Ohio, and a member of the Slovak Institute there. Mr. Cincik, a distant relative of Major Polerecky, spent much time and money in travel and research to gather the facts of the Polerecky story. When the complete story of Polerecky is published, it will be fully documented with photocopies of original documents from Slovakia, France, and the National Archives in Washington, D. C. What is presented here is from a portion of Dr. Cincik's manuscript on Major Polerecky. When Francis Rakoczy of Hungary revolted against the Habsburgs and lost, he was forced to flee for his life in 1711. He fled to Poland and later made his way to France. Rakoczy was not through with his fight against Vienna, and Louis XIV was happy to accept his services when he offered them to him in 1713. Rakoczy was ac- � SLOVAKIA 69 Mr. Secretary, and Mr. Ambassador, your personal as well as official support. As loyal sons and daughters of this great Republic, we beseech God's blessings upon You and your efforts to bring about His greater honor and glory, and we convey to each of You our sincerest and warmest personal regards. In witness whereof, we have unanimously adopted the above sentiments at this historic 35th Congress at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1957, the 50th anniversary of the first enunciation of these principles by our predecessors, of happy memory, our founding fathers and the organizers of the Slovak League of America. The Memorandum Committee of the Slovak League: (Signatures) JOHN J. SIROTNAK (Pa.) JOHN J . LESKOVJANSKY (Ohio) EDWARD J. BEHUNCIK (Conn.) JOHN B. HASSAY (Ohio) ELIZABETH ANDREJKO (Pa.) PHILIP A. HROBAK, President The Slovak League of America • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.HROBAK CHAPTER XVI - "Education in a Democracy" - by Francis H . Stuerm, Ph.D.; "Member, faculty of New York University; educated in Switzerland and the United States; Ph.D., New York University; author of Training in Democracy: The New Schools of Czechoslovakia (1938), published under the auspices of the Progressive Education Association." Another "progressive" report by a "progressive" professor! Thirteen pages, all of them devoted to the Czechs (Bohemia-Moravia), except this single paragraph which contained the word "Slovakia": "One of the Republic's lar gest educational tasks was to set up a complete system of education in the provinces of Slovakia and Sub- �70 SLOVAKIA Carpathian Ruthenia. In these former had been no universities or secondary cular, and not enough primary schools teach more than half the population for provinces of Hungary there schools taught in the vernaconducted in any language to four school years" - (p. 305). How many universities and secondary schools "taught in the vernacular" there were in Slovakia twenty years after the Czechs took over, Mr. Stuerm strangely fails to disclose which in itself is quite significant. The fact is that there was only one, the Comenius University in Bratislava, and this "only one" was completely under CZECH control! • • • "When the Czechoslovak Republic took over the schools of the former provinces of Austria-Hungary from which it was formed, its CZECH citizens were already democrats through inclination and generations of training. However, this training had not been gained in the schools. The CZECHS were democratic because their former Habsburg ruler had made them classless, three centuries before, by decimating their nobility and because for generations they had learned cooperation in united opposition to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). The fact is that the "Czechoslovak Republic" did not take any schools over, but the CZECHS did and made them over in the CZECH image. "United opposition" to the Habsburgs? The historical fact is that the Czechs served the Habsburgs most loyally! The non-Czech citizens evidently were not "democratic" according to Mr. Stuerm. We know how the " democracy" of the Benes Czechs dealt with them. • • • "The Austrian schools had been developed under a central administration determined tu discipline the young people for satisfied subjection to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). In like manner, the Czecho-Slovak schools had been developed under a central administration from Prague determined to discipline the young people of the various nations of the Republic for satisfied subjection to the Czechs. The "progressive" Czechs, however, went wide of their determination and found to their regret that young Slovaks were discipilined for dissatisfied subjection to the Czechs, upholding the principle that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Result? A greater degree of Slovak nationalism - Slovak solidarity! • • • "One of the fruits of CZECH political victories had been a continual expansion of the number of CZECH schools in which instruc- �SLOVAKIA 71 tion was given in the CZECH language . .. CZECH teachers had led the empire's educators in studying and advocating innovations of method (p. 303).... After the Republic was established, (CZECH) teachers who were interested in liberalization of method soon took advantage of their newly gained freedom to make study trips abroad. They attended PROGRESSIVE schools of pedagogy and observed PROGRESSIVE teaching in the United States, Switzerland, Belgium, Denmark, England, and in the NEW RUSSIA. They returned home filled with ideas and enthusiasm (p. 304). . . . During the Republic's early years there was a young CZECH educator, dr. Vaclav Prihoda, who was studying in the United States (Chicago U.; Columbia U.). . . . and became profoundly influenced by the ideas of Dewey and Thorndike . .. (he) was appointed chairman of this governmental committee (Reform Committee at the School of Higher Pedagogical Studies) (pp. 306-307).... The CZECHS have always considered the maintenance of the national culture as a duty sacred in its importance. . . . It was this strong practical strain in the CZECH character which caused initial reluctance among the citizens to permit changes in schools which they knew were good (pp. 308-309) . . .. During the golden age of CZECH democracy under the Republic, children cooperated freely in their classroom in the singing of (Czech) patriotic songs and in the artistic speaking chorus, all which heightened their feeling of national unity (p. 311).... The emotional basis of CZECH democracy was the same inherent staying power which had maintained the nation in its precarious geographical situation since early tribal times (p. 313).. . the CZECHS had built up in their character centuries-old habits of independent individual thought and public cooperation. . . . In Austrian times, the training in the schools overlaid the CZECH'S democratic character with a surface attitude of acquiescent passivity. When the establishment of the Republic gave CZECH democracy opportunity to flourish unhampered in its action, PROGRESSIVE educators developed a new method, which gave it direct expression" (p. 314). Mr. Stuerm certainly was hep on the "progressive" CZECH business, the only thing, according to him, and others, which figured in the "CZECH democracy" of Czecho-Slovakia - in which the progressive "truth" of Masaryk-Benes prevailed. In the end "CZECH democracy" had no trouble in becoming CZECH "PEOPLE'S Democracy!" • • • CHAPTER XVII "Czechoslovakia's Contribution to Science" - by Gerald Druce, D.R.N., M.Sc.; Fellow London Chemical Society (1915-) ; Fellow Institute of Chemistry (1925-) ; honorary and foreign member Masaryk Academy of Work (1928-) ; M.Sc., University of London; D.R.N., Charles University, Prague; authority on CZECH science; author of books and articles, among them: Wan- �72 SL'.) VAKIA derings in Czechoslovakia (1930) In the Heart of Europe - Life in Czechoslovakia (1936). Another misnomered chapter which should be entitled: CZECH contribution to science. The very first sentence of Mr. Druce's contribution to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" has no historical basis in fact; in it he claims that "the Czechoslovak State REGAINED its independence in 1918" - the ridiculous story the Benes Czechs promoted and still propagate. The "Czecho-Slovak State" never existed until 1918 ! A few samplings for the edification of historians interested in the history of the Slovaks and Czechs: " . ... contemporary mineralogical and alchemical works in the CZECH language . .. the greatest CZECH educator, Comenius ... the CZECH national revival . . . The National Museum . . . widened its scope to become a rallying point of all CZECH culture .... Purkyne lectured in CZECH ... CZECH men of science ... distinguished CZECH chemists ... CZECH scientific literature . . . Modern scientific and technical works in CZECH . .. . It was in the biological sciences that CZECH men of science made noteworthy advances a century ago . .. . Count Kaspar Sternberg ... was a patron of CZECH science at the time of the national awakening .. . ." The CZECH men of science get all the play; General Milan Stefanik, "the Slovak astronomer," was the only Slovak to rate - one sentence! The "selected Bibliography" at the end of the chapter is strictly CZECH. So, "Czechoslovakia's Contributions to Science" really winds up to be: CZECH contributions to science - according to the formula of the Benes Czechs. • • • CHAPTER XVIII - "Czechoslovak Music, Art, and by Jaroslav E. Vojan, J.D.; "President, Literature" Bohemian Arts Club (1912-); J.D., Charles University, Prague; Professor of Economics, College of Commerce, Prague (1899); editor, NEW CZECH Review (Prague, 1903-1904) ; editor, Svojan, (1928-) ; editor, Free Czechoslovakia (1939-) ; author of Czech-American Epistles (1910) ... " As one might suspect, in this chapter, too, just about everything "Czechoslovak" means "CZECH": composers, artists, sculptors, writers, poets, et al. Slovaks, however, rate a bit better than they did in the previous chapter (by �SLOVAKIA 73 Druce): Mr. Vojan generously allows them three sentences in a total of 18 pages ! • • • CHAPTER XIX - "Diplomatic Origins and Foreign Policy" - by Felix J. Vondracek, Ph.D.; "Professor of European History University of North Dakota; Ph.D. , Columbia University; author of "The Foreign Policy of Czechoslovakia (1937) ." "The best efforts of a vigilant Austro-Hungarian police and spy system had not been able to prevent patriotic Czechoslovaks in the homelands from communicating with the exiles through the efficient (Czech) 'Maffia' organization. Both groups of patriots well knew that success could be attained only through cooperation" (pp. 349-350). Professor Vondracek, like other Benes Czechs and their hired propagandists, promotes the false thesis of a "united CZECHOSLOVAK nation." What "patriotic Czechoslovaks" at a time when the Republic of Czecho-Slovakia did not exist? Why then talk about "both groups" of patriots? Who were the "SLOVAK patriots" who communicated with the CZECH exiles (Masaryk and Benes) through the CZECH "MAFFIA"? We know that most Slovak patriots and many CZECH patriots knew practically nothing about what Masaryk and Benes were cooking up for them in exile. Masaryk and Benes themselves figured that the fewer Slovak and Czech "patriots" in on their plan, the better the chances for the success of their CZECH cause, promoted under the guise of a "CZECHOSLOVAK" cause. Mr. Vondracek, CZECH "expert" on CZECHO-SLOVAK diplomacy and foreign policy, hinted at this when he said: "The efforts of the predominantly CZECH revolutionary leaders in Paris and Prague were supported by other Slavic groups" (p. 350). Of course, Mr. Vondracek very conveniently forgot to spell out the "other Slavic groups" who really knew something about the efforts of Benes, Masaryk, and the CZECH "Maffia" at that time . "On June • • • 30, 1918, American-CZECH and American-SLOVAK leaders in the United States signed the DECLARATION OF PITTSBURGH, whereby, in the Czechoslovakia-to-be, THE SLOVAK PEO- �74 SLOVAKIA PLE WERE GUARANTEED THEIR OWN ASSEMBLY, COURTS, AND ADMINISTRATION. Similarly, by the D'l!daration of Turcian• sky Sv. Martin, signed on October 30, the :ilovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the new State" - (p . 350). The Pittsburgh Convention or Agree!nent was drafted and signed by T. G. Masaryk and representatives of American Slovak and Czech organizations on May 30, 1918 - and not on JUNE 30, 1918 (See Chapter IX above). It is significant that :M:r. Vondracek fails to mention the historic:11 fact tha: Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Conver.tion, calling it but a "scrap of paper." And note th:1t the 'Slovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the ~ew State" TWO DAYS AFTER the Prague declaration of independence! This is evidence of how much "Slovak patriots" really knew about what was cooking in the CZECH kitchen of Masaryk and Benes! • • • "At the termination of the war, Cechoslovak forces totaled 182,000 men, of which number 12,000 were serving in France, 78,000 in Italy, and 92,000 in Russia. The last of these armies had been particularly valuable to the Allies" - (p. 351). The figures are undoubtedly based on CZECH mathematics authored by the Benes Czechs, which is based on the principle of at least "doubling" numbers in such cases. And the fact is that the "Czechoslovak forces" in Russia were not at all valuable to the Allies since they refused to follow their orders. Masaryk conjured the "Siberian rabbit" out of his black felt hat to create a favorable impression in America. Czechs and pro-Czechs love to indulge in the legend cooked up by Masaryk. But the truth is something else again. "The Czechs," Robert Ingrim tells us ("After Hitler Stalin?"), "were offered the 'short route' to France, via Murmansk and Archangel, but they preferred the long way via Siberia to Vladivostok. . . . They were not interested in fighting the Bolsheviks or anyone else. . . . Their policy was, as their spokesman said, 'the railroad and to go home'.... They did very little fighting, and when the Reds had overcome their initial disorganization and had become a serious military force, the Czechs withdrew eastward." Just how the "Czechoslovak army performed for the Allies services more valuable than the same forces could �SLOVAKIA 75 have rendered in France ... through control of the Volga area and the Transsiberian Railway," Mr. Vondracek does · not explain. We know that Masaryk and Benes did not want their Czech legions in Siberia to fight the Bolsheviks. We also know that the Allies insisted that "the Czechs stop their retreat and support the Regent," Admiral Koltschak, supreme commander of the anti-Bolshevik forces - "otherwise they would not get ships over the Pacific." The Czechs yielded to this threat reluctantly, but when the Reds had shown their superiority, "the Czechs helped them capture the admiral"! Mr. Vondracek, in typical Czech fashion, tells us, however, that: "Enmeshed in the Russian domestic chaos, and forced to continue the struggle against the Bolsheviks after the World War had terminated, the Czechoslovak Legions became unwilling tools of a French and British diplomacy that wished to keep them in Siberia indefinitely." Why British and French diplomacy really wanted to keep the "Czechoslovak" Legions in Siberia INDEFINITELY, Mr. Vondracek does not say. We know, however, for that British and, particularly, French diplomacy which Masaryk and Benes became WILLING TOOLS had very much to do with the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. • • • How Benes felt about the Soviet Union is, surprisingly, factually reported by Mr. Vondracek (pp. 356-362): "Benes was a pioneer in advocating the recognition of Soviet Russia long before public opinion either in Czechoslovakia or elsewhere in Europe became converted to such a step." The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia was Dr. Eduard Benes, and Benes, a thorough Socialist, was completely pro-Soviet and for the socialistic system of the U. S. S. R. His policy led to the logical conclusion we all witnessed after the war (1945-1948): a complete surrender to Communism. Benes and Masaryk undoubtedly persuaded their people, the Czechs, to recognize Soviet Russia, but they certainly could not persuade the Slovaks to do so. The Slovak nation, as a whole, remained faithful to its thoroughly Christian tradition, opposing collaboration with the godless forces of the Soviet Union to the very bitter end. �76 SLOVAKIA The Munich debacle is treated in the typical fashion of the Benes Czechs by Mr. Vondracek: Benes and his Czechs were above reproach; the culprits were Britain, France, the Germans, the Slovaks, Poles, Magyars, and Ruthenes (pp. 364-366). "Faced with the ruin of his life's work, Benes wisely resigned and went into voluntary exile," Mr. Vondracek says tersely, but nary a word that Benes had surrendered his country to Hitler without consulting parliament and thereby had incurred the just wrath of both Slovaks and Czechs, who probably would have hung him had he not fled to England. The fact is that Benes was a coward; the surrender of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, without consulting the representatives of the nations concerned, was criminal. The Benes Czechs did not and still do not want the world to know the truth why Benes did capitulate to Hitler. Robert Ingrim, however, hit the nail on the head when he said: "The allegation that the Czechs surrendered without firing a shot, because England and France asked them to do so, is purely fictitious. They chose to surrender 'at the behest of their faithless friends,' because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the German-Slovak-Magyar-Polish-Ruthenian majority of the population was not prepared to die for a State that had treated them as second-class citizens." • • • After Hitler attacked Poland, Great Britain and France declared war on Germany, and World War II was on, "for which," Mr. Vondracek says, "many CZECHOSLOVAKS had been praying as their one hope of salvation after Munich." But this is only Mr. Vondracek's opinion and not fact. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Slovaks did not pray for war but for peace. Mr. Vondracek has no proof to offer that even many Czechs, the majority of whom, we are told, are Catholics, prayed for war either. And he undoubtedly knew that the Slovak Republic, after the legal autonomous Slovak Government had declared Slovakia an independent State (March 14, 1939), was recognized DE JURE and./or DE FACTO by twenty-seven states, yet, in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," he chose to write the following historical lie: "The Czechoslovak Republic continued to exist de jure, if not de facto. The United States, Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia and Poland in particular had not recognized the annexation by Germany". �SLOVAKIA 77 The historical truth is that Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia, as well as Poland (until Hitler attacked it, September 1, 1939) - and twenty-three other countries - did recognize the independent Slovak State and, hence, must have also recognized the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia. The U. S., it is true, did not recognize independent Slovakia, but the Slovaks were quite certain that it would, if war did not break out for another year or two - and that is what they were praying for at that time. They were through with Benes's 'Czechoslovak" democracy then and did not want his "new Czechoslovakia" - the "people's democracy" in 1945. They are adamantly opposed to her today and will be as long as she exists! • • • CHAPTER XX - "The Little Entente and the Balkan Entente" - by Harry Nicholas Howard, Ph.D., "Professor of History, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio; Ph.D., University of California; member, Institut Balkanique (Belgrade; American contributing editor, Bibliographie Balkanique (Paris)," etc. Professor Howard, like the many other distinguished scholars who contributed chapters to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," succumbed to the charms of the Masaryk and Benes Czechs, lapped up their propaganda, then presented it as "history." The Little Entente was formed, Mr. Howard states, "in the light of such a practical philosophy" - the latter being expressed by Dr. Eduard Benes (p. 372). Of course, neither Benes nor Mr. Howard could even dare mention a cordon sanitaire against Germany! Having adopted Benes's "practical philosophy" for the formation of the Little Entente, Mr. Howard continued: " One of the keystones of the foreign policy of Czechoslovakia was the organization in 1920-1921 of the Little Entente, composed of Czechoslovakia, Jugoslavia and Rumania. Czechoslovakia played a principal and even a dominant role in the Little Entente .... Dr. Eduard Benes, as foreign minister and later as president of Czechoslovakia, was the major statesman of the Little Entente, not only within its inner circles, but in the League of Nations, and, therefore, in the councils of European diplomacy" - (p. 368). Big Socialist and little man Benes played " big" politics in the Little Entente, while Czecho-Slovakia, outside of being Benes's kingdom, meant little. The "major statesman" was �78 SLOVAKIA deflated completely by the first great crisis ·that hit CzechoSlovakia and the Little Entente. Mr. Howard knew that but he continued to ramble on: "When the great crisis came in September, 1938, it is interesting to note that both Jugoslavia, thanks to popular pressure on behalf of Czechoslovakia, and Rumania, as members of the Little Entente, rallied to the support of the harassed Republic. They remained true to their obligations, and were ready to stand to arms, as long as they had any confidence in France and Great Britain . .. Only the Munich 'Accord' of September 29-30 finally destroyed the Little Entente" - (p. 383). "The Little Entente, despite determined efforts, was unable to organize an effective, inclusive political and economic collaboration in central Europe, embracing Auslria and Hungary" - (p. 384). We are supposed to believe that without the "Munich Accord" the Little Entente would not have been destroyed, according to Mr. Howard. The Little Entente, Mr. Howard could have told us if he were honest, was just so much horse play. Why embrace only Austria and Hungary (as if Benes wanted to!) to organize effective collaboration in Central Europe, and not the rest of the countries "in that area? The fact is that after twenty years of Benes foreign policy, not a single neighboring country was really on friendly terms with Czecho-Slovakia. Jingos and chauvinists usually wear blinkers. The French (Clemenceau and Poincare), however, were not blind to the new dangers of the new distribution of power on the European Continent. When they decided to destroy Austria-Hungary, they undoubtedly were familiar with the objections to this program: their plan was to replace Austro-German and Magyar leadership on the Danube by Czech imperialism, combined with the Serbian and Rumanian brands. Years later the result was the Little Entente (Czecho-Slovakia, Rumania, Yugoslavia), "the memory of which," according to Robert Ingrim, "produces a smile an every European's lips, a smile tinged with scorn," because "you cannot square a circle, and, unlike distant Americans, people on the spot could not be persuaded to admire as progress the replacement of one mixed state by three no less mixed ones." Viscount D' Abernon, showing how Versailles had destroyed Europe's equilibrium- ("An Ambassador of Peace" - 1929), predicted: "The Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon �SLOVAKIA 79 as disturbing forces cease to operate as powerfully as today." We know that he was right. When the "big crisis" came the Little Entente, including Benes's Czecho-Slovakia, folded up. • • • CHAPTER XXI - "Hitler and Hitlerism" - by (Henry) Wickham Steed, LL.D., "Editor, London Times (19191922); correspondent, London Times, at Berlin (1896); at Rome (1897-1902); at Vienna (1902-1913); foreign editor (1914-1919); proprietor and editor, The Review of Reviews (1923-1930); educated at universities of Jena, Berlin, and Paris; LL.D., universities of Strasbourg and Cluj; Lecturer on Central European History, King's College, University of London (1925-1938); author of numerous books and articles ... ", etc. Probably no individual helped T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes - and their "CZECH cause" - as much as Mr. Steed of London, man of letters and contacts and, therefore, a man of great influence. With his valuable assistance and the backing of the "progressive" forces of Socialism and Freemasonry, Masaryk and Benes, who were political unknowns before World War I, in a very short time became "political wizards, outstanding statesmen, experts on Central Europe and Germany and Russia, and pre-eminently political philosophers." It all came about by propaganda - as did Czecho-Slovakia, the political monstrosity of Masaryk and Benes. And Mr. H. Wickham Steed was quite a propagandist for a new order in "Christian" Europe - an order divorced from things eternal, from God Himself. His attempt to help Masaryk and Benes "remake" the history of the Slovak and Czech nations to suit the pattern of "the ideas of Masaryk" is quite obvious in his chapter of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": "The Czechoslovak State had been fashioned and inspired by the ideas of Thomas G. Masaryk. . . . Masaryk looked upon that war (1914-1918) as a struggle between the ideas of the West and the ideas of Germany. The ideas of the West, he argued, are legacies of the Renaissance and the Reformation with their outcome in the English, American, and French revolutions, the parents of democra• cy. He defined democracy as an attempt to organize mankind intensively, as distinguished from the theocracy of the Holy Roman Empire which tried to organize European mankind extensively" (p. 402). �80 SLOVAKIA This probably explains why Czecho-Slovakia collapsed in 1938: the ideas of T. G. Masaryk were of themselves insufficient for the life of the nations contained within Masaryk's "CZECH" democracy. It is significant that even the Czechs did not fire a shot in the defense of Masaryk's democracy in 1938 or in 1948 ! • • • his World Revolution, Masaryk declared that there is only one remedy for abuses and defects in the life of the State truth and truthfulness, coupled with freedom to speak and to write the truth. Democracy, he insisted, should mean moral renovation in politics, in education, and throughout the whole range of public and private life" - (p. 405). "In This sounds regular, coming from an admirer and promoter of Masaryk, but the fact remains that T. G. M. often did not do as he preached. What did he say and write about the Slovaks and their country? Why did he deceive them and defraud them of the autonomy he and Benes had promised in Czecho-Slovakia? What about the "Siberian legend"? And White Mountain? Moral renovation? Based on what fundamentals? The state built by Masaryk and Benes was a fraud, because they were frauds at war with the Author of all genuine truth, justice, and morality. • • • "Peace can be founded only upon a community of free, democratic, and ethically minded peoples resolved to work together as equals in the spirit of Masaryk's faith. Hitlerism, in the broadest sense, is the foe of civilized humanity; and in nothing was Masaryk greater than in his insistance that the idea of his people must be : "Jesus, not Caesar" - (p. 408). Even if the whole world works "in the spirit of Masaryk's faith," no true and lasting peace will ever result. There was no genuine peace in Masaryk's own State. And what was the difference between Masarykism and Hitlerism? Hitler promoted German National Socialism, while Masaryk and Benes promoted CZECH National Socialism. Masarky did use the slogan "Jesus, not Caesar," but he did not live up to it, serving rather the enemies of Jesus, the Caesars of the forces of darkness. The cross of Jesus was forcefully removed from schools, the Marian Column was torn down in Prague, and the Church established by Jesus, the Roman Catholic Church, was harrassed and persecu- �SLOVAKlA 81 ted by Masaryk and his followers, who promoted the Czech National Church and shrieked: "Away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and convicted!" Democracy, Masaryk said, 'is not alone a form of State and of administration. It is a philosophy of life and an outlook upon the world" ( (p. 406). What was the ethical basis of his politics? T. G. M. said: "The ethical basis of all politics is humanity, and humanity is an international program. It is a new word for the old love of our fellow-men" (p. 406). Humanity, "the new word," was then substituted by Masaryk for the old word, God and Jesus, as the ethical basis of his politics. We know what it led to: Chaos and ruin. • • • CHAPTER XXII - "The Road to Munich and Beyond" - by Bernadotte E. Schmitt, Ph.D. , "Andrew MacLeish Distinguished Service Professor of Modern History, University of Chicago; B.A., M.A., Oxford (Rhodes Scholar from Tennessee); Ph.D., Wisconscin; Guggenheim Fellow (1927) ; Pulitzer Prize winner (1931) ; editor, Journal of Modern History, Chicago, 1929-) ," etc. This chapter, in the main, follows the usual line of the Benes Czechs: Benes was clean; the Czechs were "ready, even eager, to fight," but Great Britain and France would not let them; "IF Dr. Benes, with whom the ultimate decision rested, yielded to the demands of Britain and France, the explanation appears to be two-fold - Benes wished to spare his people the horrors of war and, then, he feared, "if Czechoslovakia fought only with Russia as an ally she would be labeled as a RED state (however preposterous that might seem) ... " As for the Slovaks: Hlinka's autonomists supported the demands of the Sudeten German Party, while the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938 "was satisfactory to the Czechs and to a majority of the Slovaks, but not to a considerable section of the German and Magyar minorities, the inclusion of whom was necessary to make the State economically viable." The truth is that the majority of the Slovaks were not satisfied with the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938. • • • CHAPTER XXIII - "Czechoslovak Democracy: Was It Worth While?" - by James T. Shotwell, Ph.D., LL.D., �82 SLOVAKIA "Bryce Professor of the History of International Relations, Columbia University . .. president League of Nations Association (1935-) ... commander, Order of the White Lion (Czechoslovak ia) ... " etc. (about a half page!). Mr. Shotwell is another of the "Masaryk-Ben es-coulddo-no-wrong" chain gang. The majority of the population of Czecho-Slovak ia was opposed to "Czechoslovak" democracy - a pseudodemoc racy - but Shotwell says it was worth while, stating categorically: "There can be no doubt that the history of Europe and of Western civilization has been immensely enriched by the philosophy and statesmanship of President Masaryk. Neither can there be any doubt that the Czechoslovak Republic has left a remarkable record in the annals of history; one which, with all its mis- takes - and they must be admitted - proved the competence of this branch of the Slavic peoples in the art and science of government" - (p. 441). The fact is, however, that the socialistic State of Czecho-Slovakia proved beyond a doubt that it does not pay to collaborate with the Soviet Union and the Reds. The world would be healthier today minus the "philosophy and statesmanship " of Masaryk who falsified and distorted Czech and Slovak history to create the political monstrosity of Czecho-Slovakia. Another of Shotwell's "facts": "His (Masaryk's) effort to teach the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson not only to his own people but to the others of east-central Europe did not wholly succeed; for the task was well-nigh impossible. The Austrian system of government under which the Czechs had lived, and still more Hungary's rule of the Slavs within its frontiers, were both far removed from the American democratic federalism, which was the basis of Masaryk's political philosophy. Although the Habsburg's had been forced to recognize the different national stocks which composed their varied empire, the bureaucracy and the army held these peoples together in a way which failed utterly to satisfy their aspirations for political self-expression. True federalism flourishes only under a regime of liberty, and that was something foreign to the Habsburg tradition" - (pp. 446-447). Masaryk's Czecho-Slovakia, however, proved that Masaryk was not interested in or impressed by "American democratic federalism." The "Czechoslova k" democratic system was as far removed from American democratic federalism as were the Austrian and Hungarian systems. The Czech bureaucracy and chauvinism of Masaryk and Benes �SLOVAKIA 83 failed utterly to satisfy the aspirations of the Slovaks and other non-Czech nations of Czecho-Slovakia for political self-expression. Twenty years of Masaryk-Benes rule in Czecho-Slovakia definitely proved that true liberty was more foreign to the Masaryk and Benes regimes than it was to the Habsburgs, hence, the seed of federalism was not even planted by them. Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be patterned after Switzerland or the United States, but the fact is that she was not. (The End.) • • • THE SLOVAKS WERE THERE : MAJOR JOHN L. POLERECKY FOUGHT FOR AMERICA'S INDEPENDENCE In 1781, when the defeated army of Cornwallis surrendered its arms to General George Washington at Yorktown, Va., among the "French Hussars" who encircled the defeated, as the ceremony of "surrendering arms" took place, was a son of Slovakia, Major John L. Polerecky, whose father hailed from Polerieka, Turiec Province, Slovakia. The story of John Polerecky's participation in the American Revolution for the independence of America was unfolded by Dr. Joseph Cincik, Ph.D., professor of history and art, Cleveland, Ohio, and a member of the Slovak Institute there. Mr. Cincik, a distant relative of Major Polerecky, spent much time and money in travel and research to gather the facts of the Polerecky story. When the complete story of Polerecky is published, it will be fully documented with photocopies of original documents from Slovakia, France, and the National Archives in Washington, D. C. What is presented here is from a portion of Dr. Cincik's manuscript on Major Polerecky. When Francis Rakoczy of Hungary revolted against the Habsburgs and lost, he was forced to flee for his life in 1711. He fled to Poland and later made his way to France. Rakoczy was not through with his fight against Vienna, and Louis XIV was happy to accept his services when he offered them to him in 1713. Rakoczy was ac- � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 69 Mr. Secretary, and Mr. Ambassador, your personal as well as official support. As loyal sons and daughters of this great Republic, we beseech God's blessings upon You and your efforts to bring about His greater honor and glory, and we convey to each of You our sincerest and warmest personal regards. In witness whereof, we have unanimously adopted the above sentiments at this historic 35th Congress at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1957, the 50th anniversary of the first enunciation of these principles by our predecessors, of happy memory, our founding fathers and the organizers of the Slovak League of America. The Memorandum Committee of the Slovak League: (Signatures) JOHN J. SIROTNAK (Pa.) JOHN J . LESKOVJANSKY (Ohio) EDWARD J. BEHUNCIK (Conn.) JOHN B. HASSAY (Ohio) ELIZABETH ANDREJKO (Pa.) PHILIP A. HROBAK, President The Slovak League of America • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.HROBAK CHAPTER XVI - "Education in a Democracy" - by Francis H . Stuerm, Ph.D.; "Member, faculty of New York University; educated in Switzerland and the United States; Ph.D., New York University; author of Training in Democracy: The New Schools of Czechoslovakia (1938), published under the auspices of the Progressive Education Association." Another "progressive" report by a "progressive" professor! Thirteen pages, all of them devoted to the Czechs (Bohemia-Moravia), except this single paragraph which contained the word "Slovakia": "One of the Republic's lar gest educational tasks was to set up a complete system of education in the provinces of Slovakia and Sub- 70 SLOVAKIA Carpathian Ruthenia. In these former had been no universities or secondary cular, and not enough primary schools teach more than half the population for provinces of Hungary there schools taught in the vernaconducted in any language to four school years" - (p. 305). How many universities and secondary schools "taught in the vernacular" there were in Slovakia twenty years after the Czechs took over, Mr. Stuerm strangely fails to disclose which in itself is quite significant. The fact is that there was only one, the Comenius University in Bratislava, and this "only one" was completely under CZECH control! • • • "When the Czechoslovak Republic took over the schools of the former provinces of Austria-Hungary from which it was formed, its CZECH citizens were already democrats through inclination and generations of training. However, this training had not been gained in the schools. The CZECHS were democratic because their former Habsburg ruler had made them classless, three centuries before, by decimating their nobility and because for generations they had learned cooperation in united opposition to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). The fact is that the "Czechoslovak Republic" did not take any schools over, but the CZECHS did and made them over in the CZECH image. "United opposition" to the Habsburgs? The historical fact is that the Czechs served the Habsburgs most loyally! The non-Czech citizens evidently were not "democratic" according to Mr. Stuerm. We know how the " democracy" of the Benes Czechs dealt with them. • • • "The Austrian schools had been developed under a central administration determined tu discipline the young people for satisfied subjection to the Habsburgs" - (p. 302). In like manner, the Czecho-Slovak schools had been developed under a central administration from Prague determined to discipline the young people of the various nations of the Republic for satisfied subjection to the Czechs. The "progressive" Czechs, however, went wide of their determination and found to their regret that young Slovaks were discipilined for dissatisfied subjection to the Czechs, upholding the principle that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Result? A greater degree of Slovak nationalism - Slovak solidarity! • • • "One of the fruits of CZECH political victories had been a continual expansion of the number of CZECH schools in which instruc- SLOVAKIA 71 tion was given in the CZECH language . .. CZECH teachers had led the empire's educators in studying and advocating innovations of method (p. 303).... After the Republic was established, (CZECH) teachers who were interested in liberalization of method soon took advantage of their newly gained freedom to make study trips abroad. They attended PROGRESSIVE schools of pedagogy and observed PROGRESSIVE teaching in the United States, Switzerland, Belgium, Denmark, England, and in the NEW RUSSIA. They returned home filled with ideas and enthusiasm (p. 304). . . . During the Republic's early years there was a young CZECH educator, dr. Vaclav Prihoda, who was studying in the United States (Chicago U.; Columbia U.). . . . and became profoundly influenced by the ideas of Dewey and Thorndike . .. (he) was appointed chairman of this governmental committee (Reform Committee at the School of Higher Pedagogical Studies) (pp. 306-307).... The CZECHS have always considered the maintenance of the national culture as a duty sacred in its importance. . . . It was this strong practical strain in the CZECH character which caused initial reluctance among the citizens to permit changes in schools which they knew were good (pp. 308-309) . . .. During the golden age of CZECH democracy under the Republic, children cooperated freely in their classroom in the singing of (Czech) patriotic songs and in the artistic speaking chorus, all which heightened their feeling of national unity (p. 311).... The emotional basis of CZECH democracy was the same inherent staying power which had maintained the nation in its precarious geographical situation since early tribal times (p. 313).. . the CZECHS had built up in their character centuries-old habits of independent individual thought and public cooperation. . . . In Austrian times, the training in the schools overlaid the CZECH'S democratic character with a surface attitude of acquiescent passivity. When the establishment of the Republic gave CZECH democracy opportunity to flourish unhampered in its action, PROGRESSIVE educators developed a new method, which gave it direct expression" (p. 314). Mr. Stuerm certainly was hep on the "progressive" CZECH business, the only thing, according to him, and others, which figured in the "CZECH democracy" of Czecho-Slovakia - in which the progressive "truth" of Masaryk-Benes prevailed. In the end "CZECH democracy" had no trouble in becoming CZECH "PEOPLE'S Democracy!" • • • CHAPTER XVII "Czechoslovakia's Contribution to Science" - by Gerald Druce, D.R.N., M.Sc.; Fellow London Chemical Society (1915-) ; Fellow Institute of Chemistry (1925-) ; honorary and foreign member Masaryk Academy of Work (1928-) ; M.Sc., University of London; D.R.N., Charles University, Prague; authority on CZECH science; author of books and articles, among them: Wan- 72 SL'.) VAKIA derings in Czechoslovakia (1930) In the Heart of Europe - Life in Czechoslovakia (1936). Another misnomered chapter which should be entitled: CZECH contribution to science. The very first sentence of Mr. Druce's contribution to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" has no historical basis in fact; in it he claims that "the Czechoslovak State REGAINED its independence in 1918" - the ridiculous story the Benes Czechs promoted and still propagate. The "Czecho-Slovak State" never existed until 1918 ! A few samplings for the edification of historians interested in the history of the Slovaks and Czechs: " . ... contemporary mineralogical and alchemical works in the CZECH language . .. the greatest CZECH educator, Comenius ... the CZECH national revival . . . The National Museum . . . widened its scope to become a rallying point of all CZECH culture .... Purkyne lectured in CZECH ... CZECH men of science ... distinguished CZECH chemists ... CZECH scientific literature . . . Modern scientific and technical works in CZECH . .. . It was in the biological sciences that CZECH men of science made noteworthy advances a century ago . .. . Count Kaspar Sternberg ... was a patron of CZECH science at the time of the national awakening .. . ." The CZECH men of science get all the play; General Milan Stefanik, "the Slovak astronomer," was the only Slovak to rate - one sentence! The "selected Bibliography" at the end of the chapter is strictly CZECH. So, "Czechoslovakia's Contributions to Science" really winds up to be: CZECH contributions to science - according to the formula of the Benes Czechs. • • • CHAPTER XVIII - "Czechoslovak Music, Art, and by Jaroslav E. Vojan, J.D.; "President, Literature" Bohemian Arts Club (1912-); J.D., Charles University, Prague; Professor of Economics, College of Commerce, Prague (1899); editor, NEW CZECH Review (Prague, 1903-1904) ; editor, Svojan, (1928-) ; editor, Free Czechoslovakia (1939-) ; author of Czech-American Epistles (1910) ... " As one might suspect, in this chapter, too, just about everything "Czechoslovak" means "CZECH": composers, artists, sculptors, writers, poets, et al. Slovaks, however, rate a bit better than they did in the previous chapter (by SLOVAKIA 73 Druce): Mr. Vojan generously allows them three sentences in a total of 18 pages ! • • • CHAPTER XIX - "Diplomatic Origins and Foreign Policy" - by Felix J. Vondracek, Ph.D.; "Professor of European History University of North Dakota; Ph.D. , Columbia University; author of "The Foreign Policy of Czechoslovakia (1937) ." "The best efforts of a vigilant Austro-Hungarian police and spy system had not been able to prevent patriotic Czechoslovaks in the homelands from communicating with the exiles through the efficient (Czech) 'Maffia' organization. Both groups of patriots well knew that success could be attained only through cooperation" (pp. 349-350). Professor Vondracek, like other Benes Czechs and their hired propagandists, promotes the false thesis of a "united CZECHOSLOVAK nation." What "patriotic Czechoslovaks" at a time when the Republic of Czecho-Slovakia did not exist? Why then talk about "both groups" of patriots? Who were the "SLOVAK patriots" who communicated with the CZECH exiles (Masaryk and Benes) through the CZECH "MAFFIA"? We know that most Slovak patriots and many CZECH patriots knew practically nothing about what Masaryk and Benes were cooking up for them in exile. Masaryk and Benes themselves figured that the fewer Slovak and Czech "patriots" in on their plan, the better the chances for the success of their CZECH cause, promoted under the guise of a "CZECHOSLOVAK" cause. Mr. Vondracek, CZECH "expert" on CZECHO-SLOVAK diplomacy and foreign policy, hinted at this when he said: "The efforts of the predominantly CZECH revolutionary leaders in Paris and Prague were supported by other Slavic groups" (p. 350). Of course, Mr. Vondracek very conveniently forgot to spell out the "other Slavic groups" who really knew something about the efforts of Benes, Masaryk, and the CZECH "Maffia" at that time . "On June • • • 30, 1918, American-CZECH and American-SLOVAK leaders in the United States signed the DECLARATION OF PITTSBURGH, whereby, in the Czechoslovakia-to-be, THE SLOVAK PEO- 74 SLOVAKIA PLE WERE GUARANTEED THEIR OWN ASSEMBLY, COURTS, AND ADMINISTRATION. Similarly, by the D'l!daration of Turcian• sky Sv. Martin, signed on October 30, the :ilovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the new State" - (p . 350). The Pittsburgh Convention or Agree!nent was drafted and signed by T. G. Masaryk and representatives of American Slovak and Czech organizations on May 30, 1918 - and not on JUNE 30, 1918 (See Chapter IX above). It is significant that :M:r. Vondracek fails to mention the historic:11 fact tha: Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Conver.tion, calling it but a "scrap of paper." And note th:1t the 'Slovaks in the homeland associated themselves with the ~ew State" TWO DAYS AFTER the Prague declaration of independence! This is evidence of how much "Slovak patriots" really knew about what was cooking in the CZECH kitchen of Masaryk and Benes! • • • "At the termination of the war, Cechoslovak forces totaled 182,000 men, of which number 12,000 were serving in France, 78,000 in Italy, and 92,000 in Russia. The last of these armies had been particularly valuable to the Allies" - (p. 351). The figures are undoubtedly based on CZECH mathematics authored by the Benes Czechs, which is based on the principle of at least "doubling" numbers in such cases. And the fact is that the "Czechoslovak forces" in Russia were not at all valuable to the Allies since they refused to follow their orders. Masaryk conjured the "Siberian rabbit" out of his black felt hat to create a favorable impression in America. Czechs and pro-Czechs love to indulge in the legend cooked up by Masaryk. But the truth is something else again. "The Czechs," Robert Ingrim tells us ("After Hitler Stalin?"), "were offered the 'short route' to France, via Murmansk and Archangel, but they preferred the long way via Siberia to Vladivostok. . . . They were not interested in fighting the Bolsheviks or anyone else. . . . Their policy was, as their spokesman said, 'the railroad and to go home'.... They did very little fighting, and when the Reds had overcome their initial disorganization and had become a serious military force, the Czechs withdrew eastward." Just how the "Czechoslovak army performed for the Allies services more valuable than the same forces could SLOVAKIA 75 have rendered in France ... through control of the Volga area and the Transsiberian Railway," Mr. Vondracek does · not explain. We know that Masaryk and Benes did not want their Czech legions in Siberia to fight the Bolsheviks. We also know that the Allies insisted that "the Czechs stop their retreat and support the Regent," Admiral Koltschak, supreme commander of the anti-Bolshevik forces - "otherwise they would not get ships over the Pacific." The Czechs yielded to this threat reluctantly, but when the Reds had shown their superiority, "the Czechs helped them capture the admiral"! Mr. Vondracek, in typical Czech fashion, tells us, however, that: "Enmeshed in the Russian domestic chaos, and forced to continue the struggle against the Bolsheviks after the World War had terminated, the Czechoslovak Legions became unwilling tools of a French and British diplomacy that wished to keep them in Siberia indefinitely." Why British and French diplomacy really wanted to keep the "Czechoslovak" Legions in Siberia INDEFINITELY, Mr. Vondracek does not say. We know, however, for that British and, particularly, French diplomacy which Masaryk and Benes became WILLING TOOLS had very much to do with the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. • • • How Benes felt about the Soviet Union is, surprisingly, factually reported by Mr. Vondracek (pp. 356-362): "Benes was a pioneer in advocating the recognition of Soviet Russia long before public opinion either in Czechoslovakia or elsewhere in Europe became converted to such a step." The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia was Dr. Eduard Benes, and Benes, a thorough Socialist, was completely pro-Soviet and for the socialistic system of the U. S. S. R. His policy led to the logical conclusion we all witnessed after the war (1945-1948): a complete surrender to Communism. Benes and Masaryk undoubtedly persuaded their people, the Czechs, to recognize Soviet Russia, but they certainly could not persuade the Slovaks to do so. The Slovak nation, as a whole, remained faithful to its thoroughly Christian tradition, opposing collaboration with the godless forces of the Soviet Union to the very bitter end. 76 SLOVAKIA The Munich debacle is treated in the typical fashion of the Benes Czechs by Mr. Vondracek: Benes and his Czechs were above reproach; the culprits were Britain, France, the Germans, the Slovaks, Poles, Magyars, and Ruthenes (pp. 364-366). "Faced with the ruin of his life's work, Benes wisely resigned and went into voluntary exile," Mr. Vondracek says tersely, but nary a word that Benes had surrendered his country to Hitler without consulting parliament and thereby had incurred the just wrath of both Slovaks and Czechs, who probably would have hung him had he not fled to England. The fact is that Benes was a coward; the surrender of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, without consulting the representatives of the nations concerned, was criminal. The Benes Czechs did not and still do not want the world to know the truth why Benes did capitulate to Hitler. Robert Ingrim, however, hit the nail on the head when he said: "The allegation that the Czechs surrendered without firing a shot, because England and France asked them to do so, is purely fictitious. They chose to surrender 'at the behest of their faithless friends,' because an attempt to fight would have revealed to the world that the German-Slovak-Magyar-Polish-Ruthenian majority of the population was not prepared to die for a State that had treated them as second-class citizens." • • • After Hitler attacked Poland, Great Britain and France declared war on Germany, and World War II was on, "for which," Mr. Vondracek says, "many CZECHOSLOVAKS had been praying as their one hope of salvation after Munich." But this is only Mr. Vondracek's opinion and not fact. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Slovaks did not pray for war but for peace. Mr. Vondracek has no proof to offer that even many Czechs, the majority of whom, we are told, are Catholics, prayed for war either. And he undoubtedly knew that the Slovak Republic, after the legal autonomous Slovak Government had declared Slovakia an independent State (March 14, 1939), was recognized DE JURE and./or DE FACTO by twenty-seven states, yet, in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," he chose to write the following historical lie: "The Czechoslovak Republic continued to exist de jure, if not de facto. The United States, Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia and Poland in particular had not recognized the annexation by Germany". SLOVAKIA 77 The historical truth is that Great Britain, France, Soviet Russia, as well as Poland (until Hitler attacked it, September 1, 1939) - and twenty-three other countries - did recognize the independent Slovak State and, hence, must have also recognized the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia. The U. S., it is true, did not recognize independent Slovakia, but the Slovaks were quite certain that it would, if war did not break out for another year or two - and that is what they were praying for at that time. They were through with Benes's 'Czechoslovak" democracy then and did not want his "new Czechoslovakia" - the "people's democracy" in 1945. They are adamantly opposed to her today and will be as long as she exists! • • • CHAPTER XX - "The Little Entente and the Balkan Entente" - by Harry Nicholas Howard, Ph.D., "Professor of History, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio; Ph.D., University of California; member, Institut Balkanique (Belgrade; American contributing editor, Bibliographie Balkanique (Paris)," etc. Professor Howard, like the many other distinguished scholars who contributed chapters to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," succumbed to the charms of the Masaryk and Benes Czechs, lapped up their propaganda, then presented it as "history." The Little Entente was formed, Mr. Howard states, "in the light of such a practical philosophy" - the latter being expressed by Dr. Eduard Benes (p. 372). Of course, neither Benes nor Mr. Howard could even dare mention a cordon sanitaire against Germany! Having adopted Benes's "practical philosophy" for the formation of the Little Entente, Mr. Howard continued: " One of the keystones of the foreign policy of Czechoslovakia was the organization in 1920-1921 of the Little Entente, composed of Czechoslovakia, Jugoslavia and Rumania. Czechoslovakia played a principal and even a dominant role in the Little Entente .... Dr. Eduard Benes, as foreign minister and later as president of Czechoslovakia, was the major statesman of the Little Entente, not only within its inner circles, but in the League of Nations, and, therefore, in the councils of European diplomacy" - (p. 368). Big Socialist and little man Benes played " big" politics in the Little Entente, while Czecho-Slovakia, outside of being Benes's kingdom, meant little. The "major statesman" was 78 SLOVAKIA deflated completely by the first great crisis ·that hit CzechoSlovakia and the Little Entente. Mr. Howard knew that but he continued to ramble on: "When the great crisis came in September, 1938, it is interesting to note that both Jugoslavia, thanks to popular pressure on behalf of Czechoslovakia, and Rumania, as members of the Little Entente, rallied to the support of the harassed Republic. They remained true to their obligations, and were ready to stand to arms, as long as they had any confidence in France and Great Britain . .. Only the Munich 'Accord' of September 29-30 finally destroyed the Little Entente" - (p. 383). "The Little Entente, despite determined efforts, was unable to organize an effective, inclusive political and economic collaboration in central Europe, embracing Auslria and Hungary" - (p. 384). We are supposed to believe that without the "Munich Accord" the Little Entente would not have been destroyed, according to Mr. Howard. The Little Entente, Mr. Howard could have told us if he were honest, was just so much horse play. Why embrace only Austria and Hungary (as if Benes wanted to!) to organize effective collaboration in Central Europe, and not the rest of the countries "in that area? The fact is that after twenty years of Benes foreign policy, not a single neighboring country was really on friendly terms with Czecho-Slovakia. Jingos and chauvinists usually wear blinkers. The French (Clemenceau and Poincare), however, were not blind to the new dangers of the new distribution of power on the European Continent. When they decided to destroy Austria-Hungary, they undoubtedly were familiar with the objections to this program: their plan was to replace Austro-German and Magyar leadership on the Danube by Czech imperialism, combined with the Serbian and Rumanian brands. Years later the result was the Little Entente (Czecho-Slovakia, Rumania, Yugoslavia), "the memory of which," according to Robert Ingrim, "produces a smile an every European's lips, a smile tinged with scorn," because "you cannot square a circle, and, unlike distant Americans, people on the spot could not be persuaded to admire as progress the replacement of one mixed state by three no less mixed ones." Viscount D' Abernon, showing how Versailles had destroyed Europe's equilibrium- ("An Ambassador of Peace" - 1929), predicted: "The Czech satellite will revert to the orbit of the Moscow planet as soon SLOVAKIA 79 as disturbing forces cease to operate as powerfully as today." We know that he was right. When the "big crisis" came the Little Entente, including Benes's Czecho-Slovakia, folded up. • • • CHAPTER XXI - "Hitler and Hitlerism" - by (Henry) Wickham Steed, LL.D., "Editor, London Times (19191922); correspondent, London Times, at Berlin (1896); at Rome (1897-1902); at Vienna (1902-1913); foreign editor (1914-1919); proprietor and editor, The Review of Reviews (1923-1930); educated at universities of Jena, Berlin, and Paris; LL.D., universities of Strasbourg and Cluj; Lecturer on Central European History, King's College, University of London (1925-1938); author of numerous books and articles ... ", etc. Probably no individual helped T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes - and their "CZECH cause" - as much as Mr. Steed of London, man of letters and contacts and, therefore, a man of great influence. With his valuable assistance and the backing of the "progressive" forces of Socialism and Freemasonry, Masaryk and Benes, who were political unknowns before World War I, in a very short time became "political wizards, outstanding statesmen, experts on Central Europe and Germany and Russia, and pre-eminently political philosophers." It all came about by propaganda - as did Czecho-Slovakia, the political monstrosity of Masaryk and Benes. And Mr. H. Wickham Steed was quite a propagandist for a new order in "Christian" Europe - an order divorced from things eternal, from God Himself. His attempt to help Masaryk and Benes "remake" the history of the Slovak and Czech nations to suit the pattern of "the ideas of Masaryk" is quite obvious in his chapter of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": "The Czechoslovak State had been fashioned and inspired by the ideas of Thomas G. Masaryk. . . . Masaryk looked upon that war (1914-1918) as a struggle between the ideas of the West and the ideas of Germany. The ideas of the West, he argued, are legacies of the Renaissance and the Reformation with their outcome in the English, American, and French revolutions, the parents of democra• cy. He defined democracy as an attempt to organize mankind intensively, as distinguished from the theocracy of the Holy Roman Empire which tried to organize European mankind extensively" (p. 402). 80 SLOVAKIA This probably explains why Czecho-Slovakia collapsed in 1938: the ideas of T. G. Masaryk were of themselves insufficient for the life of the nations contained within Masaryk's "CZECH" democracy. It is significant that even the Czechs did not fire a shot in the defense of Masaryk's democracy in 1938 or in 1948 ! • • • his World Revolution, Masaryk declared that there is only one remedy for abuses and defects in the life of the State truth and truthfulness, coupled with freedom to speak and to write the truth. Democracy, he insisted, should mean moral renovation in politics, in education, and throughout the whole range of public and private life" - (p. 405). "In This sounds regular, coming from an admirer and promoter of Masaryk, but the fact remains that T. G. M. often did not do as he preached. What did he say and write about the Slovaks and their country? Why did he deceive them and defraud them of the autonomy he and Benes had promised in Czecho-Slovakia? What about the "Siberian legend"? And White Mountain? Moral renovation? Based on what fundamentals? The state built by Masaryk and Benes was a fraud, because they were frauds at war with the Author of all genuine truth, justice, and morality. • • • "Peace can be founded only upon a community of free, democratic, and ethically minded peoples resolved to work together as equals in the spirit of Masaryk's faith. Hitlerism, in the broadest sense, is the foe of civilized humanity; and in nothing was Masaryk greater than in his insistance that the idea of his people must be : "Jesus, not Caesar" - (p. 408). Even if the whole world works "in the spirit of Masaryk's faith," no true and lasting peace will ever result. There was no genuine peace in Masaryk's own State. And what was the difference between Masarykism and Hitlerism? Hitler promoted German National Socialism, while Masaryk and Benes promoted CZECH National Socialism. Masarky did use the slogan "Jesus, not Caesar," but he did not live up to it, serving rather the enemies of Jesus, the Caesars of the forces of darkness. The cross of Jesus was forcefully removed from schools, the Marian Column was torn down in Prague, and the Church established by Jesus, the Roman Catholic Church, was harrassed and persecu- SLOVAKlA 81 ted by Masaryk and his followers, who promoted the Czech National Church and shrieked: "Away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and convicted!" Democracy, Masaryk said, 'is not alone a form of State and of administration. It is a philosophy of life and an outlook upon the world" ( (p. 406). What was the ethical basis of his politics? T. G. M. said: "The ethical basis of all politics is humanity, and humanity is an international program. It is a new word for the old love of our fellow-men" (p. 406). Humanity, "the new word," was then substituted by Masaryk for the old word, God and Jesus, as the ethical basis of his politics. We know what it led to: Chaos and ruin. • • • CHAPTER XXII - "The Road to Munich and Beyond" - by Bernadotte E. Schmitt, Ph.D. , "Andrew MacLeish Distinguished Service Professor of Modern History, University of Chicago; B.A., M.A., Oxford (Rhodes Scholar from Tennessee); Ph.D., Wisconscin; Guggenheim Fellow (1927) ; Pulitzer Prize winner (1931) ; editor, Journal of Modern History, Chicago, 1929-) ," etc. This chapter, in the main, follows the usual line of the Benes Czechs: Benes was clean; the Czechs were "ready, even eager, to fight," but Great Britain and France would not let them; "IF Dr. Benes, with whom the ultimate decision rested, yielded to the demands of Britain and France, the explanation appears to be two-fold - Benes wished to spare his people the horrors of war and, then, he feared, "if Czechoslovakia fought only with Russia as an ally she would be labeled as a RED state (however preposterous that might seem) ... " As for the Slovaks: Hlinka's autonomists supported the demands of the Sudeten German Party, while the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938 "was satisfactory to the Czechs and to a majority of the Slovaks, but not to a considerable section of the German and Magyar minorities, the inclusion of whom was necessary to make the State economically viable." The truth is that the majority of the Slovaks were not satisfied with the Czecho-Slovakia of 1918-1938. • • • CHAPTER XXIII - "Czechoslovak Democracy: Was It Worth While?" - by James T. Shotwell, Ph.D., LL.D., 82 SLOVAKIA "Bryce Professor of the History of International Relations, Columbia University . .. president League of Nations Association (1935-) ... commander, Order of the White Lion (Czechoslovak ia) ... " etc. (about a half page!). Mr. Shotwell is another of the "Masaryk-Ben es-coulddo-no-wrong" chain gang. The majority of the population of Czecho-Slovak ia was opposed to "Czechoslovak" democracy - a pseudodemoc racy - but Shotwell says it was worth while, stating categorically: "There can be no doubt that the history of Europe and of Western civilization has been immensely enriched by the philosophy and statesmanship of President Masaryk. Neither can there be any doubt that the Czechoslovak Republic has left a remarkable record in the annals of history; one which, with all its mis- takes - and they must be admitted - proved the competence of this branch of the Slavic peoples in the art and science of government" - (p. 441). The fact is, however, that the socialistic State of Czecho-Slovakia proved beyond a doubt that it does not pay to collaborate with the Soviet Union and the Reds. The world would be healthier today minus the "philosophy and statesmanship " of Masaryk who falsified and distorted Czech and Slovak history to create the political monstrosity of Czecho-Slovakia. Another of Shotwell's "facts": "His (Masaryk's) effort to teach the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson not only to his own people but to the others of east-central Europe did not wholly succeed; for the task was well-nigh impossible. The Austrian system of government under which the Czechs had lived, and still more Hungary's rule of the Slavs within its frontiers, were both far removed from the American democratic federalism, which was the basis of Masaryk's political philosophy. Although the Habsburg's had been forced to recognize the different national stocks which composed their varied empire, the bureaucracy and the army held these peoples together in a way which failed utterly to satisfy their aspirations for political self-expression. True federalism flourishes only under a regime of liberty, and that was something foreign to the Habsburg tradition" - (pp. 446-447). Masaryk's Czecho-Slovakia, however, proved that Masaryk was not interested in or impressed by "American democratic federalism." The "Czechoslova k" democratic system was as far removed from American democratic federalism as were the Austrian and Hungarian systems. The Czech bureaucracy and chauvinism of Masaryk and Benes SLOVAKIA 83 failed utterly to satisfy the aspirations of the Slovaks and other non-Czech nations of Czecho-Slovakia for political self-expression. Twenty years of Masaryk-Benes rule in Czecho-Slovakia definitely proved that true liberty was more foreign to the Masaryk and Benes regimes than it was to the Habsburgs, hence, the seed of federalism was not even planted by them. Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be patterned after Switzerland or the United States, but the fact is that she was not. (The End.) • • • THE SLOVAKS WERE THERE : MAJOR JOHN L. POLERECKY FOUGHT FOR AMERICA'S INDEPENDENCE In 1781, when the defeated army of Cornwallis surrendered its arms to General George Washington at Yorktown, Va., among the "French Hussars" who encircled the defeated, as the ceremony of "surrendering arms" took place, was a son of Slovakia, Major John L. Polerecky, whose father hailed from Polerieka, Turiec Province, Slovakia. The story of John Polerecky's participation in the American Revolution for the independence of America was unfolded by Dr. Joseph Cincik, Ph.D., professor of history and art, Cleveland, Ohio, and a member of the Slovak Institute there. Mr. Cincik, a distant relative of Major Polerecky, spent much time and money in travel and research to gather the facts of the Polerecky story. When the complete story of Polerecky is published, it will be fully documented with photocopies of original documents from Slovakia, France, and the National Archives in Washington, D. C. What is presented here is from a portion of Dr. Cincik's manuscript on Major Polerecky. When Francis Rakoczy of Hungary revolted against the Habsburgs and lost, he was forced to flee for his life in 1711. He fled to Poland and later made his way to France. Rakoczy was not through with his fight against Vienna, and Louis XIV was happy to accept his services when he offered them to him in 1713. Rakoczy was ac-  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (8/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), September-December 1957 pp. 69-83 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 September-December 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/242">Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), pp. 52-57</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2ec1d8d8e06dc222f3bc60fea84e770e.pdf c4d0ffaba97ff359ac0b327c65bede8a PDF Text Text 57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at- �58 SLOVAKIA tacks of Magyar hordes, could not take possesion of Slovakia, and the nomadic Magyars did not establish any kind of state for quite some time. The Slovaks, then, lost their state, but did not lose or abandon the country which they already had occupied for several centuries and, therefore, regarded it as their own homeland. The Slovaks retreated gradually from the open valleys near the Danube and the Tisa rivers to the North and settled in the hilly areas of Slovakia where they were relatively safe. Slovak geographical names along the banks of the Danube and 'l'isa show how far the land of the Slovaks extended in the tenth century. Despite all the calamities that befell Slovakia, her people preserved itself on her soil. At the foot of mountains, in the extensive valleys and deep gorges of Slovakland, that people safeguard€d its language, its time-honored customs and its Slovanic nature. The people of Slovakia did not mingle with other nations and, therefore, did not succumb to foreign influences. At the beginning of the tenth century, when the Slovak nation lost its political independence, Slovakia had behind it a full century of cultural development which began during the reign of Prince Pribina. Christian culture, which came to the Slovaks from Bavarian Passau (Pasov), Regensburg (Rezno), and Salzburg (Sol'nohrad) and met with the Christian culture of Byzantium, sank such deep roots in Slovakia that it sprea:d from the Slovaks, with the help of Slovak princes and priests, even to the neighboring nations. And this Christian culture outlived the fall of Great Moravia, became the permanent heritage of the Slovak nation, and gave the Slovaks a cultural and moral precedence over their eastern conquerors. With this heritage the Slovak nation placed itself firmly and for all time among the cultured nations of Europe. Even at the height of Magyar aggression, the ecclesiactical organization of Slovakland did not vanish completely. Nitra continued to be the center of religious life .Jt is possible that even after Wiching's death the bishopric was preserved in Nitra, and it is probable that even the Zobor monastery, in which, according to legend, King Sva- �SLOVAKIA 59 topluk died, survived all storms and was the center of Christian culture in the tenth century. The rulers of Great Moravia established in Slovakia a good state organization along western lines. The whole country was divided into smaller districts, called counties ("zupy" or "stolice"), which were governed by commissioners ("zupani"), who resided in castles or citadels ("hrady"). Some of these counties constituted a geographical unit with natural boundries and undoubtedly originated from territories of tribal ,principalities. These counties retained their .significance even after the fall of Great Moravia. The most ancient Slovak castles or citadels, which served as places of refuge for inhabitants of the respective counties, date from this period. The Slovaks had been farmers and husbandmen for several centuries and, therefore, knew how to till the soil and raise livestock. Besides the old . Slovanic art, which they brought from their old home beyond, the Carpathian Mountains, they lean1ed new trades from their neighbors, as is attested to by relics found in old Slovak castles and graves. The people of Slovakia did business with their neighbors; foreign merchants frequently came into Slovakia, bringing with them various commodities, and established places of business beneath the walls of Slovak citadels where marketplaces sprang up in the ninth and tenth centuries. The Slovak nation, therefore, possessed all the prerequisites to live in its own country even without a state of its own. SLOVAKIA ANN E XED BY HU N GA R Y Two states originated in the tenth century on the territory which once belonged under the rule of King Svatopluk: the Czech State in the west, and the Hungarian State in the east. These states, heirs to Great Moravia, developed gradually over the years. About fifteen various Czech tribes inhabited the territory known as Bohemia, which were being united under the rule of the princes of the Pfemysl clan. Prague became the main stronghold of Bohemia in the tenth century. The Pfemysl rulers broke with the Moravian kingdom soon after Svatopluk's death, recognized the supremacy of the �60 SLOVAKIA German empire, accepted Christianity, and began to build a united state on both banks of the Vltava river. Eventually the Czech nation evolved from the union of these tribes in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. One of the outstanding rulers of early Bohemia was Saint Wenceslaus (920-929 A.D.), who concerned himself with consolidating Christianity and living in peace with the Germans to spare his country and nation from a catastrophe that would have resulted from a war with them. Wenceslaus' friendly attitude with the Germans made his. brother Boleslav furious. His plan to put Wenceslaus out of the way was successful, and Boleslav took 9ver the reigns of government after Wenceslaus' murder. But even Boleslav had to yield to the Germans and pay them annual tribute. Succeeding Czech rulers also recognized their dependency on the German empire and helped the German emperors in their frequent wars with their neighbors. The Czech ruler Borivoj was baptized by St. Methodius during King Svatopluk's reign. When St. Methodius died, many of the Slovanic priests persecuted by Svatopluk escaped from Great Moravia into Bohemia. Thus it happened that the Slovanic liturgy was spread throughout Bohemia where it was used along with the Latin liturgy in the tenth century. Among the Slovanic priests who spread Christianity in Bohemia were also a number of Slovaks. It is very likely that Gorazd, successor to St. Methodius, lived in Bohemia and continued in the work which he was forced to abandon in Slovakia. Thus it was that the young Czech state became heir to the territory and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. In the second half of the tenth century the Czech rulers succeeded in uniting all the Czech tribes to build up a comparatively strong state, which--even though dependent on the German empire-made its own expeditions into neighboring countries and extended its boundaries eastward. In 973 A. D. a bishopric was established in Prague, which helped to unify and strenghten the Czech state. But the Hungarian state - which in the later half of the tenth century gradually developed on the territories once ruled by Prince Pribina and his son Kocel (Transda- �SLO\'AK!A 61 nubia)-also became partial heir to Svatopluk's empire and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. The new state inherited not only the lands once governed by the Slovak rulers, but also the culture which had been developed in those lands during the reign of Slovak rulers. The builders of this new state became the Magyars who settled in the fertile Transdanubian territory of Pannonia at the close of the ninth century, after the wild Huns and the bellicose Avars had abandoned the territory. The Magyars were of Turkish-Tartar (Mongolian) origin. Their ancient homeland was somewhere in southern Russia, north of the Black Sea. Like other nations of those times, the Magyars, too, were divided into several tribes until Arpad united them. Because they were exposed to frequent attacks of wild nomadic tribes, the Magyar tribes near the Black Sea began to migrate westward. Under Arpad's leadership they crossed the Carpathian Mountains and, during Svatopluk's reign in Great Moravia, conquered Pannonia, whence they menaced all neighboring nations. The Magyars fought on the side of the Germans against Svatopluk and Mojmir II and, therefore, contributed to the downfall of the Great Moravian Empire at the opening of the tenth century. Nomadic and bellicose in their habits, the Magyars spent most of their lives in the saddle. They were renowned horsemen who specialized in surprise raids on their neighbors. Their swift cavalry units pierced far into foreign lands, swooped down upon rich towns and monasteries to raid them and then, laden with spoils, returned to their encampments. They destroyed whatever they could not haul away. Like all nomads they avoided hard work, spent their time in roisterous living, ate raw meat, drank soured mare's milk, shaved most of their heads and braided the rest of their hair into queues. The Magyars were exceptionally bold and cruel. Their depredatory expeditions took them into the Balkan states, Italy and France, but they looted Germany more often than any other European country. The Magyars suffered a serious setback in 955, when King Otto crushed their forces near Augsburg. Otto's army �62 SLOVAKIA also had a well equipped Czech division. Most of the Magyar invaders perished in battle, but many drowned in the river Lech. After this catastrophe, the Magyars abandoned their predatory expeditions and changed their manner of living. To save themselves they had to settle down and live in peace with the nE:ighbors. In time the adventurous warriors became shepherds and farmers who learned to till the soil from their Slovanic neighbors. Bavarian missionaries came to the Magyars to instruct them in the Christian faith with which they already had become acquainted through their Slovanic neighbors. At the same time missionaries came also from the East so that the currents of western and eastern culture met on the territory of the rising state of Hungary. But Christianity took hold with difficulty among th Magyars who, by their very nature, did not know how to orientate themselves ot Christian teaching. At the close of the tenth century, St. Adalbert, Bishop of Prague, came to Hungary and labored vlith his band of missionaries to convert the Magyars to Christianity. At that time Hungary was ruled by Geza (972-997), who was building a new state in the territory of Pribina's and Kocel's principality. Geza already was a Christian, but still followed many pagan customs. His son Vajk took the name of Stephen at baptism and very zealously continued in the work of consolidating Christianity and building the Hungarian State. The nucleus of the political organization of the Hungarian State was Pannonia, the country which already during the reign of the Slovak princes in the ninth century had played a prominent role in the political and cultural history of central Europe. Slovakia, however, became the nucleus of the ecclesiastical organization of Hungary. It was the same Slovakia which already from the times of Pribina was a Christian country, the land which already during the reign of King Svatopluk had its own bishop and which, at the beginning of the 11th century, became the territory of the first and most significant Hungarian archbishopric, that of Ostrihom (Esztergom). The greater part of the territory, inhabited from time �SLOVAKIA 63 immemorial by the Slovaks, lying east of the Moravia river and north of the Danube, namely, Slovakia, became a part of the Hungarian state sometime at the end of the tenth .and the beginning of the eleventh century. But the western part of the Slovak land, which extended along the central flow of the Moravian river - from which it received its name Moravia (Morava)- seceded from Slovakia during those turbulant times. After losing its independence and a part of its territory, the Slovak nation, pressed on all sides by its stronger neighbors, did not have sufficient space to increase numerically and use all its energy to contribute to the building of its own life. Under such conditions the Slovaks remained a small nation, but even as such, they did not perish amidst the turbulant currents of history which swept over their country for long centuries. Into the new state, which was to be the home of the Slovak people for almost a thousand years, the Slovaks brought everything they had inherited from the times of their state independence. First of all, they excelled over the rest of the nations living in Hungary with their Christian culture. As has been frequently demonstrated in history, so even in this case it was proven tha.t a nation's culture is far more important than its numerical strength and military might. Slovakia, with the remnants of her ecclesiastical organization and state administration from the times of her political independence, preserved her individual status even in the new state of Hungary. After Slovakland was annexed to Hungary, it played a significant role in the building of the new state. This role was especially useful during the formation of international relations between Hungary and the German Empire, Bohemia and Poland, and in the building of internal relationships within the Hungarian state as well. When Hungary was on friendly terms with her western and northern neighbors, Slovakia served as a bridge for making friendly contacts. However, when Hungary was at odds with her neighbors, Slovakia became the battlefield on which issues were settled. The armies of the German Emperor, who wanted to establish his rule over Hun- �64 SLOVAKIA gary, the Czech armies which helped the German Emperor, and the army of the Polish king who became unfriendly with the Hungarian ruler, often tore into Slovakia, devastated the land and killed its people. At the very beginning of the 11th century, St. Stephen of Hungary quarreled with the mighty Polish ruler, Boleslaw the Brave (Chrabry). Polish troops invaded Hungary and occupied the whole of Slovakia as far as the Danube. The Polish occupation of Slovakia, however, was shortlived, because Boleslaw had other wars on his hands at that time and, therefore, was glad to give up Slovakia and conclude a peace pact with King St. Stephen. St. Stephen was an outstanding ruler ; he vanquished his enemies and, by propagating Christianity, fought against the paganism which still prevailed among the Magyars. He founded several Episcopal Sees and monasteries in order to strengthen the unity of the Hungarian State with the aid of ecclesiastical organizations. But pagan chieftains in the southern and eastern regions of his domain revolted against the zealous Christian king. During these crises Stephen found aid and succor in Slovakia. The Slovak magnates Hunt and Poznan gave the King military aid against the pagan rebels and helped to safeguard the integrity of the Hungarian State and Christianity in the Danube basin. Stephen, aware of the fact that various nations inhabited the territory of the Hungarian State, wanted each nation to regard Hungary as its homeland. He trained his son and successor Emery accordingly, that he, too, might rule wisely and justly all the nations of his kingdom. To St. Stephen is ascribed the dictum: A state with only one language is weak. (To be continued) • • • WHO SAID IT? "Some pussy-footing ostriches criticirze the treaty between Soviet Russia aind Ozeohoslovakia. Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do not want anything from the Russia,ns e~cept protection frOiID the Germruns, and the Russians want nothlrng whatsoever from us." - (Jan Masaryk, BUSINESS WEEK, May 13, 1944). � 57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at- �58 SLOVAKIA tacks of Magyar hordes, could not take possesion of Slovakia, and the nomadic Magyars did not establish any kind of state for quite some time. The Slovaks, then, lost their state, but did not lose or abandon the country which they already had occupied for several centuries and, therefore, regarded it as their own homeland. The Slovaks retreated gradually from the open valleys near the Danube and the Tisa rivers to the North and settled in the hilly areas of Slovakia where they were relatively safe. Slovak geographical names along the banks of the Danube and 'l'isa show how far the land of the Slovaks extended in the tenth century. Despite all the calamities that befell Slovakia, her people preserved itself on her soil. At the foot of mountains, in the extensive valleys and deep gorges of Slovakland, that people safeguard€d its language, its time-honored customs and its Slovanic nature. The people of Slovakia did not mingle with other nations and, therefore, did not succumb to foreign influences. At the beginning of the tenth century, when the Slovak nation lost its political independence, Slovakia had behind it a full century of cultural development which began during the reign of Prince Pribina. Christian culture, which came to the Slovaks from Bavarian Passau (Pasov), Regensburg (Rezno), and Salzburg (Sol'nohrad) and met with the Christian culture of Byzantium, sank such deep roots in Slovakia that it sprea:d from the Slovaks, with the help of Slovak princes and priests, even to the neighboring nations. And this Christian culture outlived the fall of Great Moravia, became the permanent heritage of the Slovak nation, and gave the Slovaks a cultural and moral precedence over their eastern conquerors. With this heritage the Slovak nation placed itself firmly and for all time among the cultured nations of Europe. Even at the height of Magyar aggression, the ecclesiactical organization of Slovakland did not vanish completely. Nitra continued to be the center of religious life .Jt is possible that even after Wiching's death the bishopric was preserved in Nitra, and it is probable that even the Zobor monastery, in which, according to legend, King Sva- �SLOVAKIA 59 topluk died, survived all storms and was the center of Christian culture in the tenth century. The rulers of Great Moravia established in Slovakia a good state organization along western lines. The whole country was divided into smaller districts, called counties ("zupy" or "stolice"), which were governed by commissioners ("zupani"), who resided in castles or citadels ("hrady"). Some of these counties constituted a geographical unit with natural boundries and undoubtedly originated from territories of tribal ,principalities. These counties retained their .significance even after the fall of Great Moravia. The most ancient Slovak castles or citadels, which served as places of refuge for inhabitants of the respective counties, date from this period. The Slovaks had been farmers and husbandmen for several centuries and, therefore, knew how to till the soil and raise livestock. Besides the old . Slovanic art, which they brought from their old home beyond, the Carpathian Mountains, they lean1ed new trades from their neighbors, as is attested to by relics found in old Slovak castles and graves. The people of Slovakia did business with their neighbors; foreign merchants frequently came into Slovakia, bringing with them various commodities, and established places of business beneath the walls of Slovak citadels where marketplaces sprang up in the ninth and tenth centuries. The Slovak nation, therefore, possessed all the prerequisites to live in its own country even without a state of its own. SLOVAKIA ANN E XED BY HU N GA R Y Two states originated in the tenth century on the territory which once belonged under the rule of King Svatopluk: the Czech State in the west, and the Hungarian State in the east. These states, heirs to Great Moravia, developed gradually over the years. About fifteen various Czech tribes inhabited the territory known as Bohemia, which were being united under the rule of the princes of the Pfemysl clan. Prague became the main stronghold of Bohemia in the tenth century. The Pfemysl rulers broke with the Moravian kingdom soon after Svatopluk's death, recognized the supremacy of the �60 SLOVAKIA German empire, accepted Christianity, and began to build a united state on both banks of the Vltava river. Eventually the Czech nation evolved from the union of these tribes in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. One of the outstanding rulers of early Bohemia was Saint Wenceslaus (920-929 A.D.), who concerned himself with consolidating Christianity and living in peace with the Germans to spare his country and nation from a catastrophe that would have resulted from a war with them. Wenceslaus' friendly attitude with the Germans made his. brother Boleslav furious. His plan to put Wenceslaus out of the way was successful, and Boleslav took 9ver the reigns of government after Wenceslaus' murder. But even Boleslav had to yield to the Germans and pay them annual tribute. Succeeding Czech rulers also recognized their dependency on the German empire and helped the German emperors in their frequent wars with their neighbors. The Czech ruler Borivoj was baptized by St. Methodius during King Svatopluk's reign. When St. Methodius died, many of the Slovanic priests persecuted by Svatopluk escaped from Great Moravia into Bohemia. Thus it happened that the Slovanic liturgy was spread throughout Bohemia where it was used along with the Latin liturgy in the tenth century. Among the Slovanic priests who spread Christianity in Bohemia were also a number of Slovaks. It is very likely that Gorazd, successor to St. Methodius, lived in Bohemia and continued in the work which he was forced to abandon in Slovakia. Thus it was that the young Czech state became heir to the territory and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. In the second half of the tenth century the Czech rulers succeeded in uniting all the Czech tribes to build up a comparatively strong state, which--even though dependent on the German empire-made its own expeditions into neighboring countries and extended its boundaries eastward. In 973 A. D. a bishopric was established in Prague, which helped to unify and strenghten the Czech state. But the Hungarian state - which in the later half of the tenth century gradually developed on the territories once ruled by Prince Pribina and his son Kocel (Transda- �SLO\'AK!A 61 nubia)-also became partial heir to Svatopluk's empire and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. The new state inherited not only the lands once governed by the Slovak rulers, but also the culture which had been developed in those lands during the reign of Slovak rulers. The builders of this new state became the Magyars who settled in the fertile Transdanubian territory of Pannonia at the close of the ninth century, after the wild Huns and the bellicose Avars had abandoned the territory. The Magyars were of Turkish-Tartar (Mongolian) origin. Their ancient homeland was somewhere in southern Russia, north of the Black Sea. Like other nations of those times, the Magyars, too, were divided into several tribes until Arpad united them. Because they were exposed to frequent attacks of wild nomadic tribes, the Magyar tribes near the Black Sea began to migrate westward. Under Arpad's leadership they crossed the Carpathian Mountains and, during Svatopluk's reign in Great Moravia, conquered Pannonia, whence they menaced all neighboring nations. The Magyars fought on the side of the Germans against Svatopluk and Mojmir II and, therefore, contributed to the downfall of the Great Moravian Empire at the opening of the tenth century. Nomadic and bellicose in their habits, the Magyars spent most of their lives in the saddle. They were renowned horsemen who specialized in surprise raids on their neighbors. Their swift cavalry units pierced far into foreign lands, swooped down upon rich towns and monasteries to raid them and then, laden with spoils, returned to their encampments. They destroyed whatever they could not haul away. Like all nomads they avoided hard work, spent their time in roisterous living, ate raw meat, drank soured mare's milk, shaved most of their heads and braided the rest of their hair into queues. The Magyars were exceptionally bold and cruel. Their depredatory expeditions took them into the Balkan states, Italy and France, but they looted Germany more often than any other European country. The Magyars suffered a serious setback in 955, when King Otto crushed their forces near Augsburg. Otto's army �62 SLOVAKIA also had a well equipped Czech division. Most of the Magyar invaders perished in battle, but many drowned in the river Lech. After this catastrophe, the Magyars abandoned their predatory expeditions and changed their manner of living. To save themselves they had to settle down and live in peace with the nE:ighbors. In time the adventurous warriors became shepherds and farmers who learned to till the soil from their Slovanic neighbors. Bavarian missionaries came to the Magyars to instruct them in the Christian faith with which they already had become acquainted through their Slovanic neighbors. At the same time missionaries came also from the East so that the currents of western and eastern culture met on the territory of the rising state of Hungary. But Christianity took hold with difficulty among th Magyars who, by their very nature, did not know how to orientate themselves ot Christian teaching. At the close of the tenth century, St. Adalbert, Bishop of Prague, came to Hungary and labored vlith his band of missionaries to convert the Magyars to Christianity. At that time Hungary was ruled by Geza (972-997), who was building a new state in the territory of Pribina's and Kocel's principality. Geza already was a Christian, but still followed many pagan customs. His son Vajk took the name of Stephen at baptism and very zealously continued in the work of consolidating Christianity and building the Hungarian State. The nucleus of the political organization of the Hungarian State was Pannonia, the country which already during the reign of the Slovak princes in the ninth century had played a prominent role in the political and cultural history of central Europe. Slovakia, however, became the nucleus of the ecclesiastical organization of Hungary. It was the same Slovakia which already from the times of Pribina was a Christian country, the land which already during the reign of King Svatopluk had its own bishop and which, at the beginning of the 11th century, became the territory of the first and most significant Hungarian archbishopric, that of Ostrihom (Esztergom). The greater part of the territory, inhabited from time �SLOVAKIA 63 immemorial by the Slovaks, lying east of the Moravia river and north of the Danube, namely, Slovakia, became a part of the Hungarian state sometime at the end of the tenth .and the beginning of the eleventh century. But the western part of the Slovak land, which extended along the central flow of the Moravian river - from which it received its name Moravia (Morava)- seceded from Slovakia during those turbulant times. After losing its independence and a part of its territory, the Slovak nation, pressed on all sides by its stronger neighbors, did not have sufficient space to increase numerically and use all its energy to contribute to the building of its own life. Under such conditions the Slovaks remained a small nation, but even as such, they did not perish amidst the turbulant currents of history which swept over their country for long centuries. Into the new state, which was to be the home of the Slovak people for almost a thousand years, the Slovaks brought everything they had inherited from the times of their state independence. First of all, they excelled over the rest of the nations living in Hungary with their Christian culture. As has been frequently demonstrated in history, so even in this case it was proven tha.t a nation's culture is far more important than its numerical strength and military might. Slovakia, with the remnants of her ecclesiastical organization and state administration from the times of her political independence, preserved her individual status even in the new state of Hungary. After Slovakland was annexed to Hungary, it played a significant role in the building of the new state. This role was especially useful during the formation of international relations between Hungary and the German Empire, Bohemia and Poland, and in the building of internal relationships within the Hungarian state as well. When Hungary was on friendly terms with her western and northern neighbors, Slovakia served as a bridge for making friendly contacts. However, when Hungary was at odds with her neighbors, Slovakia became the battlefield on which issues were settled. The armies of the German Emperor, who wanted to establish his rule over Hun- �64 SLOVAKIA gary, the Czech armies which helped the German Emperor, and the army of the Polish king who became unfriendly with the Hungarian ruler, often tore into Slovakia, devastated the land and killed its people. At the very beginning of the 11th century, St. Stephen of Hungary quarreled with the mighty Polish ruler, Boleslaw the Brave (Chrabry). Polish troops invaded Hungary and occupied the whole of Slovakia as far as the Danube. The Polish occupation of Slovakia, however, was shortlived, because Boleslaw had other wars on his hands at that time and, therefore, was glad to give up Slovakia and conclude a peace pact with King St. Stephen. St. Stephen was an outstanding ruler ; he vanquished his enemies and, by propagating Christianity, fought against the paganism which still prevailed among the Magyars. He founded several Episcopal Sees and monasteries in order to strengthen the unity of the Hungarian State with the aid of ecclesiastical organizations. But pagan chieftains in the southern and eastern regions of his domain revolted against the zealous Christian king. During these crises Stephen found aid and succor in Slovakia. The Slovak magnates Hunt and Poznan gave the King military aid against the pagan rebels and helped to safeguard the integrity of the Hungarian State and Christianity in the Danube basin. Stephen, aware of the fact that various nations inhabited the territory of the Hungarian State, wanted each nation to regard Hungary as its homeland. He trained his son and successor Emery accordingly, that he, too, might rule wisely and justly all the nations of his kingdom. To St. Stephen is ascribed the dictum: A state with only one language is weak. (To be continued) • • • WHO SAID IT? "Some pussy-footing ostriches criticirze the treaty between Soviet Russia aind Ozeohoslovakia. Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do not want anything from the Russia,ns e~cept protection frOiID the Germruns, and the Russians want nothlrng whatsoever from us." - (Jan Masaryk, BUSINESS WEEK, May 13, 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at- 58 SLOVAKIA tacks of Magyar hordes, could not take possesion of Slovakia, and the nomadic Magyars did not establish any kind of state for quite some time. The Slovaks, then, lost their state, but did not lose or abandon the country which they already had occupied for several centuries and, therefore, regarded it as their own homeland. The Slovaks retreated gradually from the open valleys near the Danube and the Tisa rivers to the North and settled in the hilly areas of Slovakia where they were relatively safe. Slovak geographical names along the banks of the Danube and 'l'isa show how far the land of the Slovaks extended in the tenth century. Despite all the calamities that befell Slovakia, her people preserved itself on her soil. At the foot of mountains, in the extensive valleys and deep gorges of Slovakland, that people safeguard€d its language, its time-honored customs and its Slovanic nature. The people of Slovakia did not mingle with other nations and, therefore, did not succumb to foreign influences. At the beginning of the tenth century, when the Slovak nation lost its political independence, Slovakia had behind it a full century of cultural development which began during the reign of Prince Pribina. Christian culture, which came to the Slovaks from Bavarian Passau (Pasov), Regensburg (Rezno), and Salzburg (Sol'nohrad) and met with the Christian culture of Byzantium, sank such deep roots in Slovakia that it sprea:d from the Slovaks, with the help of Slovak princes and priests, even to the neighboring nations. And this Christian culture outlived the fall of Great Moravia, became the permanent heritage of the Slovak nation, and gave the Slovaks a cultural and moral precedence over their eastern conquerors. With this heritage the Slovak nation placed itself firmly and for all time among the cultured nations of Europe. Even at the height of Magyar aggression, the ecclesiactical organization of Slovakland did not vanish completely. Nitra continued to be the center of religious life .Jt is possible that even after Wiching's death the bishopric was preserved in Nitra, and it is probable that even the Zobor monastery, in which, according to legend, King Sva- SLOVAKIA 59 topluk died, survived all storms and was the center of Christian culture in the tenth century. The rulers of Great Moravia established in Slovakia a good state organization along western lines. The whole country was divided into smaller districts, called counties ("zupy" or "stolice"), which were governed by commissioners ("zupani"), who resided in castles or citadels ("hrady"). Some of these counties constituted a geographical unit with natural boundries and undoubtedly originated from territories of tribal ,principalities. These counties retained their .significance even after the fall of Great Moravia. The most ancient Slovak castles or citadels, which served as places of refuge for inhabitants of the respective counties, date from this period. The Slovaks had been farmers and husbandmen for several centuries and, therefore, knew how to till the soil and raise livestock. Besides the old . Slovanic art, which they brought from their old home beyond, the Carpathian Mountains, they lean1ed new trades from their neighbors, as is attested to by relics found in old Slovak castles and graves. The people of Slovakia did business with their neighbors; foreign merchants frequently came into Slovakia, bringing with them various commodities, and established places of business beneath the walls of Slovak citadels where marketplaces sprang up in the ninth and tenth centuries. The Slovak nation, therefore, possessed all the prerequisites to live in its own country even without a state of its own. SLOVAKIA ANN E XED BY HU N GA R Y Two states originated in the tenth century on the territory which once belonged under the rule of King Svatopluk: the Czech State in the west, and the Hungarian State in the east. These states, heirs to Great Moravia, developed gradually over the years. About fifteen various Czech tribes inhabited the territory known as Bohemia, which were being united under the rule of the princes of the Pfemysl clan. Prague became the main stronghold of Bohemia in the tenth century. The Pfemysl rulers broke with the Moravian kingdom soon after Svatopluk's death, recognized the supremacy of the 60 SLOVAKIA German empire, accepted Christianity, and began to build a united state on both banks of the Vltava river. Eventually the Czech nation evolved from the union of these tribes in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. One of the outstanding rulers of early Bohemia was Saint Wenceslaus (920-929 A.D.), who concerned himself with consolidating Christianity and living in peace with the Germans to spare his country and nation from a catastrophe that would have resulted from a war with them. Wenceslaus' friendly attitude with the Germans made his. brother Boleslav furious. His plan to put Wenceslaus out of the way was successful, and Boleslav took 9ver the reigns of government after Wenceslaus' murder. But even Boleslav had to yield to the Germans and pay them annual tribute. Succeeding Czech rulers also recognized their dependency on the German empire and helped the German emperors in their frequent wars with their neighbors. The Czech ruler Borivoj was baptized by St. Methodius during King Svatopluk's reign. When St. Methodius died, many of the Slovanic priests persecuted by Svatopluk escaped from Great Moravia into Bohemia. Thus it happened that the Slovanic liturgy was spread throughout Bohemia where it was used along with the Latin liturgy in the tenth century. Among the Slovanic priests who spread Christianity in Bohemia were also a number of Slovaks. It is very likely that Gorazd, successor to St. Methodius, lived in Bohemia and continued in the work which he was forced to abandon in Slovakia. Thus it was that the young Czech state became heir to the territory and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. In the second half of the tenth century the Czech rulers succeeded in uniting all the Czech tribes to build up a comparatively strong state, which--even though dependent on the German empire-made its own expeditions into neighboring countries and extended its boundaries eastward. In 973 A. D. a bishopric was established in Prague, which helped to unify and strenghten the Czech state. But the Hungarian state - which in the later half of the tenth century gradually developed on the territories once ruled by Prince Pribina and his son Kocel (Transda- SLO\'AK!A 61 nubia)-also became partial heir to Svatopluk's empire and the Christian culture of Great Moravia. The new state inherited not only the lands once governed by the Slovak rulers, but also the culture which had been developed in those lands during the reign of Slovak rulers. The builders of this new state became the Magyars who settled in the fertile Transdanubian territory of Pannonia at the close of the ninth century, after the wild Huns and the bellicose Avars had abandoned the territory. The Magyars were of Turkish-Tartar (Mongolian) origin. Their ancient homeland was somewhere in southern Russia, north of the Black Sea. Like other nations of those times, the Magyars, too, were divided into several tribes until Arpad united them. Because they were exposed to frequent attacks of wild nomadic tribes, the Magyar tribes near the Black Sea began to migrate westward. Under Arpad's leadership they crossed the Carpathian Mountains and, during Svatopluk's reign in Great Moravia, conquered Pannonia, whence they menaced all neighboring nations. The Magyars fought on the side of the Germans against Svatopluk and Mojmir II and, therefore, contributed to the downfall of the Great Moravian Empire at the opening of the tenth century. Nomadic and bellicose in their habits, the Magyars spent most of their lives in the saddle. They were renowned horsemen who specialized in surprise raids on their neighbors. Their swift cavalry units pierced far into foreign lands, swooped down upon rich towns and monasteries to raid them and then, laden with spoils, returned to their encampments. They destroyed whatever they could not haul away. Like all nomads they avoided hard work, spent their time in roisterous living, ate raw meat, drank soured mare's milk, shaved most of their heads and braided the rest of their hair into queues. The Magyars were exceptionally bold and cruel. Their depredatory expeditions took them into the Balkan states, Italy and France, but they looted Germany more often than any other European country. The Magyars suffered a serious setback in 955, when King Otto crushed their forces near Augsburg. Otto's army 62 SLOVAKIA also had a well equipped Czech division. Most of the Magyar invaders perished in battle, but many drowned in the river Lech. After this catastrophe, the Magyars abandoned their predatory expeditions and changed their manner of living. To save themselves they had to settle down and live in peace with the nE:ighbors. In time the adventurous warriors became shepherds and farmers who learned to till the soil from their Slovanic neighbors. Bavarian missionaries came to the Magyars to instruct them in the Christian faith with which they already had become acquainted through their Slovanic neighbors. At the same time missionaries came also from the East so that the currents of western and eastern culture met on the territory of the rising state of Hungary. But Christianity took hold with difficulty among th Magyars who, by their very nature, did not know how to orientate themselves ot Christian teaching. At the close of the tenth century, St. Adalbert, Bishop of Prague, came to Hungary and labored vlith his band of missionaries to convert the Magyars to Christianity. At that time Hungary was ruled by Geza (972-997), who was building a new state in the territory of Pribina's and Kocel's principality. Geza already was a Christian, but still followed many pagan customs. His son Vajk took the name of Stephen at baptism and very zealously continued in the work of consolidating Christianity and building the Hungarian State. The nucleus of the political organization of the Hungarian State was Pannonia, the country which already during the reign of the Slovak princes in the ninth century had played a prominent role in the political and cultural history of central Europe. Slovakia, however, became the nucleus of the ecclesiastical organization of Hungary. It was the same Slovakia which already from the times of Pribina was a Christian country, the land which already during the reign of King Svatopluk had its own bishop and which, at the beginning of the 11th century, became the territory of the first and most significant Hungarian archbishopric, that of Ostrihom (Esztergom). The greater part of the territory, inhabited from time SLOVAKIA 63 immemorial by the Slovaks, lying east of the Moravia river and north of the Danube, namely, Slovakia, became a part of the Hungarian state sometime at the end of the tenth .and the beginning of the eleventh century. But the western part of the Slovak land, which extended along the central flow of the Moravian river - from which it received its name Moravia (Morava)- seceded from Slovakia during those turbulant times. After losing its independence and a part of its territory, the Slovak nation, pressed on all sides by its stronger neighbors, did not have sufficient space to increase numerically and use all its energy to contribute to the building of its own life. Under such conditions the Slovaks remained a small nation, but even as such, they did not perish amidst the turbulant currents of history which swept over their country for long centuries. Into the new state, which was to be the home of the Slovak people for almost a thousand years, the Slovaks brought everything they had inherited from the times of their state independence. First of all, they excelled over the rest of the nations living in Hungary with their Christian culture. As has been frequently demonstrated in history, so even in this case it was proven tha.t a nation's culture is far more important than its numerical strength and military might. Slovakia, with the remnants of her ecclesiastical organization and state administration from the times of her political independence, preserved her individual status even in the new state of Hungary. After Slovakland was annexed to Hungary, it played a significant role in the building of the new state. This role was especially useful during the formation of international relations between Hungary and the German Empire, Bohemia and Poland, and in the building of internal relationships within the Hungarian state as well. When Hungary was on friendly terms with her western and northern neighbors, Slovakia served as a bridge for making friendly contacts. However, when Hungary was at odds with her neighbors, Slovakia became the battlefield on which issues were settled. The armies of the German Emperor, who wanted to establish his rule over Hun- 64 SLOVAKIA gary, the Czech armies which helped the German Emperor, and the army of the Polish king who became unfriendly with the Hungarian ruler, often tore into Slovakia, devastated the land and killed its people. At the very beginning of the 11th century, St. Stephen of Hungary quarreled with the mighty Polish ruler, Boleslaw the Brave (Chrabry). Polish troops invaded Hungary and occupied the whole of Slovakia as far as the Danube. The Polish occupation of Slovakia, however, was shortlived, because Boleslaw had other wars on his hands at that time and, therefore, was glad to give up Slovakia and conclude a peace pact with King St. Stephen. St. Stephen was an outstanding ruler ; he vanquished his enemies and, by propagating Christianity, fought against the paganism which still prevailed among the Magyars. He founded several Episcopal Sees and monasteries in order to strengthen the unity of the Hungarian State with the aid of ecclesiastical organizations. But pagan chieftains in the southern and eastern regions of his domain revolted against the zealous Christian king. During these crises Stephen found aid and succor in Slovakia. The Slovak magnates Hunt and Poznan gave the King military aid against the pagan rebels and helped to safeguard the integrity of the Hungarian State and Christianity in the Danube basin. Stephen, aware of the fact that various nations inhabited the territory of the Hungarian State, wanted each nation to regard Hungary as its homeland. He trained his son and successor Emery accordingly, that he, too, might rule wisely and justly all the nations of his kingdom. To St. Stephen is ascribed the dictum: A state with only one language is weak. (To be continued) • • • WHO SAID IT? "Some pussy-footing ostriches criticirze the treaty between Soviet Russia aind Ozeohoslovakia. Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do not want anything from the Russia,ns e~cept protection frOiID the Germruns, and the Russians want nothlrng whatsoever from us." - (Jan Masaryk, BUSINESS WEEK, May 13, 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 The History of Slovakia (3/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957 pp. 57-64 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 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/252">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 53-59</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/229">Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), pp. 88-96</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/91797ad8dc1a42a6d66cf715ce19aa5d.pdf 4ee80f354a36993b46b464a98aa44135 PDF Text Text 52 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The Czechoslovak Declaration and the letter to Emperor Charles were published in the Saturday morning papers, October 19, 1918, the two appearing in many papers in parallel columns; the reply of President Wilson quoted above came on the Monday following. "It was still thought that American public opinion was not sufficiently informed; while the men mentioned above were trying to devise what to do next, the suggestion was made that, if a declaration were issued from Independence Hall in Philadelphia, it would make a striking impression on the American people. They immediately consulted the State Department and obtained its approval, provided Professor Masaryk took the leadership. The members of the Mid-European Union were immediately summoned on Saturday morning, the nineteenth, and a preliminary draft of a declaration was made. The following Wednesday, the Union met in Independence Hall and continued in session until Saturday noon, with Masaryk as chairman. The discussion, which was heated at times, was concentrated on controversies between the various groups. "Because of the prominence attained by Professor Masaryk through the Declaration on Saturday, the press gave the meeting much space, and minimized the often bitter discussion. Saturday noon a Declaration of Common Aims was read by Professor Masaryk in the courtyard back of Independence Hall. This Declaration was realJy the first statement leading to the Little Entente." It would be interesting, indeed, if a copy of Masaryk's "original" draft of the Declaration were available. It is significant, however, that many less valuable and important documents were preserved and recorded by T. G. Masaryk in their original forms. Masaryk made less of the Declaration than did Mr. Miller. Referring to it in his "SVETOVA REVOLUCE" (p. 364), Masaryk said: " ... the form was chosen in such a way as to remind Americans -of their own beautiful Declaration; ultimately its value was tactical . ... In the Declaration, I repudiated Charles' late attempt to promote an Austrian pseudo-federation and outlined the essential principles on which the Provisional Government was building the foundations of the new state. The first outline I gave to read to a group ~f my own friends (among them Brandeis and editor Bennet); an objective and formal criticism of it was undertaken by a small com- �SLOVAKIA 53 mittee, which made the final revision along formal and legal lines (Mr. Calffee, a remarkable expert and lawyer, was a member of it); this was a nice example of harmonious cooperation and, at the /same time, the first state act of great style, made under my direction. I delivered the Declaration to State Secretary Lansing so that I might insure agreement of the American Government beforehand; •lso so that even at the last moment before his reply to Austria I might remind Wilson of our stand." Who was right: Masaryk or Miller? Of course, they could both be right - each in his own way: the main thing was to sell Masaryk and Czecho-Slovakia to the American public, and especially to President Wilson and his advisers. Masaryk's draft of the "Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence," according to Mr. Miller, was scrapped - "the original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again" - but "great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original"! And great care was taken to destroy Masaryk's original, of course! From all this it is obvious that Masaryk, despite arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, knew little about American democracy, which he wanted to exploit so that he might create his own special brand of "Czechoslovak" democracy. But why did Mr. Herbert Adolphus Miller, in the light of statements above, state categorically: "The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved"? Are we to believe that is why Masaryk's version was scrapped and the committee's accepted?? CHAPTER XV - "The Religious Situation in Czechoslovakia" - by Matthew Spinka, B.D., Ph.D., "Associate Professor of Church History in the Chicago Theological Seminary and in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago; editor of Church History, published by the American Society of Church History, and the Society's Studies in Church History; author of: The Church and the Russian Revolution (1927); A History of Christianity in the Balkans (1933); Christianity Confronts Communism (1936-1938); Chronicle of John Malalas (1940); and numerous articles." Spinka's account, partial and notoriously biased against �SLOVAKIA 54 the Catholic Church, is not a true account of "the religious situation in Czecho-Slovakia." In it one finds, for the most part, the Protestant or "Hussite" version of the "progressive" CZECHS, which purposefully tends to falsify and confuse the true picture. In the entire 18 pages of the chapter, Slovakia and the Slovaks are limited to several sentences, which clearly indicate that the author was not interested in presenting a factual account. In reading this chapter, readers should bear this in mind, otherwise they may fall for a distorted and biased version of a situation that did not prevail even in the Czech lands, and so much the less in Slovakia. "Furthermore, there was likewise a considerable difference In the character of Slovak and Czech Catholicism, which manifested itself in the continuous and sometimes violent political opposition to the Czechs. This opposition was led chiefly by the priesthood, with the famous Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, the papal prothonotary and a member of the Czechoslovak Senate at their head. It is significant that the instrument of the violent rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia which occurred in March, 1939, was a Roman Catholic priest, Dr. Tiso" - (p. 289). Indeed, it is significant, that Spinka conveniently forgot to back this statement with proof of the "violence" resorted to by the Slovaks. The tendency is only too obvious. The fact is that Msgr. Hlinka and Msgr. Tiso, were not the instruments of the "violent" rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia in 1939. But even if we grant that they were, who was more responsible for the situation that obtained in Czecho-Slovakia in 1939 than the Benes Czechs? • • • "When the Pact of Munich delivered the CZECH nation into the hands of the Nazi regime of the Reich, unfortunately a faction within the Catholic Church thought it an opportune moment to further their program. This was a militant, aggressive group of Catholics, with Jaroslav Durych as one of their leaders, who once more identified their cause with the opposition to the democratic Masaryk orientation of CZECH culture. This noisy, denunciatory, fanatical faction tried to substitute the ultramontane policies symbolized in CZECH history by St. Vaclav for the liberal, Protestant-inspired poli• cies represented by the tradition of Jan Hus, and Jan Amos Comenius, AS REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK. But with the setting up of the "Protectorate" in March, 1939, the momentary flare-up of religious intolerance subsided. It should be stressed that the responsible political leaders of the Catholics, such as Msgr. Dr. �SLOVAKIA 55 ~ramek, did not share the views of the militant group, and remained loyal and faithful to the Masaryk-Benes orientation" - (p. 292). Please note well: The CZECHS, including "responsible political leaders of the Catholics, SUCH AS MSGR. DR. SRAMEK," scrapped the traditions of St. Wenceslaus for the policies of Hus and Comenius, "AS INTERPRETED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK"! What, then, does non-Catholic Spinka use as a yardstick for "responsible political leaders" of CZECH Catholics? • • • "Of those (CZECHS) who seceded from the Roman Church after the setting up of the Republic, the majority organized themselves into an anti-papal, nationalistic Czechoslovak Church. This body had its inception in the efforts of the "Unity of (CZECH) Catholic Clergy," which in 1919 undertook to wrest from the papal curia certain reforms which had been formulated two years earlier. . . . Seeing the hopelessness of the task of obtaining their demands, the (CZECH) leaders of the reformists decided upon the radical measure of setting up a new (CZECH) national church. At the convention of the (CZECH) reformist clergy held on January 8, 1920, the Czechoslovak Church was organized" - (p. 293). This paragraph and others following on the "Czechoslovak National Church" significantly lack the qualification "CZECH" for reasons best known to Mr. Spinka. The parenthetical inclusions here and below ( CZECH) are not Spinka's, but mine, to indicate clearly that the "Czechoslovak National Church" - which had the blessing of Masaryk and Benes and their socialistic followers was strictly a CZECH venture, nothing SLOVAK about it. • • • "The new (CZECH) Czechoslovak Church grew with astonishing rapidity. . . . The movement at first was (CZECH) Catholic, even though modernist and nationalist in character, but distinctly and bitterly anti-papal and anti-Roman. It was in no sense a Protestant body, and at first did not wish to be so considered, although in the course of time it joined the ranks of Protestant communions" (p. 294-295). • I • • "As for the cultural and religious life of the nation, despite its relative numerical inferiority, the Protestant element has played a role far beyond its strength in numbers. The president-liberator, Thomas G. Masaryk, had become early in life, a convert to Protestantism, and remained a member of the Czech Brethren Church to the end. A large number of other political leaders were and are �56 SLOVAKIA likewise members of one or another Protestant communion: Stefanik, the leader of the Slovaks during the struggle for independence; Premier Hodia, who served during the critical period in 1938; and Ivan Derer, who was minister of education in the Hodfa cabinet; in this group also are to be found ministers Slavik, Hurban, and Osusky all of whom are grouped about Dr. Eduard Benes in his struggle for the restoration of Czechoslovak independence" - (p. 300). If the "Protestant element" played "a role far beyond its strength in numbers" in a country that was predominantly Catholic (over 75 percent). there must have been some reason for it. The same element practically had a monopoly on political life. Masaryk, Spinka told us, was a member of the CZECH Brethren, while the Slovaks mentioned were Protestants, but he conveniently forgot to tell us just what Freemason Benes was. According to Spinka, Slovak Catholicism manifested itself in "violent" opposition, but he failed to mention the fact that the MasarykBenes Czechs, sworn enemies of the Roman Catholic Church, the faith of the vast majority of the population of CzechoSlovakia, were also "violent" in their opposition. In his blinded hatred for the Catholic population, especially the Slovaks, Benes, sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 and to Stalin in 1943. The Slovaks, as a nation, were opposed to the restoration of "Czechoslovak" independence, because it meant enslavement by the Marxist Czechs. It was thoughtful of Mr. Spinka to mention the fact that "the two outstanding CZECH philosophers, both pupils and disciples of Masaryk" also are Protestants: "Professor E. Ra.di, whose originality in the treatment of ideas has made him justly famous; and Professor Jan B. Kozak, the son of an outstanding minister and himself formerly a minister of the Czech Brethren Church, who was until recently the leading member of the philosophical faculty of the University of Prague. He is at present teaching at Oberlin College." Likewise that "among the theologians, none is more outstanding than Professor J. L. Hromadka, of the Jan Hus Theological Faculty, at present a member of the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary.... " All these "outstanding CZECH philosophers" - pupils and disciples of Hus and Masaryk - are doing nicely, thank you, under the �57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at- � 52 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The Czechoslovak Declaration and the letter to Emperor Charles were published in the Saturday morning papers, October 19, 1918, the two appearing in many papers in parallel columns; the reply of President Wilson quoted above came on the Monday following. "It was still thought that American public opinion was not sufficiently informed; while the men mentioned above were trying to devise what to do next, the suggestion was made that, if a declaration were issued from Independence Hall in Philadelphia, it would make a striking impression on the American people. They immediately consulted the State Department and obtained its approval, provided Professor Masaryk took the leadership. The members of the Mid-European Union were immediately summoned on Saturday morning, the nineteenth, and a preliminary draft of a declaration was made. The following Wednesday, the Union met in Independence Hall and continued in session until Saturday noon, with Masaryk as chairman. The discussion, which was heated at times, was concentrated on controversies between the various groups. "Because of the prominence attained by Professor Masaryk through the Declaration on Saturday, the press gave the meeting much space, and minimized the often bitter discussion. Saturday noon a Declaration of Common Aims was read by Professor Masaryk in the courtyard back of Independence Hall. This Declaration was realJy the first statement leading to the Little Entente." It would be interesting, indeed, if a copy of Masaryk's "original" draft of the Declaration were available. It is significant, however, that many less valuable and important documents were preserved and recorded by T. G. Masaryk in their original forms. Masaryk made less of the Declaration than did Mr. Miller. Referring to it in his "SVETOVA REVOLUCE" (p. 364), Masaryk said: " ... the form was chosen in such a way as to remind Americans -of their own beautiful Declaration; ultimately its value was tactical . ... In the Declaration, I repudiated Charles' late attempt to promote an Austrian pseudo-federation and outlined the essential principles on which the Provisional Government was building the foundations of the new state. The first outline I gave to read to a group ~f my own friends (among them Brandeis and editor Bennet); an objective and formal criticism of it was undertaken by a small com- �SLOVAKIA 53 mittee, which made the final revision along formal and legal lines (Mr. Calffee, a remarkable expert and lawyer, was a member of it); this was a nice example of harmonious cooperation and, at the /same time, the first state act of great style, made under my direction. I delivered the Declaration to State Secretary Lansing so that I might insure agreement of the American Government beforehand; •lso so that even at the last moment before his reply to Austria I might remind Wilson of our stand." Who was right: Masaryk or Miller? Of course, they could both be right - each in his own way: the main thing was to sell Masaryk and Czecho-Slovakia to the American public, and especially to President Wilson and his advisers. Masaryk's draft of the "Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence," according to Mr. Miller, was scrapped - "the original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again" - but "great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original"! And great care was taken to destroy Masaryk's original, of course! From all this it is obvious that Masaryk, despite arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, knew little about American democracy, which he wanted to exploit so that he might create his own special brand of "Czechoslovak" democracy. But why did Mr. Herbert Adolphus Miller, in the light of statements above, state categorically: "The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved"? Are we to believe that is why Masaryk's version was scrapped and the committee's accepted?? CHAPTER XV - "The Religious Situation in Czechoslovakia" - by Matthew Spinka, B.D., Ph.D., "Associate Professor of Church History in the Chicago Theological Seminary and in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago; editor of Church History, published by the American Society of Church History, and the Society's Studies in Church History; author of: The Church and the Russian Revolution (1927); A History of Christianity in the Balkans (1933); Christianity Confronts Communism (1936-1938); Chronicle of John Malalas (1940); and numerous articles." Spinka's account, partial and notoriously biased against �SLOVAKIA 54 the Catholic Church, is not a true account of "the religious situation in Czecho-Slovakia." In it one finds, for the most part, the Protestant or "Hussite" version of the "progressive" CZECHS, which purposefully tends to falsify and confuse the true picture. In the entire 18 pages of the chapter, Slovakia and the Slovaks are limited to several sentences, which clearly indicate that the author was not interested in presenting a factual account. In reading this chapter, readers should bear this in mind, otherwise they may fall for a distorted and biased version of a situation that did not prevail even in the Czech lands, and so much the less in Slovakia. "Furthermore, there was likewise a considerable difference In the character of Slovak and Czech Catholicism, which manifested itself in the continuous and sometimes violent political opposition to the Czechs. This opposition was led chiefly by the priesthood, with the famous Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, the papal prothonotary and a member of the Czechoslovak Senate at their head. It is significant that the instrument of the violent rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia which occurred in March, 1939, was a Roman Catholic priest, Dr. Tiso" - (p. 289). Indeed, it is significant, that Spinka conveniently forgot to back this statement with proof of the "violence" resorted to by the Slovaks. The tendency is only too obvious. The fact is that Msgr. Hlinka and Msgr. Tiso, were not the instruments of the "violent" rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia in 1939. But even if we grant that they were, who was more responsible for the situation that obtained in Czecho-Slovakia in 1939 than the Benes Czechs? • • • "When the Pact of Munich delivered the CZECH nation into the hands of the Nazi regime of the Reich, unfortunately a faction within the Catholic Church thought it an opportune moment to further their program. This was a militant, aggressive group of Catholics, with Jaroslav Durych as one of their leaders, who once more identified their cause with the opposition to the democratic Masaryk orientation of CZECH culture. This noisy, denunciatory, fanatical faction tried to substitute the ultramontane policies symbolized in CZECH history by St. Vaclav for the liberal, Protestant-inspired poli• cies represented by the tradition of Jan Hus, and Jan Amos Comenius, AS REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK. But with the setting up of the "Protectorate" in March, 1939, the momentary flare-up of religious intolerance subsided. It should be stressed that the responsible political leaders of the Catholics, such as Msgr. Dr. �SLOVAKIA 55 ~ramek, did not share the views of the militant group, and remained loyal and faithful to the Masaryk-Benes orientation" - (p. 292). Please note well: The CZECHS, including "responsible political leaders of the Catholics, SUCH AS MSGR. DR. SRAMEK," scrapped the traditions of St. Wenceslaus for the policies of Hus and Comenius, "AS INTERPRETED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK"! What, then, does non-Catholic Spinka use as a yardstick for "responsible political leaders" of CZECH Catholics? • • • "Of those (CZECHS) who seceded from the Roman Church after the setting up of the Republic, the majority organized themselves into an anti-papal, nationalistic Czechoslovak Church. This body had its inception in the efforts of the "Unity of (CZECH) Catholic Clergy," which in 1919 undertook to wrest from the papal curia certain reforms which had been formulated two years earlier. . . . Seeing the hopelessness of the task of obtaining their demands, the (CZECH) leaders of the reformists decided upon the radical measure of setting up a new (CZECH) national church. At the convention of the (CZECH) reformist clergy held on January 8, 1920, the Czechoslovak Church was organized" - (p. 293). This paragraph and others following on the "Czechoslovak National Church" significantly lack the qualification "CZECH" for reasons best known to Mr. Spinka. The parenthetical inclusions here and below ( CZECH) are not Spinka's, but mine, to indicate clearly that the "Czechoslovak National Church" - which had the blessing of Masaryk and Benes and their socialistic followers was strictly a CZECH venture, nothing SLOVAK about it. • • • "The new (CZECH) Czechoslovak Church grew with astonishing rapidity. . . . The movement at first was (CZECH) Catholic, even though modernist and nationalist in character, but distinctly and bitterly anti-papal and anti-Roman. It was in no sense a Protestant body, and at first did not wish to be so considered, although in the course of time it joined the ranks of Protestant communions" (p. 294-295). • I • • "As for the cultural and religious life of the nation, despite its relative numerical inferiority, the Protestant element has played a role far beyond its strength in numbers. The president-liberator, Thomas G. Masaryk, had become early in life, a convert to Protestantism, and remained a member of the Czech Brethren Church to the end. A large number of other political leaders were and are �56 SLOVAKIA likewise members of one or another Protestant communion: Stefanik, the leader of the Slovaks during the struggle for independence; Premier Hodia, who served during the critical period in 1938; and Ivan Derer, who was minister of education in the Hodfa cabinet; in this group also are to be found ministers Slavik, Hurban, and Osusky all of whom are grouped about Dr. Eduard Benes in his struggle for the restoration of Czechoslovak independence" - (p. 300). If the "Protestant element" played "a role far beyond its strength in numbers" in a country that was predominantly Catholic (over 75 percent). there must have been some reason for it. The same element practically had a monopoly on political life. Masaryk, Spinka told us, was a member of the CZECH Brethren, while the Slovaks mentioned were Protestants, but he conveniently forgot to tell us just what Freemason Benes was. According to Spinka, Slovak Catholicism manifested itself in "violent" opposition, but he failed to mention the fact that the MasarykBenes Czechs, sworn enemies of the Roman Catholic Church, the faith of the vast majority of the population of CzechoSlovakia, were also "violent" in their opposition. In his blinded hatred for the Catholic population, especially the Slovaks, Benes, sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 and to Stalin in 1943. The Slovaks, as a nation, were opposed to the restoration of "Czechoslovak" independence, because it meant enslavement by the Marxist Czechs. It was thoughtful of Mr. Spinka to mention the fact that "the two outstanding CZECH philosophers, both pupils and disciples of Masaryk" also are Protestants: "Professor E. Ra.di, whose originality in the treatment of ideas has made him justly famous; and Professor Jan B. Kozak, the son of an outstanding minister and himself formerly a minister of the Czech Brethren Church, who was until recently the leading member of the philosophical faculty of the University of Prague. He is at present teaching at Oberlin College." Likewise that "among the theologians, none is more outstanding than Professor J. L. Hromadka, of the Jan Hus Theological Faculty, at present a member of the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary.... " All these "outstanding CZECH philosophers" - pupils and disciples of Hus and Masaryk - are doing nicely, thank you, under the �57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at- � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The Czechoslovak Declaration and the letter to Emperor Charles were published in the Saturday morning papers, October 19, 1918, the two appearing in many papers in parallel columns; the reply of President Wilson quoted above came on the Monday following. "It was still thought that American public opinion was not sufficiently informed; while the men mentioned above were trying to devise what to do next, the suggestion was made that, if a declaration were issued from Independence Hall in Philadelphia, it would make a striking impression on the American people. They immediately consulted the State Department and obtained its approval, provided Professor Masaryk took the leadership. The members of the Mid-European Union were immediately summoned on Saturday morning, the nineteenth, and a preliminary draft of a declaration was made. The following Wednesday, the Union met in Independence Hall and continued in session until Saturday noon, with Masaryk as chairman. The discussion, which was heated at times, was concentrated on controversies between the various groups. "Because of the prominence attained by Professor Masaryk through the Declaration on Saturday, the press gave the meeting much space, and minimized the often bitter discussion. Saturday noon a Declaration of Common Aims was read by Professor Masaryk in the courtyard back of Independence Hall. This Declaration was realJy the first statement leading to the Little Entente." It would be interesting, indeed, if a copy of Masaryk's "original" draft of the Declaration were available. It is significant, however, that many less valuable and important documents were preserved and recorded by T. G. Masaryk in their original forms. Masaryk made less of the Declaration than did Mr. Miller. Referring to it in his "SVETOVA REVOLUCE" (p. 364), Masaryk said: " ... the form was chosen in such a way as to remind Americans -of their own beautiful Declaration; ultimately its value was tactical . ... In the Declaration, I repudiated Charles' late attempt to promote an Austrian pseudo-federation and outlined the essential principles on which the Provisional Government was building the foundations of the new state. The first outline I gave to read to a group ~f my own friends (among them Brandeis and editor Bennet); an objective and formal criticism of it was undertaken by a small com- SLOVAKIA 53 mittee, which made the final revision along formal and legal lines (Mr. Calffee, a remarkable expert and lawyer, was a member of it); this was a nice example of harmonious cooperation and, at the /same time, the first state act of great style, made under my direction. I delivered the Declaration to State Secretary Lansing so that I might insure agreement of the American Government beforehand; •lso so that even at the last moment before his reply to Austria I might remind Wilson of our stand." Who was right: Masaryk or Miller? Of course, they could both be right - each in his own way: the main thing was to sell Masaryk and Czecho-Slovakia to the American public, and especially to President Wilson and his advisers. Masaryk's draft of the "Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence," according to Mr. Miller, was scrapped - "the original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again" - but "great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original"! And great care was taken to destroy Masaryk's original, of course! From all this it is obvious that Masaryk, despite arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, knew little about American democracy, which he wanted to exploit so that he might create his own special brand of "Czechoslovak" democracy. But why did Mr. Herbert Adolphus Miller, in the light of statements above, state categorically: "The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved"? Are we to believe that is why Masaryk's version was scrapped and the committee's accepted?? CHAPTER XV - "The Religious Situation in Czechoslovakia" - by Matthew Spinka, B.D., Ph.D., "Associate Professor of Church History in the Chicago Theological Seminary and in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago; editor of Church History, published by the American Society of Church History, and the Society's Studies in Church History; author of: The Church and the Russian Revolution (1927); A History of Christianity in the Balkans (1933); Christianity Confronts Communism (1936-1938); Chronicle of John Malalas (1940); and numerous articles." Spinka's account, partial and notoriously biased against SLOVAKIA 54 the Catholic Church, is not a true account of "the religious situation in Czecho-Slovakia." In it one finds, for the most part, the Protestant or "Hussite" version of the "progressive" CZECHS, which purposefully tends to falsify and confuse the true picture. In the entire 18 pages of the chapter, Slovakia and the Slovaks are limited to several sentences, which clearly indicate that the author was not interested in presenting a factual account. In reading this chapter, readers should bear this in mind, otherwise they may fall for a distorted and biased version of a situation that did not prevail even in the Czech lands, and so much the less in Slovakia. "Furthermore, there was likewise a considerable difference In the character of Slovak and Czech Catholicism, which manifested itself in the continuous and sometimes violent political opposition to the Czechs. This opposition was led chiefly by the priesthood, with the famous Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, the papal prothonotary and a member of the Czechoslovak Senate at their head. It is significant that the instrument of the violent rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia which occurred in March, 1939, was a Roman Catholic priest, Dr. Tiso" - (p. 289). Indeed, it is significant, that Spinka conveniently forgot to back this statement with proof of the "violence" resorted to by the Slovaks. The tendency is only too obvious. The fact is that Msgr. Hlinka and Msgr. Tiso, were not the instruments of the "violent" rupture between Slovakia and Bohemia-Moravia in 1939. But even if we grant that they were, who was more responsible for the situation that obtained in Czecho-Slovakia in 1939 than the Benes Czechs? • • • "When the Pact of Munich delivered the CZECH nation into the hands of the Nazi regime of the Reich, unfortunately a faction within the Catholic Church thought it an opportune moment to further their program. This was a militant, aggressive group of Catholics, with Jaroslav Durych as one of their leaders, who once more identified their cause with the opposition to the democratic Masaryk orientation of CZECH culture. This noisy, denunciatory, fanatical faction tried to substitute the ultramontane policies symbolized in CZECH history by St. Vaclav for the liberal, Protestant-inspired poli• cies represented by the tradition of Jan Hus, and Jan Amos Comenius, AS REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK. But with the setting up of the "Protectorate" in March, 1939, the momentary flare-up of religious intolerance subsided. It should be stressed that the responsible political leaders of the Catholics, such as Msgr. Dr. SLOVAKIA 55 ~ramek, did not share the views of the militant group, and remained loyal and faithful to the Masaryk-Benes orientation" - (p. 292). Please note well: The CZECHS, including "responsible political leaders of the Catholics, SUCH AS MSGR. DR. SRAMEK," scrapped the traditions of St. Wenceslaus for the policies of Hus and Comenius, "AS INTERPRETED BY PRESIDENT MASARYK"! What, then, does non-Catholic Spinka use as a yardstick for "responsible political leaders" of CZECH Catholics? • • • "Of those (CZECHS) who seceded from the Roman Church after the setting up of the Republic, the majority organized themselves into an anti-papal, nationalistic Czechoslovak Church. This body had its inception in the efforts of the "Unity of (CZECH) Catholic Clergy," which in 1919 undertook to wrest from the papal curia certain reforms which had been formulated two years earlier. . . . Seeing the hopelessness of the task of obtaining their demands, the (CZECH) leaders of the reformists decided upon the radical measure of setting up a new (CZECH) national church. At the convention of the (CZECH) reformist clergy held on January 8, 1920, the Czechoslovak Church was organized" - (p. 293). This paragraph and others following on the "Czechoslovak National Church" significantly lack the qualification "CZECH" for reasons best known to Mr. Spinka. The parenthetical inclusions here and below ( CZECH) are not Spinka's, but mine, to indicate clearly that the "Czechoslovak National Church" - which had the blessing of Masaryk and Benes and their socialistic followers was strictly a CZECH venture, nothing SLOVAK about it. • • • "The new (CZECH) Czechoslovak Church grew with astonishing rapidity. . . . The movement at first was (CZECH) Catholic, even though modernist and nationalist in character, but distinctly and bitterly anti-papal and anti-Roman. It was in no sense a Protestant body, and at first did not wish to be so considered, although in the course of time it joined the ranks of Protestant communions" (p. 294-295). • I • • "As for the cultural and religious life of the nation, despite its relative numerical inferiority, the Protestant element has played a role far beyond its strength in numbers. The president-liberator, Thomas G. Masaryk, had become early in life, a convert to Protestantism, and remained a member of the Czech Brethren Church to the end. A large number of other political leaders were and are 56 SLOVAKIA likewise members of one or another Protestant communion: Stefanik, the leader of the Slovaks during the struggle for independence; Premier Hodia, who served during the critical period in 1938; and Ivan Derer, who was minister of education in the Hodfa cabinet; in this group also are to be found ministers Slavik, Hurban, and Osusky all of whom are grouped about Dr. Eduard Benes in his struggle for the restoration of Czechoslovak independence" - (p. 300). If the "Protestant element" played "a role far beyond its strength in numbers" in a country that was predominantly Catholic (over 75 percent). there must have been some reason for it. The same element practically had a monopoly on political life. Masaryk, Spinka told us, was a member of the CZECH Brethren, while the Slovaks mentioned were Protestants, but he conveniently forgot to tell us just what Freemason Benes was. According to Spinka, Slovak Catholicism manifested itself in "violent" opposition, but he failed to mention the fact that the MasarykBenes Czechs, sworn enemies of the Roman Catholic Church, the faith of the vast majority of the population of CzechoSlovakia, were also "violent" in their opposition. In his blinded hatred for the Catholic population, especially the Slovaks, Benes, sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 and to Stalin in 1943. The Slovaks, as a nation, were opposed to the restoration of "Czechoslovak" independence, because it meant enslavement by the Marxist Czechs. It was thoughtful of Mr. Spinka to mention the fact that "the two outstanding CZECH philosophers, both pupils and disciples of Masaryk" also are Protestants: "Professor E. Ra.di, whose originality in the treatment of ideas has made him justly famous; and Professor Jan B. Kozak, the son of an outstanding minister and himself formerly a minister of the Czech Brethren Church, who was until recently the leading member of the philosophical faculty of the University of Prague. He is at present teaching at Oberlin College." Likewise that "among the theologians, none is more outstanding than Professor J. L. Hromadka, of the Jan Hus Theological Faculty, at present a member of the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary.... " All these "outstanding CZECH philosophers" - pupils and disciples of Hus and Masaryk - are doing nicely, thank you, under the 57 SLOVAKIA Red Czech regime of Prague. Hromadka returned to Prague ten years ago to head the "Czechoslovak National Church; when the Czech Reds took over all power in February 1948, Hromadka and his Czech church voluntarily offered to co·Operate 100 percent! It would seem that the Czech "reformers" are continually reforming against Christianity! (Continued) • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK . CHAPTER THREE AFTER THE FALL OF GREAT MORAVIA There are no clear and reliable reports in historical sources to tell us when and under what circumstances Mojmir's country lost its independence. It is possible that the Slovak army, which clashed with the enemy so frequently, together with courageous Mojmir II, the last of the early Slovak rulers, perished in a final battle for the freedom of Slovakland. However, it is also possible that Mojmir IT, exhausted by constant warfare and without outside help in sight, did not venture into another war which he could not possibly win. Mojmir Il in his ten-year reign proved on more than one occasion that he was a sagacious ruler, and we can be certain that in those trying times he did what he deemed best for his country. From reliable sources we can learn only that in 906 A. D. Mojmir's country no longer was an independent state, because the Magyars marched through Slovakia in that year to aid the Slovanic Glomaches in their fight against the Saxons. Slovakia did not immediately fall prey to the Magyars who passed through it into neighboring countries on foraging expeditions. Slovakia only ceased to be an independent state. She no longer had her own ruler and could no longer defend herself, but she did not as yet belong under the rule of a foreign state. The German empire, exposed to the at-  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (7/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957 pp. 52-57 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 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/251">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 59-64</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/231">Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), pp. 69-83</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/f8066c33951e2700b471ba9f96d5ab49.pdf afd0299df80e4d64bee7c61dd5fb7c03 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 19 ANALYZING THE ANALYSTS: IS THE SOVIET UNION DOOMED? PHILIP A. HROBAK According to a number of Western "expert" analysts, correspondents, and "top" diplomats, there are many signs pointing to the "fact" that the Soviet Union is doomed. They say that many things have happened in the various satellite countries, even in the Soviet Union itself, which definitely are unmistakable signs of the failure of the Communists to convert their subjects to the doctrines of Marx and Engels and "to sell their ideas to their own youth." To the "experts" this means the eventual doom for the Communist empire," the collapse of the political system of Communism in the "foreseeable future." Such is the apparent conclusion of analyst Howard Randleman of the International News Service, whose series of articles, published early in January, 1957, I have taken the liberty to scrutinize. Is the Soviet Union really doomed? The vast majority of the nations of the free world undoubtedly wish that it were; and the sooner the Communist political system collapses, the better - but, unfortunately, wishing alone will not make it so. As long as Western political leaders, "expert" analysts and commentators, "top" diplomats and "distinguished" diplomatic correspondents follow the path which the Communists want anti-Communists to follow - the path of "peaceful coexistence," the support of "nationalist" or Titoist Communism which is supposed to be "different" than the Soviet "international" brand of Communism, while the Communists of all countries under the leadership of the men in the Kremlin are busy conquering the world - America and the rest of the free world are in mortal danger. Under the prevailing conditions, it is not the Soviet Union and the Communist political system that is doomed, but the democratic west and all free democratic political systems. Of course, the West still has time to meet the danger with �20 SLOVAKIA effective countermeasures, but it's later than most of us think. Substituting wishful thinking and arbitrary theorizing, and completely ignoring the Communist "guide to action" which is necessary for the understanding of Communist policies, techniques and tactics, did not and will not contribute to the downfall of Communism. Neither will irresponsible vagaries of Western Titoists, who glorify and idolize Tito, Gomulka, and Kadar - the old stalwarts of international Communism, but now the proponents of "naas champions of democracy. To tional" Communism promote "national" Communism (Titoism), that is, a policy of helping a Communist regin1e, for the sake of a Communist conquest of the world, makes sense. To promote it for the sake of freedom, does not. Events behind the Iron Curtain - as noted by the EVENING NEWS (Harrisburg, Pa.), January 7, 1957, in its introduction to the first of a series of six articles by Howard Randleman, " distinguished diplomatic and foreign correspondent" - have indeed moved with swift and startling speed in recent months. However, whether the analysis or interpretation of these events by the "Chief European Correspondent of the International News Service" is reasonably correct is, in my mind, highly questionable, the views of the "West's top diplomats" and the "daily headlines" on the future of the Soviet Empire to the contrary notwithstanding. After reading the articles carefully several times, I had been left with the impression that the Soviet Union really was in serious trouble and might be expected to fold up within the next five years even without any armed intervention by the West. Undoubtedly other readers of the paper had been similarly impressed. But thoroughly informed persons on the Soviet Union and Communist techniques and tactics know that this is only wishful thinking. The analysis tendered by Mr. Randleman has, I am afraid, only added to the heaps of misinformation so generously propagated even by so-called "Western experts" on Communism and the Soviet Union. The men in the Kremlin thrive on confusion and cha<!>s; they promote ,it assiduously, (. �SLOVAKIA 21 though they prefer that the West does the promoting for them, wittingly or unwittingly, for the edification of satellites and potential satellites. Strangely enough, the West thus far has done a remarkable job in that respect, and Mr. Handleman's effort, in my opinion not the least of the contributions, was appreciated by the Kremlin goons. According to Randleman: "The handwriting is on the wall for the Communist Empire. Western diplomatic authorities see it. They say the men in the Kremlin must see it." Was this a warranted or unwarranted assumption? Even if it were warranted, can any "expert" or "Western diplomatic authority" tell us with certitude that the hand½Titing on the wall is seen and interpreted by the men in he Kremlin in he same light as it is by any Western experts or diplomats? Of course not! The job of busting up the empire of Lenin and Stalin, we are told, will not be easy and may take time, but "Western experts" - whoever they are - "believe the Communist Empire will break up without a major war. They also believe, according to Randleman, that if the West can hold fast for another four or five years, "the Soviet rulers in the end will offer an acceptable formula for security in Europe and the world." But, Mr. Randleman hedged, "it is also recognized that, although the present signs point to the dissolution of the power of the Soviet Empire, the trend could be reversed." And, when it comes to the Soviet Union, there are always "too many unpredictables," according to one highly placed diplomat, "but certainly from everything we know now, the most likely trend over the next few years is one in which the Kremlin leaders will be pushed towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples." History, however, tells us in no uncertain terms that any such "trend" not only could be, but always had been reversed in the past. It also tells us that, whenever the Kremlin leaders were "pushed" towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples, the negotiation never actually benefitted the West and the peoples concerned, but only the Soviet Union and Communist regimes. "Weste@A~516~aUB'RM'f Randleman, "bank heavily MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE �22 SLOVAKIA on the common sense of the Russian leaders." One of the "best informed, who has served in the Soviet Union," said the Kremlin leaders might make war if things get worse, "but the best safeguard against war, perhaps, is that leaders in the Kremlin are pretty level headed: they do not want to commit suicide." So, if it does come to the worst, the Kremlin leaders, we are supposed to believe, will yield "what they must" to satellite pressure and, in the end, instead of busting out with atomic war, "it seems more likely they will make a realistic and acceptable offer to the West for a workable security system." It is obvious that what Randleman referred to as the "best informed" diplomat does not necessarily mean that a diplomat so qualified is in fact too well informed on the Soviet or Communist business. It certainly is most unfortunate for the West that its diplomats bank so heavily on the "common sense" of the men in the Kremlin and consider them "pretty level headed," because Soviet leaders are not just ordinary men with "common sense." They are madmen. Hence, if it is in the Soviet interest, they will commit suicide, because they know that the slightest indication to refuse to make the supreme sacrifice at any time means a betrayal of that interest, and the penalty for betrayal is death. Communism always has and always will continue to devour its own children. The Kremlin leaders cannot ever be honestly interested in any "workable security system" with the West, because they are dedicated to the destruction of western civilization and all systems of government opposed to the Soviet system. What did the West really gain by what recently transpired in Poland and Hungary? Let's be honest and face it: nothing but the scorn and curses of the terribly disappointed wretches - the "heroic fighters for freedom" as the West called them - who certainly expected a lot more than pious platitudes, sympathy, and resolutions of protest from the Western democracies which, they swear before God and all men, are in fact responsible for their brutal enslavement by the Soviet Union and its stooges. On the other hand, what did Communism and/ or the Soviet Union actually lose by what happened in those hap- �SLOVAKIA 23 less, brutally tyrannized countries? Let us be equally honest and openly admit that the Soviet Union lost nothing. And judging by past history, the Reds even stand to gain more power and prestige ! Having assumed that the Soviet Empire is collapsing, Haqdleman continued to babble, saying that "the Soviet rulers have embarked on a monumental and desperate operation to salvage what they can of the power of their empire." But the odds "among Western diplomats" are that the operation will fail because the Kremlin moved too late. In the light of reality, however, it is rather naive, if not downright silly, to assume that the Soviet Empire is collapsing and then to declare that the Soviet rulers, therefore, have embarked on a "monumental and desperate" operation to salvage the power, which they still held firmly in their hands, but which the West hopefully wished was actually threatened. Once he was captivated by his assumption, the Chief European Correspondent of the INS looked for support of his thesis to the view taken by Secretary of State Dulles at the recent NATO conference: satellite unrest carries with it the danger of a general war, but it is still to be welcomed greatly as foreshadowing the collapse of the Soviet Empire or a fundamental change in its character; and the "desperation in the Kremlin is reflected in the various means it has used to salvage power." Now, what were some of those various means? He told us that in Hungary "there were tanks and guns, and concession . .. Chou En-Lai of Red China was invited to Moscow for talks. . . . Radio Budapest broadcast Christmas hymns and carols for the first time in eight years .... In Poland there were concessions ... : On Christmas Eve radio Warsaw broadcast a message by Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski." Concessions? If that's what the above might be called, yes, but only temporary. After devoting one installment to the "various means" the Kremlin used to "salvage" its power in the satellites, Randleman then told us in the next: "The Kremlin leadership appears secure, however, within the Soviet Union and in the other satellites for the time �24 SLOVAKIA being." Quite a let-down, indeed! But there is more; the situation may not be such as reported: "The best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals decry what they call a tendency to sensationalize reports of unrest within the Soviet Union." On the other hand, however, "there have been enough reports to convince the experts that satellite people no longer are sheep who accept whatever they are told." What the 'experts" mean by "whatever they are told," is anybody's guess. We know, however, that if satellite people do not keep in line with the regime that is totally subservient to the Kremlin, they may be slaughtered, as they were in Hungary. But then, if there is a tendency to "sensationalize" reports of unrest within the Soviet Union, what was there to prevent readers of Handleman's "analysis" from suspecting that possibly even the Hungarian reports were sensationalized? And what was the net result in Hungary and Poland? Were not those satellite peoples, in the end, "sheep" who had to accept whatever they were told by the Kremlin and its agents? Youth revolts in Poland and Hungary, and other satellites, also forecast the doom of the Soviet Empire, according to Randleman, who based his conclusion on the views of Western "experts and diplomats." Even students of Moscow and Leningrad "suddenly" have begun to question and "to criticize the results of Communist rule - if not yet the very tenets of Communism." Accepting this behavior of the students as a "failure of the Communists to sell their ideas to their own youth," Western diplomats figure, according to Randleman, that this "alone means the eventual doom for the Communist Empire." Randleman himself, however, had stated in a previous chapter that "there has been no confirmed report of basic criticism of the system of Soviet rule." And we know that it will take more than criticism to knock Communism out. But does it? Youth generally is highly emotional, impatient, and fickle; it is easily swayed from one ideology to another, taking little account of principles. We read of student demonstrations in Slovakia, Ukrainia, Poland, Bohemia and Hungary against oppressions of Red regimes; �SLOVAKIA 25 in some places these demonstrations resulted in violence. The net result usually was frustration: their own people would not support their "revolts" - and the West was unwilling to intervene, because that might have meant war. Youth wants war in the satellites, but the oldsters do not and Western democracies do not, either. After a couple of setbacks, satellite youth tends to accept its fate with resignation, like the oldsters do. Of course, that is unfortunate, because in the end it means a stronger and more powerful Soviet Union. Now, in Moscow itself, did the students really question the infallibility of the Red Party, as Randleman told us? Did they really criticize "the results" of Communist rule, or possibly just some of its methods and techniques? What percentage of the students of Moscow and Leningrad dared to question "the results" of Communist rule? I believe it is safe to say that no one knows not even the "experts." Furthermore, is it not possible that some of the students, who did the questioning and criticizing, were trained agents of the men in the Kremlin? Unless Western "experts and diplomats," ordinary and "distinguished" reporters, take these and similar questions into account in their reports and statements, I believe we have reason to suspect that they are not objective, but more or less superficial and tendencious. In the last of the series of articles by Randleman in the EVENING NEWS, we read that "the American dream of a Russia strong, healthy and friendly goes way back." That may be so, but does that necessarily apply to our dream of the Soviet Union? Or does Russia and the Soviet Union mean one and the same thing to Western "expert" diplomats and correspondents? George Kennan, former ambassador to the Soviet Union and "one of the two or three best American experts on the Soviet Union," according to Randleman, "forecast bluntly in 1951 that the satellites would win their independence." Of course, he did not forecast exactly from whom or what, or how and when that would happen, but, behold what the same Mr. Kennan said on May 3, 1956: "What we must recognize today, in the case of the sa- �26 SLOVAKIA tellites, is that evil like good, produces its own vested interests. Where regimes of this nature have been in power for more than a decade, there can be no question of putting Humpty Dumpty (i.e., a relative condition of freedom) together again and restoring the status quo ante ... there is a finality, for better or worse, about what has now occurred in Eastern Europe. . . . Whether we like it or not, the gradual evolution of these Communist regimes to a position of greater independence and greater responsiveness to domestic opinion is the best we can hope for as the next phase of development in that area." However, according to the SATURDAY EVENING POST of November 24, 1956, Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," knew right along that satellite rebellions were going to take place, and actually predicted, in 1945 that they would. Then he predicted still further uprisings because "the same fundamental forces are at work throughout the whole area." What these "fundamental forces" were, however, Mr. Kennan did not spell out. On May 3, 1956, according to Mr. Kennan, there was a "finality" about Red regimes, but some seven months later he knew that there was no "finality" about those regimes at all. That, of course, brings us to the question: Did Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," have the vaguest idea of what he was talking about on May 3, 1956? We remember Mr. Kennan as the promoter of the "containment" policy of our State Department. When the Soviet "de-Stalinization" campaign erupted last winter, the same Mr. Kennan wrote many articles and spoke many speeches to explain "the meaning of the change." The central idea in all of these manifestations of Kennan is the same: "The Russians have changed" since the death and renunciation of Stalin. That, of course, was exactly what the men of the Kremlin wanted the West to believe! Then came the Hungarian massacre! It is obvious that Randleman attempted to demonstrate, with the help of "the best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals": 1. that the "normal logic" of Communist leaders is precisely the same as that of a representative Western mind (his own and the "ex- �SLOVAKIA 27 perts' " he relies upon) ; and, 2. that within the next "three, four or five years," with the United States making a strenuous effort to stop Communism in its tracks by appealing to "common sense," the men in the Kremlin, Russians or whatever they are, will come around to the point of "offering a realistic and acceptable formula by which the two worlds of the cold war era can live together in peace and later in friendship." This is muddled thinking and tragic nonsense. The thesis is built on false premises. Many of our policymakers and writers, rather than being guided by a correct picture of what is going on in Communist minds, have tended to interpret these minds in our own image. They know that all decent people would like to have the cold war ended and a lasting peace established. But they know, too, that peace can come about only by "understanding." The chief function of our policies, therefore, should be to overcome "misunderstanding" between America and the Soviet Union, with the U. S. appealing to "common purposes"! This reasoning derives from the assumption that the Soviet system is basically a national political system devoted to the pursuits of reasonable social goals. But a closer, better look at that system reveals that it is no different basically than the Nazi system. Because the Nazi features were widely accepted as evidence of irrationality, we called the followers of Hitler "crazy, dangerous madmen." What then are the followers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Co.? It is well to remember that, by virtue of their belief in Marxist dogma, Communists live in a mental world that is essentially hostile to the mental world of the West. From the very beginning, Marxism-Leninism has conceived the relation between itself and the rest of the world as one of destruction. The program of the Reds never changes: they are dedicated to our destruction; they will destroy us, if we do not destroy them first. In Soviet foreign relations there is no intellectual or emotional basis for reasonableness, as non-Soviet countries understand it. "Reasonable Communism" is a contradiction in terms. The Communist mind, as the record shows, has so defined its world that it shares neither truth nor logic nor moral- �28 SLOVAKIA ity with the rest of mankind. It is, therefore, senseless to talk about establishing peace with the Communists. Temporary truce, yes, if it suits the Soviet Union and the ultimate aim of Comunism, but not peace. Peace, in the sense of international order based on a minimum of common values, is not possible with an adversary who rejects the very right of other societies to exist. Furthermore, Communists tend to develop the psychological tendency to engage in self-contradictory actions. It is not easy for most Westerners, even many Western "experts and diplomats," to grasp that Communists manage to be for and against something at the same time. Handleman's articles, though he did not bring the thought out, have many evidences of this. The Communists were for the Russian people, so they executed more than fifteen million Russians from 1917 to 1938; they were for the Ukrainians, so they starved over 20 million of them to death in one year when there was no war; they claimed they were for a strong, democratic, independent Poland and then proceeded to knock the tar out of them, butchering over 10,000 Polish Army officers in the Katyn Forest for good measure; Moscow supported the parties allied with the Reds in the French Popular Front and simultaneously sought to split and weaken them from within; the Kremlin worked for Hitler's destruction at Geneva and in the capitals of Western Europe, but it also conducted negotiations with Berlin aiming at increasing Nazi strength; Tito, a most valuable product of the Kremlin, fought the Germans in Yugoslavia and also used their help to fight his civil war; Slovak Reds were for an independent Slovak Republic, but at the same time they collaborated with the Czech Reds and Benes Czechs to restore CzechoSlovakia; Stalin helped Benes and his Czech Nazis back into power in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia, while his stooge Gottwald was under orders to speed up the complete takeover the power by the Reds; the Kremlin is for peace and order in the world, but at the same time is fomenting throuble just about everywhere. And Stalin recommended democratic tactics as the surest way to achieve Communist aims. Communist dialectics! �SLOVAKIA 29 Handleman's articles gave the impression that the recent disturbances in Poland and Hungary had weakened the Soviet Empire ("Prophecy of Doom Heard by the Kremlin, Observer Believes" - "Red Rulers Face Desepration Drive to Save Empire"). But is it not a fact that the entire history of Communism is practically an uninterrupted sequence of bloody convulsions? And yet we know that the Communist world is stronger today than it ever was. What is more, the record shows that factional feuds within the Communist Empire do not help the West and the enslaved peoples, but ultimately only strengthen Communism. The anti-Communists of Europe apparently have learned one lesson from history: no totalitarian regime, once it was established, has ever broken down because of internal disruptions; a totalitarian regime collapses only when external powers intervene. In the face of the recent Hungarian slaughter, the "democratic" West now should be definitely convinced that even the most fantastic courage of a suppressed people cannot overthrow a determined totalitarian regime which always has the backing of the Kremlin. Of course, rebellions and convulsions within the Communist-dominated countries are exceptional opportunities for the West to thrust into the Red orbit, but, if the opportunity is wasted by a West enchanted by or petrified with pacifism, the inescapable result of such historic frustration is a further triumph of Communism. In November 1917, one regiment could have stopped the Bolsheviks, led by non-Russians, in their tracks. A year later, perhaps a division of Allied troops would have knocked them out, but a small army would have been needed in 1920. The Red Empire was always mortally vulnerable to a determined attack by organized external forces, but as the years rolled by the required effort increased both in size and also in risk. Today the men of the Kremlin are convinced that the West does not want war - that it prefers to fight with words. Randleman reported: "the chief of these problems, staggering problems for the United States, will be to prevent a third world war from erupting." In the last of his �30 SLOVAKIA series of six articles (Jan. 12, 1957), he added: "the threat of a major war being triggered in this way (by the satellites) ... was the reason Dulles had to make the painful announcement during the December meeting of NATO foreign ministers that the U. S. would not be able to intervene to help any satellite revolt with arms." That is what the poor wretches in the satellite countries did not want to hear, but that is precisely what the men of the Kremlin did want to hear: the Reds are now determined more than ever to intervene anywhere at any time in the interest of the Soviet Union, the homeland of all Communists, with impunity. The Kremlin can always take care of revolts in the satellite countries and at the same time start trouble for the West elsewhere - and its stooges in the satellites know that. The men in the Kremlin and all Reds agree with Dulles on one point he made at the NATO meeting in December: Soviet rulers shall never give up their dream of world conquest voluntarily! Freedom and Communism are irreconcilable. Coexistence is the complete denial of this fundamental fact of the present international situation. The Communist policy of "peaceful coexistence" is aimed at the moral, political, and military disarmament of the West. At present it is the main Communist vehicle to destroy the will of the free world to live and fight. Ever since the first Communist seizure of power, the Communists have amply demonstrated that they meant business and used power with utter contempt for human lives, moral scruples, and democratic principles. Since the free world has 'coexisted" with Communism for some 39 years (one generation) , Communism has grown from 200 to over 800 million people and now rules one-third of the globe. Another generation of such "coexistence" and ... ? The situation becomes all the more tragic and alarming when we recall that ten European countries were harnessed with Communist regimes by the Western democracies to appease the high-priests of Communism, the men of the Kremlin. What America and the rest of the free world really �SLOVAKIA 31 need right now is a large, stiff dose of "Knowlandism" for the brain to clear our thinking so that we might resolve: NO MORAL AND/ OR MATERIAL AID FOR THE SOVIET UNION AND ITS SATELLITES! • • • A BELATED REPORT By CHARLES MURIN, Ph.D., LL.D. It seems to be inevitable during a war, when the stakes are high, that people reduce their thinking to two categories only: my side is identified with the good and moral purely and simply, the enemy, or the other side. is the embodiment pure of the principle of evil which is the root of all disorder in the world. It is understandable that this psychological attitude belongs to war, because one has to know what he is offering his life for. However, if this psychological factor seems to belong to the conditions required for the winning of a war, the same attitude is a disturbing factor when it enters among the considerations how to win the peace. This is exactly what we experienced after World War II in regard to the organization of post-war Europe. Besides this, Slovak refugees, among many others, have experienced in their own personal destinies the drawbacks in the application of the above-mentioned psychological attitude to the period immediately following the war. It took about two years until an about face had been brought about, and the writer of these lines had the peculiar opportunity of being personally involved in both stages of mind; the one that is supposed to win the war, and the one which aims at winning the peace. It goes without saying that the latter was infinitely more in accordance with common sense and reason and with what can be called the moral principles in politics. The psychological attitude of seeing only black and white becomes a real disaster when it is adopted by responsible statesmen and politicians. As a direct consequence, this attitude inevitably involves political and moral contradictions that do not fail to give, with on unerring � SLOVAKIA 19 ANALYZING THE ANALYSTS: IS THE SOVIET UNION DOOMED? PHILIP A. HROBAK According to a number of Western "expert" analysts, correspondents, and "top" diplomats, there are many signs pointing to the "fact" that the Soviet Union is doomed. They say that many things have happened in the various satellite countries, even in the Soviet Union itself, which definitely are unmistakable signs of the failure of the Communists to convert their subjects to the doctrines of Marx and Engels and "to sell their ideas to their own youth." To the "experts" this means the eventual doom for the Communist empire," the collapse of the political system of Communism in the "foreseeable future." Such is the apparent conclusion of analyst Howard Randleman of the International News Service, whose series of articles, published early in January, 1957, I have taken the liberty to scrutinize. Is the Soviet Union really doomed? The vast majority of the nations of the free world undoubtedly wish that it were; and the sooner the Communist political system collapses, the better - but, unfortunately, wishing alone will not make it so. As long as Western political leaders, "expert" analysts and commentators, "top" diplomats and "distinguished" diplomatic correspondents follow the path which the Communists want anti-Communists to follow - the path of "peaceful coexistence," the support of "nationalist" or Titoist Communism which is supposed to be "different" than the Soviet "international" brand of Communism, while the Communists of all countries under the leadership of the men in the Kremlin are busy conquering the world - America and the rest of the free world are in mortal danger. Under the prevailing conditions, it is not the Soviet Union and the Communist political system that is doomed, but the democratic west and all free democratic political systems. Of course, the West still has time to meet the danger with �20 SLOVAKIA effective countermeasures, but it's later than most of us think. Substituting wishful thinking and arbitrary theorizing, and completely ignoring the Communist "guide to action" which is necessary for the understanding of Communist policies, techniques and tactics, did not and will not contribute to the downfall of Communism. Neither will irresponsible vagaries of Western Titoists, who glorify and idolize Tito, Gomulka, and Kadar - the old stalwarts of international Communism, but now the proponents of "naas champions of democracy. To tional" Communism promote "national" Communism (Titoism), that is, a policy of helping a Communist regin1e, for the sake of a Communist conquest of the world, makes sense. To promote it for the sake of freedom, does not. Events behind the Iron Curtain - as noted by the EVENING NEWS (Harrisburg, Pa.), January 7, 1957, in its introduction to the first of a series of six articles by Howard Randleman, " distinguished diplomatic and foreign correspondent" - have indeed moved with swift and startling speed in recent months. However, whether the analysis or interpretation of these events by the "Chief European Correspondent of the International News Service" is reasonably correct is, in my mind, highly questionable, the views of the "West's top diplomats" and the "daily headlines" on the future of the Soviet Empire to the contrary notwithstanding. After reading the articles carefully several times, I had been left with the impression that the Soviet Union really was in serious trouble and might be expected to fold up within the next five years even without any armed intervention by the West. Undoubtedly other readers of the paper had been similarly impressed. But thoroughly informed persons on the Soviet Union and Communist techniques and tactics know that this is only wishful thinking. The analysis tendered by Mr. Randleman has, I am afraid, only added to the heaps of misinformation so generously propagated even by so-called "Western experts" on Communism and the Soviet Union. The men in the Kremlin thrive on confusion and cha<!>s; they promote ,it assiduously, (. �SLOVAKIA 21 though they prefer that the West does the promoting for them, wittingly or unwittingly, for the edification of satellites and potential satellites. Strangely enough, the West thus far has done a remarkable job in that respect, and Mr. Handleman's effort, in my opinion not the least of the contributions, was appreciated by the Kremlin goons. According to Randleman: "The handwriting is on the wall for the Communist Empire. Western diplomatic authorities see it. They say the men in the Kremlin must see it." Was this a warranted or unwarranted assumption? Even if it were warranted, can any "expert" or "Western diplomatic authority" tell us with certitude that the hand½Titing on the wall is seen and interpreted by the men in he Kremlin in he same light as it is by any Western experts or diplomats? Of course not! The job of busting up the empire of Lenin and Stalin, we are told, will not be easy and may take time, but "Western experts" - whoever they are - "believe the Communist Empire will break up without a major war. They also believe, according to Randleman, that if the West can hold fast for another four or five years, "the Soviet rulers in the end will offer an acceptable formula for security in Europe and the world." But, Mr. Randleman hedged, "it is also recognized that, although the present signs point to the dissolution of the power of the Soviet Empire, the trend could be reversed." And, when it comes to the Soviet Union, there are always "too many unpredictables," according to one highly placed diplomat, "but certainly from everything we know now, the most likely trend over the next few years is one in which the Kremlin leaders will be pushed towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples." History, however, tells us in no uncertain terms that any such "trend" not only could be, but always had been reversed in the past. It also tells us that, whenever the Kremlin leaders were "pushed" towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples, the negotiation never actually benefitted the West and the peoples concerned, but only the Soviet Union and Communist regimes. "Weste@A~516~aUB'RM'f Randleman, "bank heavily MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE �22 SLOVAKIA on the common sense of the Russian leaders." One of the "best informed, who has served in the Soviet Union," said the Kremlin leaders might make war if things get worse, "but the best safeguard against war, perhaps, is that leaders in the Kremlin are pretty level headed: they do not want to commit suicide." So, if it does come to the worst, the Kremlin leaders, we are supposed to believe, will yield "what they must" to satellite pressure and, in the end, instead of busting out with atomic war, "it seems more likely they will make a realistic and acceptable offer to the West for a workable security system." It is obvious that what Randleman referred to as the "best informed" diplomat does not necessarily mean that a diplomat so qualified is in fact too well informed on the Soviet or Communist business. It certainly is most unfortunate for the West that its diplomats bank so heavily on the "common sense" of the men in the Kremlin and consider them "pretty level headed," because Soviet leaders are not just ordinary men with "common sense." They are madmen. Hence, if it is in the Soviet interest, they will commit suicide, because they know that the slightest indication to refuse to make the supreme sacrifice at any time means a betrayal of that interest, and the penalty for betrayal is death. Communism always has and always will continue to devour its own children. The Kremlin leaders cannot ever be honestly interested in any "workable security system" with the West, because they are dedicated to the destruction of western civilization and all systems of government opposed to the Soviet system. What did the West really gain by what recently transpired in Poland and Hungary? Let's be honest and face it: nothing but the scorn and curses of the terribly disappointed wretches - the "heroic fighters for freedom" as the West called them - who certainly expected a lot more than pious platitudes, sympathy, and resolutions of protest from the Western democracies which, they swear before God and all men, are in fact responsible for their brutal enslavement by the Soviet Union and its stooges. On the other hand, what did Communism and/ or the Soviet Union actually lose by what happened in those hap- �SLOVAKIA 23 less, brutally tyrannized countries? Let us be equally honest and openly admit that the Soviet Union lost nothing. And judging by past history, the Reds even stand to gain more power and prestige ! Having assumed that the Soviet Empire is collapsing, Haqdleman continued to babble, saying that "the Soviet rulers have embarked on a monumental and desperate operation to salvage what they can of the power of their empire." But the odds "among Western diplomats" are that the operation will fail because the Kremlin moved too late. In the light of reality, however, it is rather naive, if not downright silly, to assume that the Soviet Empire is collapsing and then to declare that the Soviet rulers, therefore, have embarked on a "monumental and desperate" operation to salvage the power, which they still held firmly in their hands, but which the West hopefully wished was actually threatened. Once he was captivated by his assumption, the Chief European Correspondent of the INS looked for support of his thesis to the view taken by Secretary of State Dulles at the recent NATO conference: satellite unrest carries with it the danger of a general war, but it is still to be welcomed greatly as foreshadowing the collapse of the Soviet Empire or a fundamental change in its character; and the "desperation in the Kremlin is reflected in the various means it has used to salvage power." Now, what were some of those various means? He told us that in Hungary "there were tanks and guns, and concession . .. Chou En-Lai of Red China was invited to Moscow for talks. . . . Radio Budapest broadcast Christmas hymns and carols for the first time in eight years .... In Poland there were concessions ... : On Christmas Eve radio Warsaw broadcast a message by Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski." Concessions? If that's what the above might be called, yes, but only temporary. After devoting one installment to the "various means" the Kremlin used to "salvage" its power in the satellites, Randleman then told us in the next: "The Kremlin leadership appears secure, however, within the Soviet Union and in the other satellites for the time �24 SLOVAKIA being." Quite a let-down, indeed! But there is more; the situation may not be such as reported: "The best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals decry what they call a tendency to sensationalize reports of unrest within the Soviet Union." On the other hand, however, "there have been enough reports to convince the experts that satellite people no longer are sheep who accept whatever they are told." What the 'experts" mean by "whatever they are told," is anybody's guess. We know, however, that if satellite people do not keep in line with the regime that is totally subservient to the Kremlin, they may be slaughtered, as they were in Hungary. But then, if there is a tendency to "sensationalize" reports of unrest within the Soviet Union, what was there to prevent readers of Handleman's "analysis" from suspecting that possibly even the Hungarian reports were sensationalized? And what was the net result in Hungary and Poland? Were not those satellite peoples, in the end, "sheep" who had to accept whatever they were told by the Kremlin and its agents? Youth revolts in Poland and Hungary, and other satellites, also forecast the doom of the Soviet Empire, according to Randleman, who based his conclusion on the views of Western "experts and diplomats." Even students of Moscow and Leningrad "suddenly" have begun to question and "to criticize the results of Communist rule - if not yet the very tenets of Communism." Accepting this behavior of the students as a "failure of the Communists to sell their ideas to their own youth," Western diplomats figure, according to Randleman, that this "alone means the eventual doom for the Communist Empire." Randleman himself, however, had stated in a previous chapter that "there has been no confirmed report of basic criticism of the system of Soviet rule." And we know that it will take more than criticism to knock Communism out. But does it? Youth generally is highly emotional, impatient, and fickle; it is easily swayed from one ideology to another, taking little account of principles. We read of student demonstrations in Slovakia, Ukrainia, Poland, Bohemia and Hungary against oppressions of Red regimes; �SLOVAKIA 25 in some places these demonstrations resulted in violence. The net result usually was frustration: their own people would not support their "revolts" - and the West was unwilling to intervene, because that might have meant war. Youth wants war in the satellites, but the oldsters do not and Western democracies do not, either. After a couple of setbacks, satellite youth tends to accept its fate with resignation, like the oldsters do. Of course, that is unfortunate, because in the end it means a stronger and more powerful Soviet Union. Now, in Moscow itself, did the students really question the infallibility of the Red Party, as Randleman told us? Did they really criticize "the results" of Communist rule, or possibly just some of its methods and techniques? What percentage of the students of Moscow and Leningrad dared to question "the results" of Communist rule? I believe it is safe to say that no one knows not even the "experts." Furthermore, is it not possible that some of the students, who did the questioning and criticizing, were trained agents of the men in the Kremlin? Unless Western "experts and diplomats," ordinary and "distinguished" reporters, take these and similar questions into account in their reports and statements, I believe we have reason to suspect that they are not objective, but more or less superficial and tendencious. In the last of the series of articles by Randleman in the EVENING NEWS, we read that "the American dream of a Russia strong, healthy and friendly goes way back." That may be so, but does that necessarily apply to our dream of the Soviet Union? Or does Russia and the Soviet Union mean one and the same thing to Western "expert" diplomats and correspondents? George Kennan, former ambassador to the Soviet Union and "one of the two or three best American experts on the Soviet Union," according to Randleman, "forecast bluntly in 1951 that the satellites would win their independence." Of course, he did not forecast exactly from whom or what, or how and when that would happen, but, behold what the same Mr. Kennan said on May 3, 1956: "What we must recognize today, in the case of the sa- �26 SLOVAKIA tellites, is that evil like good, produces its own vested interests. Where regimes of this nature have been in power for more than a decade, there can be no question of putting Humpty Dumpty (i.e., a relative condition of freedom) together again and restoring the status quo ante ... there is a finality, for better or worse, about what has now occurred in Eastern Europe. . . . Whether we like it or not, the gradual evolution of these Communist regimes to a position of greater independence and greater responsiveness to domestic opinion is the best we can hope for as the next phase of development in that area." However, according to the SATURDAY EVENING POST of November 24, 1956, Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," knew right along that satellite rebellions were going to take place, and actually predicted, in 1945 that they would. Then he predicted still further uprisings because "the same fundamental forces are at work throughout the whole area." What these "fundamental forces" were, however, Mr. Kennan did not spell out. On May 3, 1956, according to Mr. Kennan, there was a "finality" about Red regimes, but some seven months later he knew that there was no "finality" about those regimes at all. That, of course, brings us to the question: Did Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," have the vaguest idea of what he was talking about on May 3, 1956? We remember Mr. Kennan as the promoter of the "containment" policy of our State Department. When the Soviet "de-Stalinization" campaign erupted last winter, the same Mr. Kennan wrote many articles and spoke many speeches to explain "the meaning of the change." The central idea in all of these manifestations of Kennan is the same: "The Russians have changed" since the death and renunciation of Stalin. That, of course, was exactly what the men of the Kremlin wanted the West to believe! Then came the Hungarian massacre! It is obvious that Randleman attempted to demonstrate, with the help of "the best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals": 1. that the "normal logic" of Communist leaders is precisely the same as that of a representative Western mind (his own and the "ex- �SLOVAKIA 27 perts' " he relies upon) ; and, 2. that within the next "three, four or five years," with the United States making a strenuous effort to stop Communism in its tracks by appealing to "common sense," the men in the Kremlin, Russians or whatever they are, will come around to the point of "offering a realistic and acceptable formula by which the two worlds of the cold war era can live together in peace and later in friendship." This is muddled thinking and tragic nonsense. The thesis is built on false premises. Many of our policymakers and writers, rather than being guided by a correct picture of what is going on in Communist minds, have tended to interpret these minds in our own image. They know that all decent people would like to have the cold war ended and a lasting peace established. But they know, too, that peace can come about only by "understanding." The chief function of our policies, therefore, should be to overcome "misunderstanding" between America and the Soviet Union, with the U. S. appealing to "common purposes"! This reasoning derives from the assumption that the Soviet system is basically a national political system devoted to the pursuits of reasonable social goals. But a closer, better look at that system reveals that it is no different basically than the Nazi system. Because the Nazi features were widely accepted as evidence of irrationality, we called the followers of Hitler "crazy, dangerous madmen." What then are the followers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Co.? It is well to remember that, by virtue of their belief in Marxist dogma, Communists live in a mental world that is essentially hostile to the mental world of the West. From the very beginning, Marxism-Leninism has conceived the relation between itself and the rest of the world as one of destruction. The program of the Reds never changes: they are dedicated to our destruction; they will destroy us, if we do not destroy them first. In Soviet foreign relations there is no intellectual or emotional basis for reasonableness, as non-Soviet countries understand it. "Reasonable Communism" is a contradiction in terms. The Communist mind, as the record shows, has so defined its world that it shares neither truth nor logic nor moral- �28 SLOVAKIA ity with the rest of mankind. It is, therefore, senseless to talk about establishing peace with the Communists. Temporary truce, yes, if it suits the Soviet Union and the ultimate aim of Comunism, but not peace. Peace, in the sense of international order based on a minimum of common values, is not possible with an adversary who rejects the very right of other societies to exist. Furthermore, Communists tend to develop the psychological tendency to engage in self-contradictory actions. It is not easy for most Westerners, even many Western "experts and diplomats," to grasp that Communists manage to be for and against something at the same time. Handleman's articles, though he did not bring the thought out, have many evidences of this. The Communists were for the Russian people, so they executed more than fifteen million Russians from 1917 to 1938; they were for the Ukrainians, so they starved over 20 million of them to death in one year when there was no war; they claimed they were for a strong, democratic, independent Poland and then proceeded to knock the tar out of them, butchering over 10,000 Polish Army officers in the Katyn Forest for good measure; Moscow supported the parties allied with the Reds in the French Popular Front and simultaneously sought to split and weaken them from within; the Kremlin worked for Hitler's destruction at Geneva and in the capitals of Western Europe, but it also conducted negotiations with Berlin aiming at increasing Nazi strength; Tito, a most valuable product of the Kremlin, fought the Germans in Yugoslavia and also used their help to fight his civil war; Slovak Reds were for an independent Slovak Republic, but at the same time they collaborated with the Czech Reds and Benes Czechs to restore CzechoSlovakia; Stalin helped Benes and his Czech Nazis back into power in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia, while his stooge Gottwald was under orders to speed up the complete takeover the power by the Reds; the Kremlin is for peace and order in the world, but at the same time is fomenting throuble just about everywhere. And Stalin recommended democratic tactics as the surest way to achieve Communist aims. Communist dialectics! �SLOVAKIA 29 Handleman's articles gave the impression that the recent disturbances in Poland and Hungary had weakened the Soviet Empire ("Prophecy of Doom Heard by the Kremlin, Observer Believes" - "Red Rulers Face Desepration Drive to Save Empire"). But is it not a fact that the entire history of Communism is practically an uninterrupted sequence of bloody convulsions? And yet we know that the Communist world is stronger today than it ever was. What is more, the record shows that factional feuds within the Communist Empire do not help the West and the enslaved peoples, but ultimately only strengthen Communism. The anti-Communists of Europe apparently have learned one lesson from history: no totalitarian regime, once it was established, has ever broken down because of internal disruptions; a totalitarian regime collapses only when external powers intervene. In the face of the recent Hungarian slaughter, the "democratic" West now should be definitely convinced that even the most fantastic courage of a suppressed people cannot overthrow a determined totalitarian regime which always has the backing of the Kremlin. Of course, rebellions and convulsions within the Communist-dominated countries are exceptional opportunities for the West to thrust into the Red orbit, but, if the opportunity is wasted by a West enchanted by or petrified with pacifism, the inescapable result of such historic frustration is a further triumph of Communism. In November 1917, one regiment could have stopped the Bolsheviks, led by non-Russians, in their tracks. A year later, perhaps a division of Allied troops would have knocked them out, but a small army would have been needed in 1920. The Red Empire was always mortally vulnerable to a determined attack by organized external forces, but as the years rolled by the required effort increased both in size and also in risk. Today the men of the Kremlin are convinced that the West does not want war - that it prefers to fight with words. Randleman reported: "the chief of these problems, staggering problems for the United States, will be to prevent a third world war from erupting." In the last of his �30 SLOVAKIA series of six articles (Jan. 12, 1957), he added: "the threat of a major war being triggered in this way (by the satellites) ... was the reason Dulles had to make the painful announcement during the December meeting of NATO foreign ministers that the U. S. would not be able to intervene to help any satellite revolt with arms." That is what the poor wretches in the satellite countries did not want to hear, but that is precisely what the men of the Kremlin did want to hear: the Reds are now determined more than ever to intervene anywhere at any time in the interest of the Soviet Union, the homeland of all Communists, with impunity. The Kremlin can always take care of revolts in the satellite countries and at the same time start trouble for the West elsewhere - and its stooges in the satellites know that. The men in the Kremlin and all Reds agree with Dulles on one point he made at the NATO meeting in December: Soviet rulers shall never give up their dream of world conquest voluntarily! Freedom and Communism are irreconcilable. Coexistence is the complete denial of this fundamental fact of the present international situation. The Communist policy of "peaceful coexistence" is aimed at the moral, political, and military disarmament of the West. At present it is the main Communist vehicle to destroy the will of the free world to live and fight. Ever since the first Communist seizure of power, the Communists have amply demonstrated that they meant business and used power with utter contempt for human lives, moral scruples, and democratic principles. Since the free world has 'coexisted" with Communism for some 39 years (one generation) , Communism has grown from 200 to over 800 million people and now rules one-third of the globe. Another generation of such "coexistence" and ... ? The situation becomes all the more tragic and alarming when we recall that ten European countries were harnessed with Communist regimes by the Western democracies to appease the high-priests of Communism, the men of the Kremlin. What America and the rest of the free world really �SLOVAKIA 31 need right now is a large, stiff dose of "Knowlandism" for the brain to clear our thinking so that we might resolve: NO MORAL AND/ OR MATERIAL AID FOR THE SOVIET UNION AND ITS SATELLITES! • • • A BELATED REPORT By CHARLES MURIN, Ph.D., LL.D. It seems to be inevitable during a war, when the stakes are high, that people reduce their thinking to two categories only: my side is identified with the good and moral purely and simply, the enemy, or the other side. is the embodiment pure of the principle of evil which is the root of all disorder in the world. It is understandable that this psychological attitude belongs to war, because one has to know what he is offering his life for. However, if this psychological factor seems to belong to the conditions required for the winning of a war, the same attitude is a disturbing factor when it enters among the considerations how to win the peace. This is exactly what we experienced after World War II in regard to the organization of post-war Europe. Besides this, Slovak refugees, among many others, have experienced in their own personal destinies the drawbacks in the application of the above-mentioned psychological attitude to the period immediately following the war. It took about two years until an about face had been brought about, and the writer of these lines had the peculiar opportunity of being personally involved in both stages of mind; the one that is supposed to win the war, and the one which aims at winning the peace. It goes without saying that the latter was infinitely more in accordance with common sense and reason and with what can be called the moral principles in politics. The psychological attitude of seeing only black and white becomes a real disaster when it is adopted by responsible statesmen and politicians. As a direct consequence, this attitude inevitably involves political and moral contradictions that do not fail to give, with on unerring � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 19 ANALYZING THE ANALYSTS: IS THE SOVIET UNION DOOMED? PHILIP A. HROBAK According to a number of Western "expert" analysts, correspondents, and "top" diplomats, there are many signs pointing to the "fact" that the Soviet Union is doomed. They say that many things have happened in the various satellite countries, even in the Soviet Union itself, which definitely are unmistakable signs of the failure of the Communists to convert their subjects to the doctrines of Marx and Engels and "to sell their ideas to their own youth." To the "experts" this means the eventual doom for the Communist empire," the collapse of the political system of Communism in the "foreseeable future." Such is the apparent conclusion of analyst Howard Randleman of the International News Service, whose series of articles, published early in January, 1957, I have taken the liberty to scrutinize. Is the Soviet Union really doomed? The vast majority of the nations of the free world undoubtedly wish that it were; and the sooner the Communist political system collapses, the better - but, unfortunately, wishing alone will not make it so. As long as Western political leaders, "expert" analysts and commentators, "top" diplomats and "distinguished" diplomatic correspondents follow the path which the Communists want anti-Communists to follow - the path of "peaceful coexistence," the support of "nationalist" or Titoist Communism which is supposed to be "different" than the Soviet "international" brand of Communism, while the Communists of all countries under the leadership of the men in the Kremlin are busy conquering the world - America and the rest of the free world are in mortal danger. Under the prevailing conditions, it is not the Soviet Union and the Communist political system that is doomed, but the democratic west and all free democratic political systems. Of course, the West still has time to meet the danger with 20 SLOVAKIA effective countermeasures, but it's later than most of us think. Substituting wishful thinking and arbitrary theorizing, and completely ignoring the Communist "guide to action" which is necessary for the understanding of Communist policies, techniques and tactics, did not and will not contribute to the downfall of Communism. Neither will irresponsible vagaries of Western Titoists, who glorify and idolize Tito, Gomulka, and Kadar - the old stalwarts of international Communism, but now the proponents of "naas champions of democracy. To tional" Communism promote "national" Communism (Titoism), that is, a policy of helping a Communist regin1e, for the sake of a Communist conquest of the world, makes sense. To promote it for the sake of freedom, does not. Events behind the Iron Curtain - as noted by the EVENING NEWS (Harrisburg, Pa.), January 7, 1957, in its introduction to the first of a series of six articles by Howard Randleman, " distinguished diplomatic and foreign correspondent" - have indeed moved with swift and startling speed in recent months. However, whether the analysis or interpretation of these events by the "Chief European Correspondent of the International News Service" is reasonably correct is, in my mind, highly questionable, the views of the "West's top diplomats" and the "daily headlines" on the future of the Soviet Empire to the contrary notwithstanding. After reading the articles carefully several times, I had been left with the impression that the Soviet Union really was in serious trouble and might be expected to fold up within the next five years even without any armed intervention by the West. Undoubtedly other readers of the paper had been similarly impressed. But thoroughly informed persons on the Soviet Union and Communist techniques and tactics know that this is only wishful thinking. The analysis tendered by Mr. Randleman has, I am afraid, only added to the heaps of misinformation so generously propagated even by so-called "Western experts" on Communism and the Soviet Union. The men in the Kremlin thrive on confusion and cha<!>s; they promote ,it assiduously, (. SLOVAKIA 21 though they prefer that the West does the promoting for them, wittingly or unwittingly, for the edification of satellites and potential satellites. Strangely enough, the West thus far has done a remarkable job in that respect, and Mr. Handleman's effort, in my opinion not the least of the contributions, was appreciated by the Kremlin goons. According to Randleman: "The handwriting is on the wall for the Communist Empire. Western diplomatic authorities see it. They say the men in the Kremlin must see it." Was this a warranted or unwarranted assumption? Even if it were warranted, can any "expert" or "Western diplomatic authority" tell us with certitude that the hand½Titing on the wall is seen and interpreted by the men in he Kremlin in he same light as it is by any Western experts or diplomats? Of course not! The job of busting up the empire of Lenin and Stalin, we are told, will not be easy and may take time, but "Western experts" - whoever they are - "believe the Communist Empire will break up without a major war. They also believe, according to Randleman, that if the West can hold fast for another four or five years, "the Soviet rulers in the end will offer an acceptable formula for security in Europe and the world." But, Mr. Randleman hedged, "it is also recognized that, although the present signs point to the dissolution of the power of the Soviet Empire, the trend could be reversed." And, when it comes to the Soviet Union, there are always "too many unpredictables," according to one highly placed diplomat, "but certainly from everything we know now, the most likely trend over the next few years is one in which the Kremlin leaders will be pushed towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples." History, however, tells us in no uncertain terms that any such "trend" not only could be, but always had been reversed in the past. It also tells us that, whenever the Kremlin leaders were "pushed" towards a realistic negotiation by their own peoples, the negotiation never actually benefitted the West and the peoples concerned, but only the Soviet Union and Communist regimes. "Weste@A~516~aUB'RM'f Randleman, "bank heavily MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE 22 SLOVAKIA on the common sense of the Russian leaders." One of the "best informed, who has served in the Soviet Union," said the Kremlin leaders might make war if things get worse, "but the best safeguard against war, perhaps, is that leaders in the Kremlin are pretty level headed: they do not want to commit suicide." So, if it does come to the worst, the Kremlin leaders, we are supposed to believe, will yield "what they must" to satellite pressure and, in the end, instead of busting out with atomic war, "it seems more likely they will make a realistic and acceptable offer to the West for a workable security system." It is obvious that what Randleman referred to as the "best informed" diplomat does not necessarily mean that a diplomat so qualified is in fact too well informed on the Soviet or Communist business. It certainly is most unfortunate for the West that its diplomats bank so heavily on the "common sense" of the men in the Kremlin and consider them "pretty level headed," because Soviet leaders are not just ordinary men with "common sense." They are madmen. Hence, if it is in the Soviet interest, they will commit suicide, because they know that the slightest indication to refuse to make the supreme sacrifice at any time means a betrayal of that interest, and the penalty for betrayal is death. Communism always has and always will continue to devour its own children. The Kremlin leaders cannot ever be honestly interested in any "workable security system" with the West, because they are dedicated to the destruction of western civilization and all systems of government opposed to the Soviet system. What did the West really gain by what recently transpired in Poland and Hungary? Let's be honest and face it: nothing but the scorn and curses of the terribly disappointed wretches - the "heroic fighters for freedom" as the West called them - who certainly expected a lot more than pious platitudes, sympathy, and resolutions of protest from the Western democracies which, they swear before God and all men, are in fact responsible for their brutal enslavement by the Soviet Union and its stooges. On the other hand, what did Communism and/ or the Soviet Union actually lose by what happened in those hap- SLOVAKIA 23 less, brutally tyrannized countries? Let us be equally honest and openly admit that the Soviet Union lost nothing. And judging by past history, the Reds even stand to gain more power and prestige ! Having assumed that the Soviet Empire is collapsing, Haqdleman continued to babble, saying that "the Soviet rulers have embarked on a monumental and desperate operation to salvage what they can of the power of their empire." But the odds "among Western diplomats" are that the operation will fail because the Kremlin moved too late. In the light of reality, however, it is rather naive, if not downright silly, to assume that the Soviet Empire is collapsing and then to declare that the Soviet rulers, therefore, have embarked on a "monumental and desperate" operation to salvage the power, which they still held firmly in their hands, but which the West hopefully wished was actually threatened. Once he was captivated by his assumption, the Chief European Correspondent of the INS looked for support of his thesis to the view taken by Secretary of State Dulles at the recent NATO conference: satellite unrest carries with it the danger of a general war, but it is still to be welcomed greatly as foreshadowing the collapse of the Soviet Empire or a fundamental change in its character; and the "desperation in the Kremlin is reflected in the various means it has used to salvage power." Now, what were some of those various means? He told us that in Hungary "there were tanks and guns, and concession . .. Chou En-Lai of Red China was invited to Moscow for talks. . . . Radio Budapest broadcast Christmas hymns and carols for the first time in eight years .... In Poland there were concessions ... : On Christmas Eve radio Warsaw broadcast a message by Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski." Concessions? If that's what the above might be called, yes, but only temporary. After devoting one installment to the "various means" the Kremlin used to "salvage" its power in the satellites, Randleman then told us in the next: "The Kremlin leadership appears secure, however, within the Soviet Union and in the other satellites for the time 24 SLOVAKIA being." Quite a let-down, indeed! But there is more; the situation may not be such as reported: "The best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals decry what they call a tendency to sensationalize reports of unrest within the Soviet Union." On the other hand, however, "there have been enough reports to convince the experts that satellite people no longer are sheep who accept whatever they are told." What the 'experts" mean by "whatever they are told," is anybody's guess. We know, however, that if satellite people do not keep in line with the regime that is totally subservient to the Kremlin, they may be slaughtered, as they were in Hungary. But then, if there is a tendency to "sensationalize" reports of unrest within the Soviet Union, what was there to prevent readers of Handleman's "analysis" from suspecting that possibly even the Hungarian reports were sensationalized? And what was the net result in Hungary and Poland? Were not those satellite peoples, in the end, "sheep" who had to accept whatever they were told by the Kremlin and its agents? Youth revolts in Poland and Hungary, and other satellites, also forecast the doom of the Soviet Empire, according to Randleman, who based his conclusion on the views of Western "experts and diplomats." Even students of Moscow and Leningrad "suddenly" have begun to question and "to criticize the results of Communist rule - if not yet the very tenets of Communism." Accepting this behavior of the students as a "failure of the Communists to sell their ideas to their own youth," Western diplomats figure, according to Randleman, that this "alone means the eventual doom for the Communist Empire." Randleman himself, however, had stated in a previous chapter that "there has been no confirmed report of basic criticism of the system of Soviet rule." And we know that it will take more than criticism to knock Communism out. But does it? Youth generally is highly emotional, impatient, and fickle; it is easily swayed from one ideology to another, taking little account of principles. We read of student demonstrations in Slovakia, Ukrainia, Poland, Bohemia and Hungary against oppressions of Red regimes; SLOVAKIA 25 in some places these demonstrations resulted in violence. The net result usually was frustration: their own people would not support their "revolts" - and the West was unwilling to intervene, because that might have meant war. Youth wants war in the satellites, but the oldsters do not and Western democracies do not, either. After a couple of setbacks, satellite youth tends to accept its fate with resignation, like the oldsters do. Of course, that is unfortunate, because in the end it means a stronger and more powerful Soviet Union. Now, in Moscow itself, did the students really question the infallibility of the Red Party, as Randleman told us? Did they really criticize "the results" of Communist rule, or possibly just some of its methods and techniques? What percentage of the students of Moscow and Leningrad dared to question "the results" of Communist rule? I believe it is safe to say that no one knows not even the "experts." Furthermore, is it not possible that some of the students, who did the questioning and criticizing, were trained agents of the men in the Kremlin? Unless Western "experts and diplomats," ordinary and "distinguished" reporters, take these and similar questions into account in their reports and statements, I believe we have reason to suspect that they are not objective, but more or less superficial and tendencious. In the last of the series of articles by Randleman in the EVENING NEWS, we read that "the American dream of a Russia strong, healthy and friendly goes way back." That may be so, but does that necessarily apply to our dream of the Soviet Union? Or does Russia and the Soviet Union mean one and the same thing to Western "expert" diplomats and correspondents? George Kennan, former ambassador to the Soviet Union and "one of the two or three best American experts on the Soviet Union," according to Randleman, "forecast bluntly in 1951 that the satellites would win their independence." Of course, he did not forecast exactly from whom or what, or how and when that would happen, but, behold what the same Mr. Kennan said on May 3, 1956: "What we must recognize today, in the case of the sa- 26 SLOVAKIA tellites, is that evil like good, produces its own vested interests. Where regimes of this nature have been in power for more than a decade, there can be no question of putting Humpty Dumpty (i.e., a relative condition of freedom) together again and restoring the status quo ante ... there is a finality, for better or worse, about what has now occurred in Eastern Europe. . . . Whether we like it or not, the gradual evolution of these Communist regimes to a position of greater independence and greater responsiveness to domestic opinion is the best we can hope for as the next phase of development in that area." However, according to the SATURDAY EVENING POST of November 24, 1956, Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," knew right along that satellite rebellions were going to take place, and actually predicted, in 1945 that they would. Then he predicted still further uprisings because "the same fundamental forces are at work throughout the whole area." What these "fundamental forces" were, however, Mr. Kennan did not spell out. On May 3, 1956, according to Mr. Kennan, there was a "finality" about Red regimes, but some seven months later he knew that there was no "finality" about those regimes at all. That, of course, brings us to the question: Did Mr. Kennan, "our No. 1 expert on the Soviet Union," have the vaguest idea of what he was talking about on May 3, 1956? We remember Mr. Kennan as the promoter of the "containment" policy of our State Department. When the Soviet "de-Stalinization" campaign erupted last winter, the same Mr. Kennan wrote many articles and spoke many speeches to explain "the meaning of the change." The central idea in all of these manifestations of Kennan is the same: "The Russians have changed" since the death and renunciation of Stalin. That, of course, was exactly what the men of the Kremlin wanted the West to believe! Then came the Hungarian massacre! It is obvious that Randleman attempted to demonstrate, with the help of "the best diplomatic brains in Paris and other West European capitals": 1. that the "normal logic" of Communist leaders is precisely the same as that of a representative Western mind (his own and the "ex- SLOVAKIA 27 perts' " he relies upon) ; and, 2. that within the next "three, four or five years," with the United States making a strenuous effort to stop Communism in its tracks by appealing to "common sense," the men in the Kremlin, Russians or whatever they are, will come around to the point of "offering a realistic and acceptable formula by which the two worlds of the cold war era can live together in peace and later in friendship." This is muddled thinking and tragic nonsense. The thesis is built on false premises. Many of our policymakers and writers, rather than being guided by a correct picture of what is going on in Communist minds, have tended to interpret these minds in our own image. They know that all decent people would like to have the cold war ended and a lasting peace established. But they know, too, that peace can come about only by "understanding." The chief function of our policies, therefore, should be to overcome "misunderstanding" between America and the Soviet Union, with the U. S. appealing to "common purposes"! This reasoning derives from the assumption that the Soviet system is basically a national political system devoted to the pursuits of reasonable social goals. But a closer, better look at that system reveals that it is no different basically than the Nazi system. Because the Nazi features were widely accepted as evidence of irrationality, we called the followers of Hitler "crazy, dangerous madmen." What then are the followers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Co.? It is well to remember that, by virtue of their belief in Marxist dogma, Communists live in a mental world that is essentially hostile to the mental world of the West. From the very beginning, Marxism-Leninism has conceived the relation between itself and the rest of the world as one of destruction. The program of the Reds never changes: they are dedicated to our destruction; they will destroy us, if we do not destroy them first. In Soviet foreign relations there is no intellectual or emotional basis for reasonableness, as non-Soviet countries understand it. "Reasonable Communism" is a contradiction in terms. The Communist mind, as the record shows, has so defined its world that it shares neither truth nor logic nor moral- 28 SLOVAKIA ity with the rest of mankind. It is, therefore, senseless to talk about establishing peace with the Communists. Temporary truce, yes, if it suits the Soviet Union and the ultimate aim of Comunism, but not peace. Peace, in the sense of international order based on a minimum of common values, is not possible with an adversary who rejects the very right of other societies to exist. Furthermore, Communists tend to develop the psychological tendency to engage in self-contradictory actions. It is not easy for most Westerners, even many Western "experts and diplomats," to grasp that Communists manage to be for and against something at the same time. Handleman's articles, though he did not bring the thought out, have many evidences of this. The Communists were for the Russian people, so they executed more than fifteen million Russians from 1917 to 1938; they were for the Ukrainians, so they starved over 20 million of them to death in one year when there was no war; they claimed they were for a strong, democratic, independent Poland and then proceeded to knock the tar out of them, butchering over 10,000 Polish Army officers in the Katyn Forest for good measure; Moscow supported the parties allied with the Reds in the French Popular Front and simultaneously sought to split and weaken them from within; the Kremlin worked for Hitler's destruction at Geneva and in the capitals of Western Europe, but it also conducted negotiations with Berlin aiming at increasing Nazi strength; Tito, a most valuable product of the Kremlin, fought the Germans in Yugoslavia and also used their help to fight his civil war; Slovak Reds were for an independent Slovak Republic, but at the same time they collaborated with the Czech Reds and Benes Czechs to restore CzechoSlovakia; Stalin helped Benes and his Czech Nazis back into power in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia, while his stooge Gottwald was under orders to speed up the complete takeover the power by the Reds; the Kremlin is for peace and order in the world, but at the same time is fomenting throuble just about everywhere. And Stalin recommended democratic tactics as the surest way to achieve Communist aims. Communist dialectics! SLOVAKIA 29 Handleman's articles gave the impression that the recent disturbances in Poland and Hungary had weakened the Soviet Empire ("Prophecy of Doom Heard by the Kremlin, Observer Believes" - "Red Rulers Face Desepration Drive to Save Empire"). But is it not a fact that the entire history of Communism is practically an uninterrupted sequence of bloody convulsions? And yet we know that the Communist world is stronger today than it ever was. What is more, the record shows that factional feuds within the Communist Empire do not help the West and the enslaved peoples, but ultimately only strengthen Communism. The anti-Communists of Europe apparently have learned one lesson from history: no totalitarian regime, once it was established, has ever broken down because of internal disruptions; a totalitarian regime collapses only when external powers intervene. In the face of the recent Hungarian slaughter, the "democratic" West now should be definitely convinced that even the most fantastic courage of a suppressed people cannot overthrow a determined totalitarian regime which always has the backing of the Kremlin. Of course, rebellions and convulsions within the Communist-dominated countries are exceptional opportunities for the West to thrust into the Red orbit, but, if the opportunity is wasted by a West enchanted by or petrified with pacifism, the inescapable result of such historic frustration is a further triumph of Communism. In November 1917, one regiment could have stopped the Bolsheviks, led by non-Russians, in their tracks. A year later, perhaps a division of Allied troops would have knocked them out, but a small army would have been needed in 1920. The Red Empire was always mortally vulnerable to a determined attack by organized external forces, but as the years rolled by the required effort increased both in size and also in risk. Today the men of the Kremlin are convinced that the West does not want war - that it prefers to fight with words. Randleman reported: "the chief of these problems, staggering problems for the United States, will be to prevent a third world war from erupting." In the last of his 30 SLOVAKIA series of six articles (Jan. 12, 1957), he added: "the threat of a major war being triggered in this way (by the satellites) ... was the reason Dulles had to make the painful announcement during the December meeting of NATO foreign ministers that the U. S. would not be able to intervene to help any satellite revolt with arms." That is what the poor wretches in the satellite countries did not want to hear, but that is precisely what the men of the Kremlin did want to hear: the Reds are now determined more than ever to intervene anywhere at any time in the interest of the Soviet Union, the homeland of all Communists, with impunity. The Kremlin can always take care of revolts in the satellite countries and at the same time start trouble for the West elsewhere - and its stooges in the satellites know that. The men in the Kremlin and all Reds agree with Dulles on one point he made at the NATO meeting in December: Soviet rulers shall never give up their dream of world conquest voluntarily! Freedom and Communism are irreconcilable. Coexistence is the complete denial of this fundamental fact of the present international situation. The Communist policy of "peaceful coexistence" is aimed at the moral, political, and military disarmament of the West. At present it is the main Communist vehicle to destroy the will of the free world to live and fight. Ever since the first Communist seizure of power, the Communists have amply demonstrated that they meant business and used power with utter contempt for human lives, moral scruples, and democratic principles. Since the free world has 'coexisted" with Communism for some 39 years (one generation) , Communism has grown from 200 to over 800 million people and now rules one-third of the globe. Another generation of such "coexistence" and ... ? The situation becomes all the more tragic and alarming when we recall that ten European countries were harnessed with Communist regimes by the Western democracies to appease the high-priests of Communism, the men of the Kremlin. What America and the rest of the free world really SLOVAKIA 31 need right now is a large, stiff dose of "Knowlandism" for the brain to clear our thinking so that we might resolve: NO MORAL AND/ OR MATERIAL AID FOR THE SOVIET UNION AND ITS SATELLITES! • • • A BELATED REPORT By CHARLES MURIN, Ph.D., LL.D. It seems to be inevitable during a war, when the stakes are high, that people reduce their thinking to two categories only: my side is identified with the good and moral purely and simply, the enemy, or the other side. is the embodiment pure of the principle of evil which is the root of all disorder in the world. It is understandable that this psychological attitude belongs to war, because one has to know what he is offering his life for. However, if this psychological factor seems to belong to the conditions required for the winning of a war, the same attitude is a disturbing factor when it enters among the considerations how to win the peace. This is exactly what we experienced after World War II in regard to the organization of post-war Europe. Besides this, Slovak refugees, among many others, have experienced in their own personal destinies the drawbacks in the application of the above-mentioned psychological attitude to the period immediately following the war. It took about two years until an about face had been brought about, and the writer of these lines had the peculiar opportunity of being personally involved in both stages of mind; the one that is supposed to win the war, and the one which aims at winning the peace. It goes without saying that the latter was infinitely more in accordance with common sense and reason and with what can be called the moral principles in politics. The psychological attitude of seeing only black and white becomes a real disaster when it is adopted by responsible statesmen and politicians. As a direct consequence, this attitude inevitably involves political and moral contradictions that do not fail to give, with on unerring  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 Analyzing the Analysts: Is the Soviet Union Doomed? Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957 pp. 19-31 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 1957 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d0577842868b7d94615309287fb336e5.pdf 05d5ff1a6e3261b78b698b582b6de0f5 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 10 "FOR GOD AND NATION" 50 YEARS OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA PHILIP A. HROBAK After greater numbers of Slovaks had settled in the United States of America during the last quarter of the past century, Slovak newspapers, fraternal benefit societies, churches and schools soon came into being. The Slovaks took to American democracy like fish to water, enjoying fully every moment of their existence in their "new" homeland. In America they had the very thing that souls of men everywhere thirst for: freedom. The liberties and God-given rights so freely and thoroughly pursued and enjoyed in America electrified the minds and hearts of the Slovaks and inspired them to work for the freedom and independence of their own homeland, where natural rights had been denied their people for a thousand years. Of course, their interest in the "old" homeland was only natural. Political persecution and economic suppression were the daily lot of the Slovaks under the Magyars of Hungary. It was evident that the Magyars, after their settlement with Vienna in 1867, were determined to liquidate the Slovaks as a national entity. The Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) was taken over by Budapest and its assets confiscated, students were thrown out of secondary schools, professors were fired or transferred to Magyar regions for their Slovak convictions, and Slovak intellectuals and professionals were deprived of the opportunity of making a livelihood in their own homeland. "Extra Hungariam non est vita" ( outside Hungary there is no life), the Magyars used to say, but this applied only to them, while the Slovaks were forced to leave their homeland by the hundreds of thousands to keep their bodies and souls together. The incident that fired the Slovaks both at home and in America to do something about the unfortunate lot of their homeland was the Cernova Massacre of October 26, 1907. Cernova was the birthplace of Andrew Hlinka, beloved priest and ardent patriot, who had been sentenced to �SLOVAKIA 11 two years in jail in 1906 by the Magyars for his active opposition to Magyarizat ion. The good Slovaks of Cernova, in the meantime, having completed the building of their new church with funds collected by Hlinka, entreated the Ordinary of the diocese, Bishop Parvy, who had suspended Hlinka because of his political activity, to reinstate and allow 'our Father Hlinka' to perform the ceremonies of dedication. The bishop refused, appointing another priest for the task. The people resented this decision of the bishop On October 26, 1907, the date of the dedication, the Slovaks of Cernova blocked the priest's entrance to their new church; hard words led to turmoil; the Magyar gendarmes on hand for the occasion fired into the mass of the people. When the smoke cleared nine were dead, three were dying, twelve were seriously and 80 less seriously injured. Before the night was over five more succumbed to their injuries: fourteen dead, fourteen martyrs of Magyar chauvinism. And numerous Slovaks were jailed as "instigator s" of the Cernova incident. The Slovaks in America swung into action; mass meetings of protest organized by the Slovak clergy and Slovak newsmen followed; articles in Slovak and English flooded every Slovak center to spotlight the attention of the world on Magyar brutalities. Thousands of dollars were collected and sent to the homeland for the defense and support of patriotic Slovaks. Cernova, above all else, w1doubtedly motivated the Slovaks of America to join the Slovak League of America, to form a united front against Magyar tyranny. It was on April 4, 1907, at the invitation of the Rev. Stephen Furdek of Cleveland, Ohio, that representat ives of the Slovak Press in America met in Pittsburgh, Pa., to deliberate how they might best help their wretched brethren beneath the Tatras. All recognized the fact that the time was ripe to organize all Slovaks in America into one union for the defense of everything past Slovak generations had built and fought for in Slovakia. Adopting the slogan "For Our Slovak Heritage" (Za tu nasu Slovencinu ), the meeting adopted a two-plank program: 1. To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life at home (in Slovakia); 2. �12 SLOVAKIA To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life in America. Furthermore, it was decided that a mass meeting of American Slovaks would be held at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1907. Soon after the Pittsburgh meeting, all Slovak newspapers in America publicized the proposed mass rally in Cleveland, inviting all Slovaks interested in the righteous cause of the Slovak nation to attend the "Slovak Congress" on May 26, 1907. It was undersigned by representatives of all Slovak fraternal organizations and newspapers. "The purpose of the Congress," the announcement said, "is to unite all Slovak organizations in systematic national work. ... Our old country is turning to us, let us help it. We must present a united front." Over 7000 of them, representing all Slovak societies and newspapers, fraternal benefit organizations and parishes, clergy and laity of various religious and political convictions, met in Cleveland, Ohio, where they more than filled the spacious Gray's Armory. On that day the Slovak League of America was founded to unite all Slovaks in America to fight for the inherent, God-given rights of the Slovak nation which was doomed to national extinction by the Magyars of Hungary. On that day Americans of Slovak descent resolved in the spirit of America that the nation they are descended from shall be free and independent of alien rule, that it shall be the master of its own household and work out its own destiny as an equal among nations. Under the leadership of the great and immortal Rev. Stephen Furdek, the founder and first president of the Slovak League of America, the League made America known to the Slovaks at home, and Slovakia and her people known to Americans. The seed of freedom and independence, which had taken a solid hold in the fertile soil of America, was now planted by Americans of Slovak descent in the land of their forefathers, Slovakia. Throughout the past fifty years, the Slovak League of America has remained faithful to its mission. It united the Slovaks in America to work for a better America by becoming alert citizens and to work for the liberation of their brethren in Slovakia from hostile, alien domination. The �SLOVAKIA 13 League has made America and the rest of the world aware of the fact that the Slovak nation does exist and demands recognition of and respect for its natural rights. But the Slovak League of America also inspired and gave strength to the Slovaks at home not to abandon the uneven struggle for freedom and independence. It was, in fact, the Slovak League of America that made it possible for the Slovak nation to liberate itself from Magyar tyranny. The fatal shot that started the world conflagration and massacre in 1914 had not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovak League of America prepared a Memorandum addressed "to all just and truth-respecting nations," demanding complete autonomy for the Slovaks on the basis of the right of self-determination. After the Sarajevo incident, the Slovaks were faced with the question: We are through with the Magyars, but now with whom shall we join up to gain what is rightfully ours? With the Russians? The Czechs? The Poles? After due consideration, the Slovaks decided to go along with the Czechs. The decision was greatly influenced by the Slovak League of America. But it was only after T. G. Masaryk, first president and one of the founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement on May 30, 1918, that the Slovaks really joined with the Czechs to work for the establishment of a common political state. The Agreement guaranteed complete autonomy (states' rights) to Slovakia within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, which was to be patterned after Switzerland and the United States. Unfortunately, T. G. Masaryk failed to keep his word. Advised by Dr. Edward Benes and other "progressive" chauvinistic Czech socialists, Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact, calling it a "scrap of paper." The Slovaks, however, never let up in their clamor for the incorporation of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But to no avail: the Masaryk-Benes Czechs in Prague subbornly refused to listen to reason. After twenty years of Czecho-Slovakia under Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were ready to break with the Czechs. After twenty years of Masaryk-Benes pro-Soviet and antiSlovak policies, the Slovaks and Czechs were farther apart �14 SLOVAKIA than they ever had been. Dr. Edward Benes pursued his ruinous policy to the very bitter end, refusing to recognize and respect the inherent right of the Slovak nation to have something to say about its own destiny. Within a week after accepting the Munich verdict, without consulting the parliament or the Slovak and Czech people, he simply resigned and later left the country. The day following Benes' resignation, the Prague Parliament belatedly and begrudgingly granted autonomy to Slovakia and later had the law incorporated into the Czecho-Slovak Constitution. Hitler and his Nazis started their mad race to destruction; there was no one to stop them at that time. And the Czechs, apparently regretting that they had granted autonomy to Slovakia, placed Slovakia under martial law on March 10, 1939, and occupied Slovakia. Hitler, of course, exploited the situation. Without mincing words, he told the Slovaks to proclaim their independence or else. Under the circumstances, the duly elected representatives of the Slovak people proclaimed the independnce of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. The independent Republic of Slovakia was soon recognized by twenty-seven countries. Slovakia was not too badly off during the war; as far as their internal affairs were concerned, the Slovaks managed their country well under President Joseph Tiso. They were better off than most neutral countries and enjoyed more freedom than they ever did under Masaryk and Benes. Why Hitler left them alone and did not bother to take them over completely, as he did the Czechs and so many other nations, still remains unexplained. But the fact is that the Slovaks were doing right well until the end of August 1944, when Moscow agents and the Benes proSoviet clique engineered the so-called "Slovak National Uprising." The story of Warsaw was repeated. Hitler's hordes poured into Slovakia "to restore order" - and the Slovaks were on the receiving end of both sides, the Reds and the Nazis. Over 70,000 Slovaks were killed in the slaughter. We know what happened at the end of World War IT. Benes sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 without firing a shot; he repeated the performance in 1943 by for- �SLOVAKIA 15 mally selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to Stalin with a treaty. Benes' pro-Soviet policy paid off temporarily: with Stalin's blessing he became president of Czecho-Slovakia again, this time the head man of the new "people's" Republic. To show his gratefulness, Dr. Benes and his Reddominated Prague government immediately began to liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialistic elements in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. But finally Benes himself was destroyed by the monster he had nurtured to prove again that Communism devours its own children! The Slovak nation was consistently vilified and misrepresented by the nations which dominated and exploited it. As far as the Magyars and Czechs were concerned, there was no Slovak nation, there was no Slovak language. T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes told the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 that the Slovaks were but a branch of the Czech nation and their language was but a dialect of the Czech. In old Hungary, the Magyars boasted that they were the "natio hungarica" ; after 1918, the Czechs beat their chests that they were the "state-nation" - the "Czechoslovak" nation. The Magyars accused the Slovaks of being anti-State and pro-Slav; the Czechs under Masaryk and Benes accused them of being anti-State and pro-Magyar. Both Magyars and Czechs agreed that the Slovaks were "separatists." And their propaganda in America blasted the Slovaks who worked for the liberation of their old homeland from alien domination. The Slovak League of America was the prime target of both the Magyars and the Czechs. During the last war, the Slovak League of America was the main target of attack of Dr. Benes' smear and vilification campaign. Dr. Benes knew the right people in Washington, Paris, London, and Moscow. Americans of Slovak descent could not prevail on their own government to save the Republic of Slovakia for the West; official Washington, in 1945, brushed them off when they begged that Dr. Tiso and the members of the Slovak Government, who had surrendered to the American Army in Austria, be offered political asylum and not handed over to the vengeful Dr. Benes; and two million Americans of Slovak descent �16 SLOVAKIA could not prevail on the President and the Government of the United States to request Benes to spare Dr. Tiso from the gallows in 1947. And today, ten years later, we find that the Benes Czechs still carry some weight in official Washington circles. The Slovak League of America has lost several skirmishes and battles, but it still is carrying on the fight for the reeognition of the natural rights of the Slovak nation. It is only natural that the League is vitally interested in this all-important question, because the existence of the Slovak people is at stake. Since the Slovak nation has not been given an opportunity to speak freely for itself and never had been actually free and independent to work out its own destiny, the Slovak League of America has taken upon itself the obligation of pleading for the realization of the fundamental rights of the Slovak people. As loyal Americans, we are firmly convinced that those rights are predicated on the elementary principle that all peoples are morally entitled to speak in the United Nations, there to defend their rights to survival and self-fulfillment. Liberty cannot be exercised by proxy, and the Slovak people, like all other nations on the earth, must have a voice in the determination of their own destiny. Being American institutions, the Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it are primarily interested in the welfare and security of the United States of America. They sincerely believe that it is in the highest interest of America and the rest of the free world that the Slovak nation be free and independent. Therefore, they cannot sit idly by while foreign political opportunists of the Benes stripe, discredited and cursed by their own people, exploit and compromise the good name of America, while given the opportunity to use American tax dollars to prolong the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation and to promote the political, pseudo-democratic conceptions of Masaryk and Benes which led to the destruction of Czecho-Slovakia and the utter enslavement of the Slovak and Czech nations by the Communists. It is, the Slovaks believe, contrary to justice and morals to recognize and give moral and material aid to individuals and �SLOVAKIA 17 organizations that seek the destruction of the Slovak nation by promoting the big lie of a "united Czechoslovak nation." The truth is that the Slovaks never were, nor do they wish to be Czechs; and, on the other hand, the Czechs never were, nor do they desire to be Slovaki:i. Americans of Slovak descent, organized in the Slovak League of America, are loyal to America, because to them America is an ideal, a living symbol of freedom, tolerance, and justice. They seek no special favors for the nation they are descended from, but only recognition of and respect for the inherent, natural rights of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks learned about freedom and democracy from America. They know that they can best secure and safeguard their national existence only if they manage their own household. America has no cause to deny the Slovaks their rights to freedom and independence; this the American people as a whole understand well, but it seems that people making up our Government do not. This undoubtedly is due to the influence of the Benes Czechs who collaborated with the Reds and the Soviet Union until February 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic" exiles. As in the past, so in the future, the Slovak League must expend every effort to correct the situation. Administrations • of the United States Government, no matter what their political beliefs, must be convinced that the righteous cause of the Slovak nation deserves the support of all Americans. Americans of Slovak descent, we trust, are not overly presumptuous in assuming that they merit at least the same measure of favor and trust from their Government as does the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political clique of the late Dr. Edward Benes, which today is operating in America as the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia." Rebuffed and humbled on so many occasions, the Slovak League continues stubbornly and courageously in the work of liberating the Slovaks from all foreign domination. The existence of the Slovak nation can never be secured unless the Slovaks are masters of their own destiny. The Slovaks must not be denied the right to organize their own state, an independent Slovak Republic. The Slovaks are not against a federation or confederation of European �18 SLOVAKIA states, but rather for it. But into such a federation they want to enter not as an appendage of the Czech nation, but as a nation no less sovereign than the rest of the nations of any such proposed European federation. Today the Slovaks look to America for liberation and salvation more than they ever did; the Slovak nation needs encouragement and inspiration in this its darkest hour. After the great onslaught of World War II, the Slovaks were thrown to the Red wolves of the Kremlin and their stooges in Prague, and yet they have never let up in their fight against Communism. They fought against this scourge of humanity in and out of season for the past 100 years and are determined, with God's help, to keep fighting it until the Red plague is wiped off the face of the earth. The work of the Slovak League of America will never be finished until this happens and the Slovak nation at last takes its rightful place in the family of free nations, there to share the burdens and blessings of free men under God, all laboring toward one end: a just and lasting peace, based on the love of man for God and for his fellowman . • • . WHO SAID IT? ' ~Prague, Budapest, Zagreb, Brno, Bratislaiva were as German a'S Linz or Innsbruck, so much so they had German names: Brague (for Praha), Ofon, Agrrum, Brlinn, Pressburg. In Prague in 181'5 there were 50,000 Germam.s and only 15,000 Czechs; even in 1848 respectrubie people spoke only German in the streets, and to ask the way in Czech would provoke an offensive reply . . . . The smaller towns remained German far longer, ,some, such as Brno, until the twentieth century .... The German character of the towns (in the HaJbsbur,g Monarchy) had little or nothing to do with race . . . The enterp:r,ising son of a peasant, Czech, Roumaniian, or &rob, who entered a town, learned a German art and spoke Geiiman to his fellow shopkeepers; his children despised their father',s peasant dialect, am.d his grandcihildren, sa.fuly arrived in staJte j'dbs, forgot that they had ever been am.ytlling but German and town-dwellers." - (A. J. P. Taylor, THE HiABSBURG MONARJOHY, London, 1948; ,pp. 24-25). � SLOVAKIA 10 "FOR GOD AND NATION" 50 YEARS OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA PHILIP A. HROBAK After greater numbers of Slovaks had settled in the United States of America during the last quarter of the past century, Slovak newspapers, fraternal benefit societies, churches and schools soon came into being. The Slovaks took to American democracy like fish to water, enjoying fully every moment of their existence in their "new" homeland. In America they had the very thing that souls of men everywhere thirst for: freedom. The liberties and God-given rights so freely and thoroughly pursued and enjoyed in America electrified the minds and hearts of the Slovaks and inspired them to work for the freedom and independence of their own homeland, where natural rights had been denied their people for a thousand years. Of course, their interest in the "old" homeland was only natural. Political persecution and economic suppression were the daily lot of the Slovaks under the Magyars of Hungary. It was evident that the Magyars, after their settlement with Vienna in 1867, were determined to liquidate the Slovaks as a national entity. The Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) was taken over by Budapest and its assets confiscated, students were thrown out of secondary schools, professors were fired or transferred to Magyar regions for their Slovak convictions, and Slovak intellectuals and professionals were deprived of the opportunity of making a livelihood in their own homeland. "Extra Hungariam non est vita" ( outside Hungary there is no life), the Magyars used to say, but this applied only to them, while the Slovaks were forced to leave their homeland by the hundreds of thousands to keep their bodies and souls together. The incident that fired the Slovaks both at home and in America to do something about the unfortunate lot of their homeland was the Cernova Massacre of October 26, 1907. Cernova was the birthplace of Andrew Hlinka, beloved priest and ardent patriot, who had been sentenced to �SLOVAKIA 11 two years in jail in 1906 by the Magyars for his active opposition to Magyarizat ion. The good Slovaks of Cernova, in the meantime, having completed the building of their new church with funds collected by Hlinka, entreated the Ordinary of the diocese, Bishop Parvy, who had suspended Hlinka because of his political activity, to reinstate and allow 'our Father Hlinka' to perform the ceremonies of dedication. The bishop refused, appointing another priest for the task. The people resented this decision of the bishop On October 26, 1907, the date of the dedication, the Slovaks of Cernova blocked the priest's entrance to their new church; hard words led to turmoil; the Magyar gendarmes on hand for the occasion fired into the mass of the people. When the smoke cleared nine were dead, three were dying, twelve were seriously and 80 less seriously injured. Before the night was over five more succumbed to their injuries: fourteen dead, fourteen martyrs of Magyar chauvinism. And numerous Slovaks were jailed as "instigator s" of the Cernova incident. The Slovaks in America swung into action; mass meetings of protest organized by the Slovak clergy and Slovak newsmen followed; articles in Slovak and English flooded every Slovak center to spotlight the attention of the world on Magyar brutalities. Thousands of dollars were collected and sent to the homeland for the defense and support of patriotic Slovaks. Cernova, above all else, w1doubtedly motivated the Slovaks of America to join the Slovak League of America, to form a united front against Magyar tyranny. It was on April 4, 1907, at the invitation of the Rev. Stephen Furdek of Cleveland, Ohio, that representat ives of the Slovak Press in America met in Pittsburgh, Pa., to deliberate how they might best help their wretched brethren beneath the Tatras. All recognized the fact that the time was ripe to organize all Slovaks in America into one union for the defense of everything past Slovak generations had built and fought for in Slovakia. Adopting the slogan "For Our Slovak Heritage" (Za tu nasu Slovencinu ), the meeting adopted a two-plank program: 1. To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life at home (in Slovakia); 2. �12 SLOVAKIA To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life in America. Furthermore, it was decided that a mass meeting of American Slovaks would be held at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1907. Soon after the Pittsburgh meeting, all Slovak newspapers in America publicized the proposed mass rally in Cleveland, inviting all Slovaks interested in the righteous cause of the Slovak nation to attend the "Slovak Congress" on May 26, 1907. It was undersigned by representatives of all Slovak fraternal organizations and newspapers. "The purpose of the Congress," the announcement said, "is to unite all Slovak organizations in systematic national work. ... Our old country is turning to us, let us help it. We must present a united front." Over 7000 of them, representing all Slovak societies and newspapers, fraternal benefit organizations and parishes, clergy and laity of various religious and political convictions, met in Cleveland, Ohio, where they more than filled the spacious Gray's Armory. On that day the Slovak League of America was founded to unite all Slovaks in America to fight for the inherent, God-given rights of the Slovak nation which was doomed to national extinction by the Magyars of Hungary. On that day Americans of Slovak descent resolved in the spirit of America that the nation they are descended from shall be free and independent of alien rule, that it shall be the master of its own household and work out its own destiny as an equal among nations. Under the leadership of the great and immortal Rev. Stephen Furdek, the founder and first president of the Slovak League of America, the League made America known to the Slovaks at home, and Slovakia and her people known to Americans. The seed of freedom and independence, which had taken a solid hold in the fertile soil of America, was now planted by Americans of Slovak descent in the land of their forefathers, Slovakia. Throughout the past fifty years, the Slovak League of America has remained faithful to its mission. It united the Slovaks in America to work for a better America by becoming alert citizens and to work for the liberation of their brethren in Slovakia from hostile, alien domination. The �SLOVAKIA 13 League has made America and the rest of the world aware of the fact that the Slovak nation does exist and demands recognition of and respect for its natural rights. But the Slovak League of America also inspired and gave strength to the Slovaks at home not to abandon the uneven struggle for freedom and independence. It was, in fact, the Slovak League of America that made it possible for the Slovak nation to liberate itself from Magyar tyranny. The fatal shot that started the world conflagration and massacre in 1914 had not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovak League of America prepared a Memorandum addressed "to all just and truth-respecting nations," demanding complete autonomy for the Slovaks on the basis of the right of self-determination. After the Sarajevo incident, the Slovaks were faced with the question: We are through with the Magyars, but now with whom shall we join up to gain what is rightfully ours? With the Russians? The Czechs? The Poles? After due consideration, the Slovaks decided to go along with the Czechs. The decision was greatly influenced by the Slovak League of America. But it was only after T. G. Masaryk, first president and one of the founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement on May 30, 1918, that the Slovaks really joined with the Czechs to work for the establishment of a common political state. The Agreement guaranteed complete autonomy (states' rights) to Slovakia within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, which was to be patterned after Switzerland and the United States. Unfortunately, T. G. Masaryk failed to keep his word. Advised by Dr. Edward Benes and other "progressive" chauvinistic Czech socialists, Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact, calling it a "scrap of paper." The Slovaks, however, never let up in their clamor for the incorporation of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But to no avail: the Masaryk-Benes Czechs in Prague subbornly refused to listen to reason. After twenty years of Czecho-Slovakia under Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were ready to break with the Czechs. After twenty years of Masaryk-Benes pro-Soviet and antiSlovak policies, the Slovaks and Czechs were farther apart �14 SLOVAKIA than they ever had been. Dr. Edward Benes pursued his ruinous policy to the very bitter end, refusing to recognize and respect the inherent right of the Slovak nation to have something to say about its own destiny. Within a week after accepting the Munich verdict, without consulting the parliament or the Slovak and Czech people, he simply resigned and later left the country. The day following Benes' resignation, the Prague Parliament belatedly and begrudgingly granted autonomy to Slovakia and later had the law incorporated into the Czecho-Slovak Constitution. Hitler and his Nazis started their mad race to destruction; there was no one to stop them at that time. And the Czechs, apparently regretting that they had granted autonomy to Slovakia, placed Slovakia under martial law on March 10, 1939, and occupied Slovakia. Hitler, of course, exploited the situation. Without mincing words, he told the Slovaks to proclaim their independence or else. Under the circumstances, the duly elected representatives of the Slovak people proclaimed the independnce of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. The independent Republic of Slovakia was soon recognized by twenty-seven countries. Slovakia was not too badly off during the war; as far as their internal affairs were concerned, the Slovaks managed their country well under President Joseph Tiso. They were better off than most neutral countries and enjoyed more freedom than they ever did under Masaryk and Benes. Why Hitler left them alone and did not bother to take them over completely, as he did the Czechs and so many other nations, still remains unexplained. But the fact is that the Slovaks were doing right well until the end of August 1944, when Moscow agents and the Benes proSoviet clique engineered the so-called "Slovak National Uprising." The story of Warsaw was repeated. Hitler's hordes poured into Slovakia "to restore order" - and the Slovaks were on the receiving end of both sides, the Reds and the Nazis. Over 70,000 Slovaks were killed in the slaughter. We know what happened at the end of World War IT. Benes sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 without firing a shot; he repeated the performance in 1943 by for- �SLOVAKIA 15 mally selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to Stalin with a treaty. Benes' pro-Soviet policy paid off temporarily: with Stalin's blessing he became president of Czecho-Slovakia again, this time the head man of the new "people's" Republic. To show his gratefulness, Dr. Benes and his Reddominated Prague government immediately began to liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialistic elements in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. But finally Benes himself was destroyed by the monster he had nurtured to prove again that Communism devours its own children! The Slovak nation was consistently vilified and misrepresented by the nations which dominated and exploited it. As far as the Magyars and Czechs were concerned, there was no Slovak nation, there was no Slovak language. T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes told the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 that the Slovaks were but a branch of the Czech nation and their language was but a dialect of the Czech. In old Hungary, the Magyars boasted that they were the "natio hungarica" ; after 1918, the Czechs beat their chests that they were the "state-nation" - the "Czechoslovak" nation. The Magyars accused the Slovaks of being anti-State and pro-Slav; the Czechs under Masaryk and Benes accused them of being anti-State and pro-Magyar. Both Magyars and Czechs agreed that the Slovaks were "separatists." And their propaganda in America blasted the Slovaks who worked for the liberation of their old homeland from alien domination. The Slovak League of America was the prime target of both the Magyars and the Czechs. During the last war, the Slovak League of America was the main target of attack of Dr. Benes' smear and vilification campaign. Dr. Benes knew the right people in Washington, Paris, London, and Moscow. Americans of Slovak descent could not prevail on their own government to save the Republic of Slovakia for the West; official Washington, in 1945, brushed them off when they begged that Dr. Tiso and the members of the Slovak Government, who had surrendered to the American Army in Austria, be offered political asylum and not handed over to the vengeful Dr. Benes; and two million Americans of Slovak descent �16 SLOVAKIA could not prevail on the President and the Government of the United States to request Benes to spare Dr. Tiso from the gallows in 1947. And today, ten years later, we find that the Benes Czechs still carry some weight in official Washington circles. The Slovak League of America has lost several skirmishes and battles, but it still is carrying on the fight for the reeognition of the natural rights of the Slovak nation. It is only natural that the League is vitally interested in this all-important question, because the existence of the Slovak people is at stake. Since the Slovak nation has not been given an opportunity to speak freely for itself and never had been actually free and independent to work out its own destiny, the Slovak League of America has taken upon itself the obligation of pleading for the realization of the fundamental rights of the Slovak people. As loyal Americans, we are firmly convinced that those rights are predicated on the elementary principle that all peoples are morally entitled to speak in the United Nations, there to defend their rights to survival and self-fulfillment. Liberty cannot be exercised by proxy, and the Slovak people, like all other nations on the earth, must have a voice in the determination of their own destiny. Being American institutions, the Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it are primarily interested in the welfare and security of the United States of America. They sincerely believe that it is in the highest interest of America and the rest of the free world that the Slovak nation be free and independent. Therefore, they cannot sit idly by while foreign political opportunists of the Benes stripe, discredited and cursed by their own people, exploit and compromise the good name of America, while given the opportunity to use American tax dollars to prolong the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation and to promote the political, pseudo-democratic conceptions of Masaryk and Benes which led to the destruction of Czecho-Slovakia and the utter enslavement of the Slovak and Czech nations by the Communists. It is, the Slovaks believe, contrary to justice and morals to recognize and give moral and material aid to individuals and �SLOVAKIA 17 organizations that seek the destruction of the Slovak nation by promoting the big lie of a "united Czechoslovak nation." The truth is that the Slovaks never were, nor do they wish to be Czechs; and, on the other hand, the Czechs never were, nor do they desire to be Slovaki:i. Americans of Slovak descent, organized in the Slovak League of America, are loyal to America, because to them America is an ideal, a living symbol of freedom, tolerance, and justice. They seek no special favors for the nation they are descended from, but only recognition of and respect for the inherent, natural rights of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks learned about freedom and democracy from America. They know that they can best secure and safeguard their national existence only if they manage their own household. America has no cause to deny the Slovaks their rights to freedom and independence; this the American people as a whole understand well, but it seems that people making up our Government do not. This undoubtedly is due to the influence of the Benes Czechs who collaborated with the Reds and the Soviet Union until February 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic" exiles. As in the past, so in the future, the Slovak League must expend every effort to correct the situation. Administrations • of the United States Government, no matter what their political beliefs, must be convinced that the righteous cause of the Slovak nation deserves the support of all Americans. Americans of Slovak descent, we trust, are not overly presumptuous in assuming that they merit at least the same measure of favor and trust from their Government as does the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political clique of the late Dr. Edward Benes, which today is operating in America as the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia." Rebuffed and humbled on so many occasions, the Slovak League continues stubbornly and courageously in the work of liberating the Slovaks from all foreign domination. The existence of the Slovak nation can never be secured unless the Slovaks are masters of their own destiny. The Slovaks must not be denied the right to organize their own state, an independent Slovak Republic. The Slovaks are not against a federation or confederation of European �18 SLOVAKIA states, but rather for it. But into such a federation they want to enter not as an appendage of the Czech nation, but as a nation no less sovereign than the rest of the nations of any such proposed European federation. Today the Slovaks look to America for liberation and salvation more than they ever did; the Slovak nation needs encouragement and inspiration in this its darkest hour. After the great onslaught of World War II, the Slovaks were thrown to the Red wolves of the Kremlin and their stooges in Prague, and yet they have never let up in their fight against Communism. They fought against this scourge of humanity in and out of season for the past 100 years and are determined, with God's help, to keep fighting it until the Red plague is wiped off the face of the earth. The work of the Slovak League of America will never be finished until this happens and the Slovak nation at last takes its rightful place in the family of free nations, there to share the burdens and blessings of free men under God, all laboring toward one end: a just and lasting peace, based on the love of man for God and for his fellowman . • • . WHO SAID IT? ' ~Prague, Budapest, Zagreb, Brno, Bratislaiva were as German a'S Linz or Innsbruck, so much so they had German names: Brague (for Praha), Ofon, Agrrum, Brlinn, Pressburg. In Prague in 181'5 there were 50,000 Germam.s and only 15,000 Czechs; even in 1848 respectrubie people spoke only German in the streets, and to ask the way in Czech would provoke an offensive reply . . . . The smaller towns remained German far longer, ,some, such as Brno, until the twentieth century .... The German character of the towns (in the HaJbsbur,g Monarchy) had little or nothing to do with race . . . The enterp:r,ising son of a peasant, Czech, Roumaniian, or &rob, who entered a town, learned a German art and spoke Geiiman to his fellow shopkeepers; his children despised their father',s peasant dialect, am.d his grandcihildren, sa.fuly arrived in staJte j'dbs, forgot that they had ever been am.ytlling but German and town-dwellers." - (A. J. P. Taylor, THE HiABSBURG MONARJOHY, London, 1948; ,pp. 24-25). � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 10 "FOR GOD AND NATION" 50 YEARS OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA PHILIP A. HROBAK After greater numbers of Slovaks had settled in the United States of America during the last quarter of the past century, Slovak newspapers, fraternal benefit societies, churches and schools soon came into being. The Slovaks took to American democracy like fish to water, enjoying fully every moment of their existence in their "new" homeland. In America they had the very thing that souls of men everywhere thirst for: freedom. The liberties and God-given rights so freely and thoroughly pursued and enjoyed in America electrified the minds and hearts of the Slovaks and inspired them to work for the freedom and independence of their own homeland, where natural rights had been denied their people for a thousand years. Of course, their interest in the "old" homeland was only natural. Political persecution and economic suppression were the daily lot of the Slovaks under the Magyars of Hungary. It was evident that the Magyars, after their settlement with Vienna in 1867, were determined to liquidate the Slovaks as a national entity. The Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) was taken over by Budapest and its assets confiscated, students were thrown out of secondary schools, professors were fired or transferred to Magyar regions for their Slovak convictions, and Slovak intellectuals and professionals were deprived of the opportunity of making a livelihood in their own homeland. "Extra Hungariam non est vita" ( outside Hungary there is no life), the Magyars used to say, but this applied only to them, while the Slovaks were forced to leave their homeland by the hundreds of thousands to keep their bodies and souls together. The incident that fired the Slovaks both at home and in America to do something about the unfortunate lot of their homeland was the Cernova Massacre of October 26, 1907. Cernova was the birthplace of Andrew Hlinka, beloved priest and ardent patriot, who had been sentenced to SLOVAKIA 11 two years in jail in 1906 by the Magyars for his active opposition to Magyarizat ion. The good Slovaks of Cernova, in the meantime, having completed the building of their new church with funds collected by Hlinka, entreated the Ordinary of the diocese, Bishop Parvy, who had suspended Hlinka because of his political activity, to reinstate and allow 'our Father Hlinka' to perform the ceremonies of dedication. The bishop refused, appointing another priest for the task. The people resented this decision of the bishop On October 26, 1907, the date of the dedication, the Slovaks of Cernova blocked the priest's entrance to their new church; hard words led to turmoil; the Magyar gendarmes on hand for the occasion fired into the mass of the people. When the smoke cleared nine were dead, three were dying, twelve were seriously and 80 less seriously injured. Before the night was over five more succumbed to their injuries: fourteen dead, fourteen martyrs of Magyar chauvinism. And numerous Slovaks were jailed as "instigator s" of the Cernova incident. The Slovaks in America swung into action; mass meetings of protest organized by the Slovak clergy and Slovak newsmen followed; articles in Slovak and English flooded every Slovak center to spotlight the attention of the world on Magyar brutalities. Thousands of dollars were collected and sent to the homeland for the defense and support of patriotic Slovaks. Cernova, above all else, w1doubtedly motivated the Slovaks of America to join the Slovak League of America, to form a united front against Magyar tyranny. It was on April 4, 1907, at the invitation of the Rev. Stephen Furdek of Cleveland, Ohio, that representat ives of the Slovak Press in America met in Pittsburgh, Pa., to deliberate how they might best help their wretched brethren beneath the Tatras. All recognized the fact that the time was ripe to organize all Slovaks in America into one union for the defense of everything past Slovak generations had built and fought for in Slovakia. Adopting the slogan "For Our Slovak Heritage" (Za tu nasu Slovencinu ), the meeting adopted a two-plank program: 1. To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life at home (in Slovakia); 2. 12 SLOVAKIA To care for and support Slovak cultural and political life in America. Furthermore, it was decided that a mass meeting of American Slovaks would be held at Cleveland, Ohio, on May 26, 1907. Soon after the Pittsburgh meeting, all Slovak newspapers in America publicized the proposed mass rally in Cleveland, inviting all Slovaks interested in the righteous cause of the Slovak nation to attend the "Slovak Congress" on May 26, 1907. It was undersigned by representatives of all Slovak fraternal organizations and newspapers. "The purpose of the Congress," the announcement said, "is to unite all Slovak organizations in systematic national work. ... Our old country is turning to us, let us help it. We must present a united front." Over 7000 of them, representing all Slovak societies and newspapers, fraternal benefit organizations and parishes, clergy and laity of various religious and political convictions, met in Cleveland, Ohio, where they more than filled the spacious Gray's Armory. On that day the Slovak League of America was founded to unite all Slovaks in America to fight for the inherent, God-given rights of the Slovak nation which was doomed to national extinction by the Magyars of Hungary. On that day Americans of Slovak descent resolved in the spirit of America that the nation they are descended from shall be free and independent of alien rule, that it shall be the master of its own household and work out its own destiny as an equal among nations. Under the leadership of the great and immortal Rev. Stephen Furdek, the founder and first president of the Slovak League of America, the League made America known to the Slovaks at home, and Slovakia and her people known to Americans. The seed of freedom and independence, which had taken a solid hold in the fertile soil of America, was now planted by Americans of Slovak descent in the land of their forefathers, Slovakia. Throughout the past fifty years, the Slovak League of America has remained faithful to its mission. It united the Slovaks in America to work for a better America by becoming alert citizens and to work for the liberation of their brethren in Slovakia from hostile, alien domination. The SLOVAKIA 13 League has made America and the rest of the world aware of the fact that the Slovak nation does exist and demands recognition of and respect for its natural rights. But the Slovak League of America also inspired and gave strength to the Slovaks at home not to abandon the uneven struggle for freedom and independence. It was, in fact, the Slovak League of America that made it possible for the Slovak nation to liberate itself from Magyar tyranny. The fatal shot that started the world conflagration and massacre in 1914 had not yet been fired in Sarajevo, when the Slovak League of America prepared a Memorandum addressed "to all just and truth-respecting nations," demanding complete autonomy for the Slovaks on the basis of the right of self-determination. After the Sarajevo incident, the Slovaks were faced with the question: We are through with the Magyars, but now with whom shall we join up to gain what is rightfully ours? With the Russians? The Czechs? The Poles? After due consideration, the Slovaks decided to go along with the Czechs. The decision was greatly influenced by the Slovak League of America. But it was only after T. G. Masaryk, first president and one of the founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, drafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement on May 30, 1918, that the Slovaks really joined with the Czechs to work for the establishment of a common political state. The Agreement guaranteed complete autonomy (states' rights) to Slovakia within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia, which was to be patterned after Switzerland and the United States. Unfortunately, T. G. Masaryk failed to keep his word. Advised by Dr. Edward Benes and other "progressive" chauvinistic Czech socialists, Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact, calling it a "scrap of paper." The Slovaks, however, never let up in their clamor for the incorporation of the Pittsburgh Pact into the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But to no avail: the Masaryk-Benes Czechs in Prague subbornly refused to listen to reason. After twenty years of Czecho-Slovakia under Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were ready to break with the Czechs. After twenty years of Masaryk-Benes pro-Soviet and antiSlovak policies, the Slovaks and Czechs were farther apart 14 SLOVAKIA than they ever had been. Dr. Edward Benes pursued his ruinous policy to the very bitter end, refusing to recognize and respect the inherent right of the Slovak nation to have something to say about its own destiny. Within a week after accepting the Munich verdict, without consulting the parliament or the Slovak and Czech people, he simply resigned and later left the country. The day following Benes' resignation, the Prague Parliament belatedly and begrudgingly granted autonomy to Slovakia and later had the law incorporated into the Czecho-Slovak Constitution. Hitler and his Nazis started their mad race to destruction; there was no one to stop them at that time. And the Czechs, apparently regretting that they had granted autonomy to Slovakia, placed Slovakia under martial law on March 10, 1939, and occupied Slovakia. Hitler, of course, exploited the situation. Without mincing words, he told the Slovaks to proclaim their independence or else. Under the circumstances, the duly elected representatives of the Slovak people proclaimed the independnce of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. The independent Republic of Slovakia was soon recognized by twenty-seven countries. Slovakia was not too badly off during the war; as far as their internal affairs were concerned, the Slovaks managed their country well under President Joseph Tiso. They were better off than most neutral countries and enjoyed more freedom than they ever did under Masaryk and Benes. Why Hitler left them alone and did not bother to take them over completely, as he did the Czechs and so many other nations, still remains unexplained. But the fact is that the Slovaks were doing right well until the end of August 1944, when Moscow agents and the Benes proSoviet clique engineered the so-called "Slovak National Uprising." The story of Warsaw was repeated. Hitler's hordes poured into Slovakia "to restore order" - and the Slovaks were on the receiving end of both sides, the Reds and the Nazis. Over 70,000 Slovaks were killed in the slaughter. We know what happened at the end of World War IT. Benes sold out Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler in 1938 without firing a shot; he repeated the performance in 1943 by for- SLOVAKIA 15 mally selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to Stalin with a treaty. Benes' pro-Soviet policy paid off temporarily: with Stalin's blessing he became president of Czecho-Slovakia again, this time the head man of the new "people's" Republic. To show his gratefulness, Dr. Benes and his Reddominated Prague government immediately began to liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialistic elements in the "new" Czecho-Slovakia. But finally Benes himself was destroyed by the monster he had nurtured to prove again that Communism devours its own children! The Slovak nation was consistently vilified and misrepresented by the nations which dominated and exploited it. As far as the Magyars and Czechs were concerned, there was no Slovak nation, there was no Slovak language. T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes told the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 that the Slovaks were but a branch of the Czech nation and their language was but a dialect of the Czech. In old Hungary, the Magyars boasted that they were the "natio hungarica" ; after 1918, the Czechs beat their chests that they were the "state-nation" - the "Czechoslovak" nation. The Magyars accused the Slovaks of being anti-State and pro-Slav; the Czechs under Masaryk and Benes accused them of being anti-State and pro-Magyar. Both Magyars and Czechs agreed that the Slovaks were "separatists." And their propaganda in America blasted the Slovaks who worked for the liberation of their old homeland from alien domination. The Slovak League of America was the prime target of both the Magyars and the Czechs. During the last war, the Slovak League of America was the main target of attack of Dr. Benes' smear and vilification campaign. Dr. Benes knew the right people in Washington, Paris, London, and Moscow. Americans of Slovak descent could not prevail on their own government to save the Republic of Slovakia for the West; official Washington, in 1945, brushed them off when they begged that Dr. Tiso and the members of the Slovak Government, who had surrendered to the American Army in Austria, be offered political asylum and not handed over to the vengeful Dr. Benes; and two million Americans of Slovak descent 16 SLOVAKIA could not prevail on the President and the Government of the United States to request Benes to spare Dr. Tiso from the gallows in 1947. And today, ten years later, we find that the Benes Czechs still carry some weight in official Washington circles. The Slovak League of America has lost several skirmishes and battles, but it still is carrying on the fight for the reeognition of the natural rights of the Slovak nation. It is only natural that the League is vitally interested in this all-important question, because the existence of the Slovak people is at stake. Since the Slovak nation has not been given an opportunity to speak freely for itself and never had been actually free and independent to work out its own destiny, the Slovak League of America has taken upon itself the obligation of pleading for the realization of the fundamental rights of the Slovak people. As loyal Americans, we are firmly convinced that those rights are predicated on the elementary principle that all peoples are morally entitled to speak in the United Nations, there to defend their rights to survival and self-fulfillment. Liberty cannot be exercised by proxy, and the Slovak people, like all other nations on the earth, must have a voice in the determination of their own destiny. Being American institutions, the Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it are primarily interested in the welfare and security of the United States of America. They sincerely believe that it is in the highest interest of America and the rest of the free world that the Slovak nation be free and independent. Therefore, they cannot sit idly by while foreign political opportunists of the Benes stripe, discredited and cursed by their own people, exploit and compromise the good name of America, while given the opportunity to use American tax dollars to prolong the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation and to promote the political, pseudo-democratic conceptions of Masaryk and Benes which led to the destruction of Czecho-Slovakia and the utter enslavement of the Slovak and Czech nations by the Communists. It is, the Slovaks believe, contrary to justice and morals to recognize and give moral and material aid to individuals and SLOVAKIA 17 organizations that seek the destruction of the Slovak nation by promoting the big lie of a "united Czechoslovak nation." The truth is that the Slovaks never were, nor do they wish to be Czechs; and, on the other hand, the Czechs never were, nor do they desire to be Slovaki:i. Americans of Slovak descent, organized in the Slovak League of America, are loyal to America, because to them America is an ideal, a living symbol of freedom, tolerance, and justice. They seek no special favors for the nation they are descended from, but only recognition of and respect for the inherent, natural rights of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks learned about freedom and democracy from America. They know that they can best secure and safeguard their national existence only if they manage their own household. America has no cause to deny the Slovaks their rights to freedom and independence; this the American people as a whole understand well, but it seems that people making up our Government do not. This undoubtedly is due to the influence of the Benes Czechs who collaborated with the Reds and the Soviet Union until February 1948, when they suddenly became "democratic" exiles. As in the past, so in the future, the Slovak League must expend every effort to correct the situation. Administrations • of the United States Government, no matter what their political beliefs, must be convinced that the righteous cause of the Slovak nation deserves the support of all Americans. Americans of Slovak descent, we trust, are not overly presumptuous in assuming that they merit at least the same measure of favor and trust from their Government as does the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political clique of the late Dr. Edward Benes, which today is operating in America as the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia." Rebuffed and humbled on so many occasions, the Slovak League continues stubbornly and courageously in the work of liberating the Slovaks from all foreign domination. The existence of the Slovak nation can never be secured unless the Slovaks are masters of their own destiny. The Slovaks must not be denied the right to organize their own state, an independent Slovak Republic. The Slovaks are not against a federation or confederation of European 18 SLOVAKIA states, but rather for it. But into such a federation they want to enter not as an appendage of the Czech nation, but as a nation no less sovereign than the rest of the nations of any such proposed European federation. Today the Slovaks look to America for liberation and salvation more than they ever did; the Slovak nation needs encouragement and inspiration in this its darkest hour. After the great onslaught of World War II, the Slovaks were thrown to the Red wolves of the Kremlin and their stooges in Prague, and yet they have never let up in their fight against Communism. They fought against this scourge of humanity in and out of season for the past 100 years and are determined, with God's help, to keep fighting it until the Red plague is wiped off the face of the earth. The work of the Slovak League of America will never be finished until this happens and the Slovak nation at last takes its rightful place in the family of free nations, there to share the burdens and blessings of free men under God, all laboring toward one end: a just and lasting peace, based on the love of man for God and for his fellowman . • • . WHO SAID IT? ' ~Prague, Budapest, Zagreb, Brno, Bratislaiva were as German a'S Linz or Innsbruck, so much so they had German names: Brague (for Praha), Ofon, Agrrum, Brlinn, Pressburg. In Prague in 181'5 there were 50,000 Germam.s and only 15,000 Czechs; even in 1848 respectrubie people spoke only German in the streets, and to ask the way in Czech would provoke an offensive reply . . . . The smaller towns remained German far longer, ,some, such as Brno, until the twentieth century .... The German character of the towns (in the HaJbsbur,g Monarchy) had little or nothing to do with race . . . The enterp:r,ising son of a peasant, Czech, Roumaniian, or &rob, who entered a town, learned a German art and spoke Geiiman to his fellow shopkeepers; his children despised their father',s peasant dialect, am.d his grandcihildren, sa.fuly arrived in staJte j'dbs, forgot that they had ever been am.ytlling but German and town-dwellers." - (A. J. P. Taylor, THE HiABSBURG MONARJOHY, London, 1948; ,pp. 24-25).  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 50 Years of the Slovak League of America Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957 pp. 10-18 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 1957 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/e8393482d575f457cb49b6fe42559817.pdf 37eac43278d2e84137b9438dc839665f PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA Published quarterly by the Slovak VOL. VII League of America JUNE, 1957 NO. 2 (23) C. I. A. DULLES AND THE BENES CZECHS Philip A. Hrobak The House Committee on Un-American Activities prepared and released, in September, 1956, a two-volume symposium on the technique of Soviet cold-warfare which it called: "Soviet Total War - 'Historic Mission' of Violence and Deceit." Besides Mr. Allen W. Dulles, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, more than 120 other prominent United States Government officials, military leaders, labor officials, business executives, educators, journalists, and political scientists contributed statements for the symposium. The analysis of current Communist tactics submitted by Mr. Allen Dulles ("The Communist Attack Upon Parliamentary Government," Vol. II, pp. 423-430) is interesting, indeed, even though it only repeats what others already had said and written on so many other occasions and, in spots, betrays a certain tendency. This tendency is particularly noticeable in Dulles' reference to Czecho-Slovakia, with which I am quite familiar. How the Reds take over a country is a pet subject of the C. I. A. Director; he has talked about it on many occasions, and we read about one such occasion in June, 1956, shortly after Mr. Dulles, at a dinner of the University of Pennsylvania "Law Review," described the methods by which Communists can gain control of a country's parliament. His contribution to the symposium, published by the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, is for the most part a repeat of that address. Mr. Allen Dulles says that in the Soviet process of subverting the "free" governments of Hungary, Romania, Poland and Bulgaria, "the actual presence of Soviet forces on the spot played a decisive role," though he does not elaborate on how it came about that Soviet forces happened to �2 SLOVAKIA be "on the spot," or just how "free" the governments of the countries mentioned were at the time. In Czecho-Slovakia, however, according to Mr. Dulles, "some of the same effect was obtained by the presence, just across the border, of strong Soviet forces and by the fact that the Soviet had previously occupied Prague and many other important Czech centers and had been able, by their terrorist and infiltration methods, to gain a position of strength which far exceed the numerical representation in the population at large. "In fact, they prepared the way for the coup before they evacuated their troops in 1945. Beginning in 1945, Moscow exercised heavy pressure on the free Czech government headed by President Benes. "Hoping to be able to work with the Kremlin and anxious to insure the quick withdrawal of Russian troops, Benes went to Moscow in March of that year. He sought agreement on the forming of a coalition government acceptable to the Soviet, which would include some of the proCommunist emigres who had been collected in Moscow during the war and who flooded back to their home country to play roles preassigned to them by the Kremlin." It is significant that this is the same story which the Benes Czechs ( Czech socialists of all shades now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia") tell us today, the story which did not exist until after the Reds took over all power in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, until after February 25, 1948. If Moscow exercised "heavy pressure" on what Mr. Dulles calls "the free Czech government headed by president Benes," why did Benes and the members of his handpicked political entourage tell the world in 1945, and as late as the end of 1947, that there was no Iron Curtain in Czecho-Slovakia, that the Soviet Union was not intervening in the internal affairs of that hapless country? Furthermore, why did Laurence A. Steinhardt, U. S. Ambassador to Czecho-Slovakia, tell the American public that "there is definitely no iron curtain in Czechoslovakia" (The New York Times, 2-1-47)? It is significant, too, that the C.I.A. Director seems to know nothing about what happened to Slovakia and its �SLOVAKIA 3 people in 1945, when Benes and his Moscow-formed "free Czech government" - supported by the Red Army - returned as "liberators"! And why did Mr. Dulles completely ignore the long record of collaboration of the once-resigned president of Czecho-Slovakia with the Soviet Union - a collaboration that went back to at least 1922? What about the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943? BENE~ DID WORK WITH THE REDS Benes did not only "hope" to be able to work with the Kremlin, as Dulles states, but he actually did work with the men of the Kremlin for many years. How else could he have become president again after he resigned "voluntarily" - as he himself admitted - and Ha.cha was duly elected in his place by the Prague Parliament according to the Czecho-Slovak Constitution? The fact is that Benes already knew in London, as head of the so-called "Czecho-Slovak government-in-exile," the conditions under which he could return as "president" of the country which he had first cowardly abandoned to Hitler in 1938, and then formally to Stalin in 1943. And what does Mr. Dulles mean by saying that "some" pro-Communist emigres "flooded" back to their home country? All of them, including Benes and his band-picked political entourage, "flooded" back only because all were proSoviet and pro-Communist, and all had agreed to play the roles "pre-assigned to them by the Kremlin," as Dulles tells it. "When the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted," Mr. Dulles continues, "the anti-Communist forces were badly divided among four or more parties. The Communist Party, as usual, presented a monolithic front." But the fact is that no anti-Communist and anti-Socialist forces were allowed· to organize in a political party by Benes and his government. The national Front Government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition was dominated by the Czech Nazis of Benes (Czech National Socialists) and the Czech Communists headed by Gottwald, the former collaborating wholeheartedly with the latter to suppress and �4 SLOVAKIA liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist elements in the country. The Benes Czechs might be called non-Communist forces, but never "anti-Communist." The same applies to the so-called Slovak "democrats" - the Judas Slovaks headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich who collaborated so closely with the Communists and the Benes Czechs. The vast majority of the Slovak nation, however, which was not permitted to organize in a political party but was forced to join either the Communists or the Lettrich "democrats," was truly anti-Communist and not merely nonCommunist. "Under these conditions," Mr. Dulles continues, "the elections of 1946 gave the Communists 38 percent of the votes. Thus they became the largest single party, their leader Gottwald was named Prime Minister, and the Communists were able to take over key ministries, including Interior, Information and Finance, with a crypto-Communjst in charge of Defense." SLOVAKS VOTED ANTI-RED Mr. Dulles, however, does not explain who gave the Communists the votes: the people of the Czech lands (Behemia and Moravia), or the people of Slovakia? Of course, informed persons know that the votes of the Czech lands did - and they gave more than 38 percent of the total number of votes to the Communists. In Slovakia the Communists were decisively beaten, getting less than 30 percent of the votes cast, despite the fact that thousands of patriotic Slovaks were not permitted to vote while some 200,000 Czech army and administrative personnel in Slovakia did vote. And another thing, Mr. Allen Dulles states that as a result of the 1946 elections "the Communists were able to take over key ministries" in Czecho-Slovakia. Informed persons, including the Benes Czechs- themselves, however, know that the Czech Reds had already taken over "key ministries" in 1945, as agreed upon by Benes and Stalin in Moscow. Is it possible that the director of our Central Intelligence Agency did not know this, that even today he does �SLOVAKIA 5 not understand the difference between a Slovak and a Czech? Or that the Reds, even though they were thoroughly trounced in Slovakia in the May, 1946, elections, nevertheless retained all key positions in that country, thanks to Benes and his government and the weakness and cowardly behavior of Dr. Joseph Lettrich and his "democratic" lieutenants? "During all this period," Mr. Dulles rambles on, "Stalin had cultivated President Benes and lulled him into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Meanwhile the Communists were building up their control of the Czech military forces, the trade unions, and the internal security policy. "Finally, one of Moscow's principal 'expediters,' Valerian Zarin, now Soviet ambassador to Bonn, was sent to Prague, and the minority Communist Party seized power in February, 1948, without firing a shot." Dr. Edward Benes - frequently hailed as "the smartest statesman in Europe - the world's foremost democrat - Europe's wisest politician" and "brilliant diplomat" - the man who was supposed to know Stalin and Soviet Russia better than any man in Europe, the man who saw what the USSR did in Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and other countries, was, we are supposed to believe, "lulled into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions by Stalin! The fact is that the Reds were in control of the key posts in Czecho-Slovakia before the elections of 1946; the latter made them more secure and, hence, more aggressive. GAVE UP WITHOUT A SHOT T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes were largely responsible for the conduct of the Czechs in regard to the Soviet Union and materialistic Communism; Dr. Edward Benes and his political clique had lulled the Czech people into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Even many Czechs admit this today. The Czechs, who controlled government in Czech-Slovakia, promoted materialistic Socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Benes and, hence, Czecho-Slovakia could wind up only as she did: The Czechs did not fire a shot at Hitler �ti SLOVAKIA in 1938, and they gave up to the Communists without firing a shot in 1948. C. L. Sulzberger's article in The New York Times of March 10, 1956, based on information received from Czechs in Prague, aptly described the Czechs: The Czech people under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, had been transformed into a nation of 'Schweiks' ( clowns or buffoons). The Czechs never had to fight for anything, everything being handed to them on a platter, including CzechoSlovakia, and hence, had no real sense of appreciation for freedom. "The · principal Czech anti-Communist leaders," according to Dulles, "either escaped abroad, committed suicide, or were eliminated by arrest. Non-Communist parties were liquidated by the armed seizure of their headquarters and newspapers. A purge commission dealt with all so-called ' unreliable political leaders." leaders" that esanti-Communist Who the "principal It is generally say. not caped abroad were, Mr. Dulles does anti"principal" any, if known, however, that very few, CommunCommunist leaders are able to escape from any ist-controlled country. Does Mr. Dulles mean the members of Dr. Benes's political family, who escaped "wholesale" from Czecho-Slovakia in 1948 and today form the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia" and are regarded as The New York Times stated, as a sort of "Czecho-Slovak government-inexile" by official Washington, "reliable enough to exercise significant influence in and on various United States Government agencies (USIA, State Department, Army, C.I.C., C.I.A., etc.), and even on Congress and the White House? If he does, he is dead wrong in applying the appellation "principal Czech anti-Communist leaders" to them. They promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and collaborated with the Communists: some of them have frankly admitted this regretfully, most of them have not, and all of them would rather not be questioned about it. We know that non-Communist, and particularly antiOommunist, parties are generally liquidated in every coun- �SLOVAKIA 7 try in which Communists gain control. We know, too, that Reds sometimes purge Reds themselves: everi in CzechoSlovakia the Czech Reds liquidated or rendered useless leading Slovak Reds and then even purged their own ranks. Who liquidated the anti-Communist and anti-Socialist parties in Czecho-Slovakia? Benes and his handpicked and Moscow-blessed government and, mind you, after - as Mr. Dulles puts it - "the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted" in 1945 ! The Benes-Gottwald regime controlled everything in CzechoSlovakia: political parties, the press, radio, army, etc. In the lands of the Czechs four political parties were permitted by the government to exist, while only two were allowed in Slovakia (later, just before the 1946 elections, two more were permitted to help the Reds). So, in CzechoSlovakia, anti-Soviet and anti-Red elements and parties were liquidated by both the "non-Communist" and also the "Communist" parties which were allowed to organize by the Prague government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition of 1945. BENl!S FORCED TO DO EVERYTHING "President Benes," Mr. Dulles states categorically, "was forced to resign in June, 1948, and the Communists took over and ever since have maintained supreme control." Benes, according to his apologists, C. I. A. Director Allen Dulles included, was always "forced" to do things: he was forced to give in to England and France and surrender to Hitler in Munich; he was forced to take on the presidency after he had resigned; he was forced to go to Moscow and sign a treaty, without a mandate from the Slovaks and the Czechs, whereby he formally sold out the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia to Stalin; he was forced to return to Czecho-Slovakia behind the Red Army after he had cowardly fled the country in 1938; he was forced to surrender the great Skoda Works to the Nazis and then to the Communists; he was forced to hoodwink President Roosevelt, convincing him that Stalin was "a good old Joe" and really a democrat at heart; he was forced to hang Dr. Joseph Tiso, president of the Slovak Republic (1939-1945), and to imprison and put to trial all his Czech and Slovak �8 SLOVAKIA political opponents, including President Ha.cha, whom he had -congratulated after he was elected his successor; he was forced to eliminate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist leaders in post-war Czecho-Slovakia; he was forced to decree the establishment of "people's courts" in CzechoSlovakia; he was forced to nationalize just about everything, including ecclesiastical property; he was forced to dispossess and deport some 3,500,000 Germans and 500,000 Magyars; he was forced to accept the resignation of nonCommunist ministers in February 1948; he was forced to consent to the creation of a Cabinet under full control of the Communist Party; he was forced to resign in June, 1948; and in September, 1948, he was forced to die! In 1945, after the end of the war in Europe, the world press told us that Dr. Edward Benes had the backing of all the people of Czecho-Slovakia and that on his return to that country he was joyously and wildly acclaimed by Slovaks and Czechs. And yet, we are supposed to believe that this man Benes was forced to do practically everything during his political life, except possibly to promote socialism and friendship for the Soviet Union in his country! C. I. A. DULLES IS BADLY INFORMED Mr. Dulles concludes his commentary on Czecho-Slovakia with these obfuscated words of wisdom: "There are many lessons to be learned from this historical precedent. When the Communists obtain an effective minority position in any parliamentary body, it is a sign of danger. "If, in addition to that, they have important places in the government and, in particular, control of the ministries of defense and interior, then that danger is greatly augmented and the country in question is ripe for a Communist take-over." The director of the C. I. A. undoubtedly could have done better, if he were better informed. How did the Communists in Czecho-Slovakia obtain "an effective minority position" in the government or the Prague parliament? How did they happen to be in "important places" and, in particular, in control of the Ministries of Defense and Interior? �SLOVAKIA 9 Benes we were told, had everything under control. The Communists, we know, could not obtain an "effective minority position" and control of any ministry in the wartime Slovak Republic, for example, because they were outlawed by the Slovak government under Dr. Joseph Tiso. Benes, on the other hand, after his return to Czecho-Slovakia, stated unequivocally that he would not govern the state without the Communists. The world knows what happened - and at this late date, so should the head of our Central Intelligence Agency. If Mr. Dulles is thoroughly informed on the subject, he could have pointed out the one lesson to be learned from Czecho-Slovakia, or rather from the conduct of the Benes Czechs: you cannot tolerate Communism, you cannot collaborate with Communists and expect to retain the blessings of freedom. It appears that what Mr. Allen W. Dulles said about Czecho-Slovakia was prepared by a Benes apologist, probably a Benes Czech of the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia," and, possibly, by a Benes Czech employed by him in the C. I. A. itself. The Benes Czechs have prepared many speeches and briefs for men in the United States Government and its various agencies. And that probably explains why the American public is so misinformed on Czecho-Slovakia. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Today, in vain are the followers of Benes trying to justify thei:r coHalb.oraJbion with the Bolsh0V.iiks and their crimes a:gainst humarrtty during 1945-1948 with the desperate claim that they did so !because the USA wanted them to do it. That is not only a lie, ,b ut a coarse and ibase insult to the government and the naition of the US·A. The freedom and laiw-aJbiding democratic American peo,ple hitherto had no idea of the terrible crimes the Bolsheviks with their collrubo-rator;s had committed in our country. Only now is the American people slowly learning the truth, that terrible truth and ma•k ing itself heard. It does not want criminals and the agents of Moscow in its country." - (J. Horny, BOHEMIA, Dec. 1952). � SLOVAKIA Published quarterly by the Slovak VOL. VII League of America JUNE, 1957 NO. 2 (23) C. I. A. DULLES AND THE BENES CZECHS Philip A. Hrobak The House Committee on Un-American Activities prepared and released, in September, 1956, a two-volume symposium on the technique of Soviet cold-warfare which it called: "Soviet Total War - 'Historic Mission' of Violence and Deceit." Besides Mr. Allen W. Dulles, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, more than 120 other prominent United States Government officials, military leaders, labor officials, business executives, educators, journalists, and political scientists contributed statements for the symposium. The analysis of current Communist tactics submitted by Mr. Allen Dulles ("The Communist Attack Upon Parliamentary Government," Vol. II, pp. 423-430) is interesting, indeed, even though it only repeats what others already had said and written on so many other occasions and, in spots, betrays a certain tendency. This tendency is particularly noticeable in Dulles' reference to Czecho-Slovakia, with which I am quite familiar. How the Reds take over a country is a pet subject of the C. I. A. Director; he has talked about it on many occasions, and we read about one such occasion in June, 1956, shortly after Mr. Dulles, at a dinner of the University of Pennsylvania "Law Review," described the methods by which Communists can gain control of a country's parliament. His contribution to the symposium, published by the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, is for the most part a repeat of that address. Mr. Allen Dulles says that in the Soviet process of subverting the "free" governments of Hungary, Romania, Poland and Bulgaria, "the actual presence of Soviet forces on the spot played a decisive role," though he does not elaborate on how it came about that Soviet forces happened to �2 SLOVAKIA be "on the spot," or just how "free" the governments of the countries mentioned were at the time. In Czecho-Slovakia, however, according to Mr. Dulles, "some of the same effect was obtained by the presence, just across the border, of strong Soviet forces and by the fact that the Soviet had previously occupied Prague and many other important Czech centers and had been able, by their terrorist and infiltration methods, to gain a position of strength which far exceed the numerical representation in the population at large. "In fact, they prepared the way for the coup before they evacuated their troops in 1945. Beginning in 1945, Moscow exercised heavy pressure on the free Czech government headed by President Benes. "Hoping to be able to work with the Kremlin and anxious to insure the quick withdrawal of Russian troops, Benes went to Moscow in March of that year. He sought agreement on the forming of a coalition government acceptable to the Soviet, which would include some of the proCommunist emigres who had been collected in Moscow during the war and who flooded back to their home country to play roles preassigned to them by the Kremlin." It is significant that this is the same story which the Benes Czechs ( Czech socialists of all shades now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia") tell us today, the story which did not exist until after the Reds took over all power in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, until after February 25, 1948. If Moscow exercised "heavy pressure" on what Mr. Dulles calls "the free Czech government headed by president Benes," why did Benes and the members of his handpicked political entourage tell the world in 1945, and as late as the end of 1947, that there was no Iron Curtain in Czecho-Slovakia, that the Soviet Union was not intervening in the internal affairs of that hapless country? Furthermore, why did Laurence A. Steinhardt, U. S. Ambassador to Czecho-Slovakia, tell the American public that "there is definitely no iron curtain in Czechoslovakia" (The New York Times, 2-1-47)? It is significant, too, that the C.I.A. Director seems to know nothing about what happened to Slovakia and its �SLOVAKIA 3 people in 1945, when Benes and his Moscow-formed "free Czech government" - supported by the Red Army - returned as "liberators"! And why did Mr. Dulles completely ignore the long record of collaboration of the once-resigned president of Czecho-Slovakia with the Soviet Union - a collaboration that went back to at least 1922? What about the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943? BENE~ DID WORK WITH THE REDS Benes did not only "hope" to be able to work with the Kremlin, as Dulles states, but he actually did work with the men of the Kremlin for many years. How else could he have become president again after he resigned "voluntarily" - as he himself admitted - and Ha.cha was duly elected in his place by the Prague Parliament according to the Czecho-Slovak Constitution? The fact is that Benes already knew in London, as head of the so-called "Czecho-Slovak government-in-exile," the conditions under which he could return as "president" of the country which he had first cowardly abandoned to Hitler in 1938, and then formally to Stalin in 1943. And what does Mr. Dulles mean by saying that "some" pro-Communist emigres "flooded" back to their home country? All of them, including Benes and his band-picked political entourage, "flooded" back only because all were proSoviet and pro-Communist, and all had agreed to play the roles "pre-assigned to them by the Kremlin," as Dulles tells it. "When the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted," Mr. Dulles continues, "the anti-Communist forces were badly divided among four or more parties. The Communist Party, as usual, presented a monolithic front." But the fact is that no anti-Communist and anti-Socialist forces were allowed· to organize in a political party by Benes and his government. The national Front Government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition was dominated by the Czech Nazis of Benes (Czech National Socialists) and the Czech Communists headed by Gottwald, the former collaborating wholeheartedly with the latter to suppress and �4 SLOVAKIA liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist elements in the country. The Benes Czechs might be called non-Communist forces, but never "anti-Communist." The same applies to the so-called Slovak "democrats" - the Judas Slovaks headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich who collaborated so closely with the Communists and the Benes Czechs. The vast majority of the Slovak nation, however, which was not permitted to organize in a political party but was forced to join either the Communists or the Lettrich "democrats," was truly anti-Communist and not merely nonCommunist. "Under these conditions," Mr. Dulles continues, "the elections of 1946 gave the Communists 38 percent of the votes. Thus they became the largest single party, their leader Gottwald was named Prime Minister, and the Communists were able to take over key ministries, including Interior, Information and Finance, with a crypto-Communjst in charge of Defense." SLOVAKS VOTED ANTI-RED Mr. Dulles, however, does not explain who gave the Communists the votes: the people of the Czech lands (Behemia and Moravia), or the people of Slovakia? Of course, informed persons know that the votes of the Czech lands did - and they gave more than 38 percent of the total number of votes to the Communists. In Slovakia the Communists were decisively beaten, getting less than 30 percent of the votes cast, despite the fact that thousands of patriotic Slovaks were not permitted to vote while some 200,000 Czech army and administrative personnel in Slovakia did vote. And another thing, Mr. Allen Dulles states that as a result of the 1946 elections "the Communists were able to take over key ministries" in Czecho-Slovakia. Informed persons, including the Benes Czechs- themselves, however, know that the Czech Reds had already taken over "key ministries" in 1945, as agreed upon by Benes and Stalin in Moscow. Is it possible that the director of our Central Intelligence Agency did not know this, that even today he does �SLOVAKIA 5 not understand the difference between a Slovak and a Czech? Or that the Reds, even though they were thoroughly trounced in Slovakia in the May, 1946, elections, nevertheless retained all key positions in that country, thanks to Benes and his government and the weakness and cowardly behavior of Dr. Joseph Lettrich and his "democratic" lieutenants? "During all this period," Mr. Dulles rambles on, "Stalin had cultivated President Benes and lulled him into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Meanwhile the Communists were building up their control of the Czech military forces, the trade unions, and the internal security policy. "Finally, one of Moscow's principal 'expediters,' Valerian Zarin, now Soviet ambassador to Bonn, was sent to Prague, and the minority Communist Party seized power in February, 1948, without firing a shot." Dr. Edward Benes - frequently hailed as "the smartest statesman in Europe - the world's foremost democrat - Europe's wisest politician" and "brilliant diplomat" - the man who was supposed to know Stalin and Soviet Russia better than any man in Europe, the man who saw what the USSR did in Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and other countries, was, we are supposed to believe, "lulled into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions by Stalin! The fact is that the Reds were in control of the key posts in Czecho-Slovakia before the elections of 1946; the latter made them more secure and, hence, more aggressive. GAVE UP WITHOUT A SHOT T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes were largely responsible for the conduct of the Czechs in regard to the Soviet Union and materialistic Communism; Dr. Edward Benes and his political clique had lulled the Czech people into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Even many Czechs admit this today. The Czechs, who controlled government in Czech-Slovakia, promoted materialistic Socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Benes and, hence, Czecho-Slovakia could wind up only as she did: The Czechs did not fire a shot at Hitler �ti SLOVAKIA in 1938, and they gave up to the Communists without firing a shot in 1948. C. L. Sulzberger's article in The New York Times of March 10, 1956, based on information received from Czechs in Prague, aptly described the Czechs: The Czech people under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, had been transformed into a nation of 'Schweiks' ( clowns or buffoons). The Czechs never had to fight for anything, everything being handed to them on a platter, including CzechoSlovakia, and hence, had no real sense of appreciation for freedom. "The · principal Czech anti-Communist leaders," according to Dulles, "either escaped abroad, committed suicide, or were eliminated by arrest. Non-Communist parties were liquidated by the armed seizure of their headquarters and newspapers. A purge commission dealt with all so-called ' unreliable political leaders." leaders" that esanti-Communist Who the "principal It is generally say. not caped abroad were, Mr. Dulles does anti"principal" any, if known, however, that very few, CommunCommunist leaders are able to escape from any ist-controlled country. Does Mr. Dulles mean the members of Dr. Benes's political family, who escaped "wholesale" from Czecho-Slovakia in 1948 and today form the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia" and are regarded as The New York Times stated, as a sort of "Czecho-Slovak government-inexile" by official Washington, "reliable enough to exercise significant influence in and on various United States Government agencies (USIA, State Department, Army, C.I.C., C.I.A., etc.), and even on Congress and the White House? If he does, he is dead wrong in applying the appellation "principal Czech anti-Communist leaders" to them. They promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and collaborated with the Communists: some of them have frankly admitted this regretfully, most of them have not, and all of them would rather not be questioned about it. We know that non-Communist, and particularly antiOommunist, parties are generally liquidated in every coun- �SLOVAKIA 7 try in which Communists gain control. We know, too, that Reds sometimes purge Reds themselves: everi in CzechoSlovakia the Czech Reds liquidated or rendered useless leading Slovak Reds and then even purged their own ranks. Who liquidated the anti-Communist and anti-Socialist parties in Czecho-Slovakia? Benes and his handpicked and Moscow-blessed government and, mind you, after - as Mr. Dulles puts it - "the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted" in 1945 ! The Benes-Gottwald regime controlled everything in CzechoSlovakia: political parties, the press, radio, army, etc. In the lands of the Czechs four political parties were permitted by the government to exist, while only two were allowed in Slovakia (later, just before the 1946 elections, two more were permitted to help the Reds). So, in CzechoSlovakia, anti-Soviet and anti-Red elements and parties were liquidated by both the "non-Communist" and also the "Communist" parties which were allowed to organize by the Prague government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition of 1945. BENl!S FORCED TO DO EVERYTHING "President Benes," Mr. Dulles states categorically, "was forced to resign in June, 1948, and the Communists took over and ever since have maintained supreme control." Benes, according to his apologists, C. I. A. Director Allen Dulles included, was always "forced" to do things: he was forced to give in to England and France and surrender to Hitler in Munich; he was forced to take on the presidency after he had resigned; he was forced to go to Moscow and sign a treaty, without a mandate from the Slovaks and the Czechs, whereby he formally sold out the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia to Stalin; he was forced to return to Czecho-Slovakia behind the Red Army after he had cowardly fled the country in 1938; he was forced to surrender the great Skoda Works to the Nazis and then to the Communists; he was forced to hoodwink President Roosevelt, convincing him that Stalin was "a good old Joe" and really a democrat at heart; he was forced to hang Dr. Joseph Tiso, president of the Slovak Republic (1939-1945), and to imprison and put to trial all his Czech and Slovak �8 SLOVAKIA political opponents, including President Ha.cha, whom he had -congratulated after he was elected his successor; he was forced to eliminate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist leaders in post-war Czecho-Slovakia; he was forced to decree the establishment of "people's courts" in CzechoSlovakia; he was forced to nationalize just about everything, including ecclesiastical property; he was forced to dispossess and deport some 3,500,000 Germans and 500,000 Magyars; he was forced to accept the resignation of nonCommunist ministers in February 1948; he was forced to consent to the creation of a Cabinet under full control of the Communist Party; he was forced to resign in June, 1948; and in September, 1948, he was forced to die! In 1945, after the end of the war in Europe, the world press told us that Dr. Edward Benes had the backing of all the people of Czecho-Slovakia and that on his return to that country he was joyously and wildly acclaimed by Slovaks and Czechs. And yet, we are supposed to believe that this man Benes was forced to do practically everything during his political life, except possibly to promote socialism and friendship for the Soviet Union in his country! C. I. A. DULLES IS BADLY INFORMED Mr. Dulles concludes his commentary on Czecho-Slovakia with these obfuscated words of wisdom: "There are many lessons to be learned from this historical precedent. When the Communists obtain an effective minority position in any parliamentary body, it is a sign of danger. "If, in addition to that, they have important places in the government and, in particular, control of the ministries of defense and interior, then that danger is greatly augmented and the country in question is ripe for a Communist take-over." The director of the C. I. A. undoubtedly could have done better, if he were better informed. How did the Communists in Czecho-Slovakia obtain "an effective minority position" in the government or the Prague parliament? How did they happen to be in "important places" and, in particular, in control of the Ministries of Defense and Interior? �SLOVAKIA 9 Benes we were told, had everything under control. The Communists, we know, could not obtain an "effective minority position" and control of any ministry in the wartime Slovak Republic, for example, because they were outlawed by the Slovak government under Dr. Joseph Tiso. Benes, on the other hand, after his return to Czecho-Slovakia, stated unequivocally that he would not govern the state without the Communists. The world knows what happened - and at this late date, so should the head of our Central Intelligence Agency. If Mr. Dulles is thoroughly informed on the subject, he could have pointed out the one lesson to be learned from Czecho-Slovakia, or rather from the conduct of the Benes Czechs: you cannot tolerate Communism, you cannot collaborate with Communists and expect to retain the blessings of freedom. It appears that what Mr. Allen W. Dulles said about Czecho-Slovakia was prepared by a Benes apologist, probably a Benes Czech of the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia," and, possibly, by a Benes Czech employed by him in the C. I. A. itself. The Benes Czechs have prepared many speeches and briefs for men in the United States Government and its various agencies. And that probably explains why the American public is so misinformed on Czecho-Slovakia. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Today, in vain are the followers of Benes trying to justify thei:r coHalb.oraJbion with the Bolsh0V.iiks and their crimes a:gainst humarrtty during 1945-1948 with the desperate claim that they did so !because the USA wanted them to do it. That is not only a lie, ,b ut a coarse and ibase insult to the government and the naition of the US·A. The freedom and laiw-aJbiding democratic American peo,ple hitherto had no idea of the terrible crimes the Bolsheviks with their collrubo-rator;s had committed in our country. Only now is the American people slowly learning the truth, that terrible truth and ma•k ing itself heard. It does not want criminals and the agents of Moscow in its country." - (J. Horny, BOHEMIA, Dec. 1952). � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 quarterly by the Slovak VOL. VII League of America JUNE, 1957 NO. 2 (23) C. I. A. DULLES AND THE BENES CZECHS Philip A. Hrobak The House Committee on Un-American Activities prepared and released, in September, 1956, a two-volume symposium on the technique of Soviet cold-warfare which it called: "Soviet Total War - 'Historic Mission' of Violence and Deceit." Besides Mr. Allen W. Dulles, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, more than 120 other prominent United States Government officials, military leaders, labor officials, business executives, educators, journalists, and political scientists contributed statements for the symposium. The analysis of current Communist tactics submitted by Mr. Allen Dulles ("The Communist Attack Upon Parliamentary Government," Vol. II, pp. 423-430) is interesting, indeed, even though it only repeats what others already had said and written on so many other occasions and, in spots, betrays a certain tendency. This tendency is particularly noticeable in Dulles' reference to Czecho-Slovakia, with which I am quite familiar. How the Reds take over a country is a pet subject of the C. I. A. Director; he has talked about it on many occasions, and we read about one such occasion in June, 1956, shortly after Mr. Dulles, at a dinner of the University of Pennsylvania "Law Review," described the methods by which Communists can gain control of a country's parliament. His contribution to the symposium, published by the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, is for the most part a repeat of that address. Mr. Allen Dulles says that in the Soviet process of subverting the "free" governments of Hungary, Romania, Poland and Bulgaria, "the actual presence of Soviet forces on the spot played a decisive role," though he does not elaborate on how it came about that Soviet forces happened to 2 SLOVAKIA be "on the spot," or just how "free" the governments of the countries mentioned were at the time. In Czecho-Slovakia, however, according to Mr. Dulles, "some of the same effect was obtained by the presence, just across the border, of strong Soviet forces and by the fact that the Soviet had previously occupied Prague and many other important Czech centers and had been able, by their terrorist and infiltration methods, to gain a position of strength which far exceed the numerical representation in the population at large. "In fact, they prepared the way for the coup before they evacuated their troops in 1945. Beginning in 1945, Moscow exercised heavy pressure on the free Czech government headed by President Benes. "Hoping to be able to work with the Kremlin and anxious to insure the quick withdrawal of Russian troops, Benes went to Moscow in March of that year. He sought agreement on the forming of a coalition government acceptable to the Soviet, which would include some of the proCommunist emigres who had been collected in Moscow during the war and who flooded back to their home country to play roles preassigned to them by the Kremlin." It is significant that this is the same story which the Benes Czechs ( Czech socialists of all shades now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia") tell us today, the story which did not exist until after the Reds took over all power in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, until after February 25, 1948. If Moscow exercised "heavy pressure" on what Mr. Dulles calls "the free Czech government headed by president Benes," why did Benes and the members of his handpicked political entourage tell the world in 1945, and as late as the end of 1947, that there was no Iron Curtain in Czecho-Slovakia, that the Soviet Union was not intervening in the internal affairs of that hapless country? Furthermore, why did Laurence A. Steinhardt, U. S. Ambassador to Czecho-Slovakia, tell the American public that "there is definitely no iron curtain in Czechoslovakia" (The New York Times, 2-1-47)? It is significant, too, that the C.I.A. Director seems to know nothing about what happened to Slovakia and its SLOVAKIA 3 people in 1945, when Benes and his Moscow-formed "free Czech government" - supported by the Red Army - returned as "liberators"! And why did Mr. Dulles completely ignore the long record of collaboration of the once-resigned president of Czecho-Slovakia with the Soviet Union - a collaboration that went back to at least 1922? What about the Benes-Soviet Treaty of December 12, 1943? BENE~ DID WORK WITH THE REDS Benes did not only "hope" to be able to work with the Kremlin, as Dulles states, but he actually did work with the men of the Kremlin for many years. How else could he have become president again after he resigned "voluntarily" - as he himself admitted - and Ha.cha was duly elected in his place by the Prague Parliament according to the Czecho-Slovak Constitution? The fact is that Benes already knew in London, as head of the so-called "Czecho-Slovak government-in-exile," the conditions under which he could return as "president" of the country which he had first cowardly abandoned to Hitler in 1938, and then formally to Stalin in 1943. And what does Mr. Dulles mean by saying that "some" pro-Communist emigres "flooded" back to their home country? All of them, including Benes and his band-picked political entourage, "flooded" back only because all were proSoviet and pro-Communist, and all had agreed to play the roles "pre-assigned to them by the Kremlin," as Dulles tells it. "When the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted," Mr. Dulles continues, "the anti-Communist forces were badly divided among four or more parties. The Communist Party, as usual, presented a monolithic front." But the fact is that no anti-Communist and anti-Socialist forces were allowed· to organize in a political party by Benes and his government. The national Front Government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition was dominated by the Czech Nazis of Benes (Czech National Socialists) and the Czech Communists headed by Gottwald, the former collaborating wholeheartedly with the latter to suppress and 4 SLOVAKIA liquidate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist elements in the country. The Benes Czechs might be called non-Communist forces, but never "anti-Communist." The same applies to the so-called Slovak "democrats" - the Judas Slovaks headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich who collaborated so closely with the Communists and the Benes Czechs. The vast majority of the Slovak nation, however, which was not permitted to organize in a political party but was forced to join either the Communists or the Lettrich "democrats," was truly anti-Communist and not merely nonCommunist. "Under these conditions," Mr. Dulles continues, "the elections of 1946 gave the Communists 38 percent of the votes. Thus they became the largest single party, their leader Gottwald was named Prime Minister, and the Communists were able to take over key ministries, including Interior, Information and Finance, with a crypto-Communjst in charge of Defense." SLOVAKS VOTED ANTI-RED Mr. Dulles, however, does not explain who gave the Communists the votes: the people of the Czech lands (Behemia and Moravia), or the people of Slovakia? Of course, informed persons know that the votes of the Czech lands did - and they gave more than 38 percent of the total number of votes to the Communists. In Slovakia the Communists were decisively beaten, getting less than 30 percent of the votes cast, despite the fact that thousands of patriotic Slovaks were not permitted to vote while some 200,000 Czech army and administrative personnel in Slovakia did vote. And another thing, Mr. Allen Dulles states that as a result of the 1946 elections "the Communists were able to take over key ministries" in Czecho-Slovakia. Informed persons, including the Benes Czechs- themselves, however, know that the Czech Reds had already taken over "key ministries" in 1945, as agreed upon by Benes and Stalin in Moscow. Is it possible that the director of our Central Intelligence Agency did not know this, that even today he does SLOVAKIA 5 not understand the difference between a Slovak and a Czech? Or that the Reds, even though they were thoroughly trounced in Slovakia in the May, 1946, elections, nevertheless retained all key positions in that country, thanks to Benes and his government and the weakness and cowardly behavior of Dr. Joseph Lettrich and his "democratic" lieutenants? "During all this period," Mr. Dulles rambles on, "Stalin had cultivated President Benes and lulled him into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Meanwhile the Communists were building up their control of the Czech military forces, the trade unions, and the internal security policy. "Finally, one of Moscow's principal 'expediters,' Valerian Zarin, now Soviet ambassador to Bonn, was sent to Prague, and the minority Communist Party seized power in February, 1948, without firing a shot." Dr. Edward Benes - frequently hailed as "the smartest statesman in Europe - the world's foremost democrat - Europe's wisest politician" and "brilliant diplomat" - the man who was supposed to know Stalin and Soviet Russia better than any man in Europe, the man who saw what the USSR did in Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and other countries, was, we are supposed to believe, "lulled into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions by Stalin! The fact is that the Reds were in control of the key posts in Czecho-Slovakia before the elections of 1946; the latter made them more secure and, hence, more aggressive. GAVE UP WITHOUT A SHOT T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes were largely responsible for the conduct of the Czechs in regard to the Soviet Union and materialistic Communism; Dr. Edward Benes and his political clique had lulled the Czech people into a feeling of security as to Moscow's intentions. Even many Czechs admit this today. The Czechs, who controlled government in Czech-Slovakia, promoted materialistic Socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Benes and, hence, Czecho-Slovakia could wind up only as she did: The Czechs did not fire a shot at Hitler ti SLOVAKIA in 1938, and they gave up to the Communists without firing a shot in 1948. C. L. Sulzberger's article in The New York Times of March 10, 1956, based on information received from Czechs in Prague, aptly described the Czechs: The Czech people under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, had been transformed into a nation of 'Schweiks' ( clowns or buffoons). The Czechs never had to fight for anything, everything being handed to them on a platter, including CzechoSlovakia, and hence, had no real sense of appreciation for freedom. "The · principal Czech anti-Communist leaders," according to Dulles, "either escaped abroad, committed suicide, or were eliminated by arrest. Non-Communist parties were liquidated by the armed seizure of their headquarters and newspapers. A purge commission dealt with all so-called ' unreliable political leaders." leaders" that esanti-Communist Who the "principal It is generally say. not caped abroad were, Mr. Dulles does anti"principal" any, if known, however, that very few, CommunCommunist leaders are able to escape from any ist-controlled country. Does Mr. Dulles mean the members of Dr. Benes's political family, who escaped "wholesale" from Czecho-Slovakia in 1948 and today form the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia" and are regarded as The New York Times stated, as a sort of "Czecho-Slovak government-inexile" by official Washington, "reliable enough to exercise significant influence in and on various United States Government agencies (USIA, State Department, Army, C.I.C., C.I.A., etc.), and even on Congress and the White House? If he does, he is dead wrong in applying the appellation "principal Czech anti-Communist leaders" to them. They promoted the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes and collaborated with the Communists: some of them have frankly admitted this regretfully, most of them have not, and all of them would rather not be questioned about it. We know that non-Communist, and particularly antiOommunist, parties are generally liquidated in every coun- SLOVAKIA 7 try in which Communists gain control. We know, too, that Reds sometimes purge Reds themselves: everi in CzechoSlovakia the Czech Reds liquidated or rendered useless leading Slovak Reds and then even purged their own ranks. Who liquidated the anti-Communist and anti-Socialist parties in Czecho-Slovakia? Benes and his handpicked and Moscow-blessed government and, mind you, after - as Mr. Dulles puts it - "the parliamentary government of President Benes was actually reconstituted" in 1945 ! The Benes-Gottwald regime controlled everything in CzechoSlovakia: political parties, the press, radio, army, etc. In the lands of the Czechs four political parties were permitted by the government to exist, while only two were allowed in Slovakia (later, just before the 1946 elections, two more were permitted to help the Reds). So, in CzechoSlovakia, anti-Soviet and anti-Red elements and parties were liquidated by both the "non-Communist" and also the "Communist" parties which were allowed to organize by the Prague government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition of 1945. BENl!S FORCED TO DO EVERYTHING "President Benes," Mr. Dulles states categorically, "was forced to resign in June, 1948, and the Communists took over and ever since have maintained supreme control." Benes, according to his apologists, C. I. A. Director Allen Dulles included, was always "forced" to do things: he was forced to give in to England and France and surrender to Hitler in Munich; he was forced to take on the presidency after he had resigned; he was forced to go to Moscow and sign a treaty, without a mandate from the Slovaks and the Czechs, whereby he formally sold out the peoples of Czecho-Slovakia to Stalin; he was forced to return to Czecho-Slovakia behind the Red Army after he had cowardly fled the country in 1938; he was forced to surrender the great Skoda Works to the Nazis and then to the Communists; he was forced to hoodwink President Roosevelt, convincing him that Stalin was "a good old Joe" and really a democrat at heart; he was forced to hang Dr. Joseph Tiso, president of the Slovak Republic (1939-1945), and to imprison and put to trial all his Czech and Slovak 8 SLOVAKIA political opponents, including President Ha.cha, whom he had -congratulated after he was elected his successor; he was forced to eliminate all anti-Communist and anti-Socialist leaders in post-war Czecho-Slovakia; he was forced to decree the establishment of "people's courts" in CzechoSlovakia; he was forced to nationalize just about everything, including ecclesiastical property; he was forced to dispossess and deport some 3,500,000 Germans and 500,000 Magyars; he was forced to accept the resignation of nonCommunist ministers in February 1948; he was forced to consent to the creation of a Cabinet under full control of the Communist Party; he was forced to resign in June, 1948; and in September, 1948, he was forced to die! In 1945, after the end of the war in Europe, the world press told us that Dr. Edward Benes had the backing of all the people of Czecho-Slovakia and that on his return to that country he was joyously and wildly acclaimed by Slovaks and Czechs. And yet, we are supposed to believe that this man Benes was forced to do practically everything during his political life, except possibly to promote socialism and friendship for the Soviet Union in his country! C. I. A. DULLES IS BADLY INFORMED Mr. Dulles concludes his commentary on Czecho-Slovakia with these obfuscated words of wisdom: "There are many lessons to be learned from this historical precedent. When the Communists obtain an effective minority position in any parliamentary body, it is a sign of danger. "If, in addition to that, they have important places in the government and, in particular, control of the ministries of defense and interior, then that danger is greatly augmented and the country in question is ripe for a Communist take-over." The director of the C. I. A. undoubtedly could have done better, if he were better informed. How did the Communists in Czecho-Slovakia obtain "an effective minority position" in the government or the Prague parliament? How did they happen to be in "important places" and, in particular, in control of the Ministries of Defense and Interior? SLOVAKIA 9 Benes we were told, had everything under control. The Communists, we know, could not obtain an "effective minority position" and control of any ministry in the wartime Slovak Republic, for example, because they were outlawed by the Slovak government under Dr. Joseph Tiso. Benes, on the other hand, after his return to Czecho-Slovakia, stated unequivocally that he would not govern the state without the Communists. The world knows what happened - and at this late date, so should the head of our Central Intelligence Agency. If Mr. Dulles is thoroughly informed on the subject, he could have pointed out the one lesson to be learned from Czecho-Slovakia, or rather from the conduct of the Benes Czechs: you cannot tolerate Communism, you cannot collaborate with Communists and expect to retain the blessings of freedom. It appears that what Mr. Allen W. Dulles said about Czecho-Slovakia was prepared by a Benes apologist, probably a Benes Czech of the so-called "Council of Free Czecho-Slovakia," and, possibly, by a Benes Czech employed by him in the C. I. A. itself. The Benes Czechs have prepared many speeches and briefs for men in the United States Government and its various agencies. And that probably explains why the American public is so misinformed on Czecho-Slovakia. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Today, in vain are the followers of Benes trying to justify thei:r coHalb.oraJbion with the Bolsh0V.iiks and their crimes a:gainst humarrtty during 1945-1948 with the desperate claim that they did so !because the USA wanted them to do it. That is not only a lie, ,b ut a coarse and ibase insult to the government and the naition of the US·A. The freedom and laiw-aJbiding democratic American peo,ple hitherto had no idea of the terrible crimes the Bolsheviks with their collrubo-rator;s had committed in our country. Only now is the American people slowly learning the truth, that terrible truth and ma•k ing itself heard. It does not want criminals and the agents of Moscow in its country." - (J. Horny, BOHEMIA, Dec. 1952).  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 C. I. A. Dulles and the Beneš Czechs Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957 pp. 1-9 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 1957 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/56f2b6a27cb6faf1e9d6592a8ddd5f01.pdf 8259601ea19a53524701c45296a43eaf PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in �60 SLOVAKIA particular appears paradoxical in relation to the demands that Warsaw made on Prague regarding the Polish minority in Teschen" - p. (188). It is hardly the task of an objective historian to act the role of apologist, but Roucek obviously seemed to forget that. The fact is that Czecho-Slovakia's fate was determined in a very large measure by the way the Masaryk and Benes regimes treated their minorities, and especially their "equal partners," the Slovaks. The "Czecho-Slovak" treatment of minorities and the Slovaks cannot be justified by the argument that the Germans and Poles treated their minorities less justly or more harshly. The historical fact remains that after twenty years of Czech rule, under Masaryk and Benes, all neighboring states hated Czecho-Slovakia, and her citizens, the Czechs included, refused to fire a single shot in her defense. And that tells us just about everything: Czecho-Slovakia was not worth fighting for! • • • "The only democratic country in a world of fascist and semifascist central and eastern European states, Czecho-Slovakia consistently suppressed ant-Jewish manifestations" - (p. 189). Roucek said it and Kerner published it in his "Czechoslovakia," but students of history should demand a bill of full particulars of at least some such actual manifestations. And, of course, we might also ask the "experts" on CzechoSlovakia whether the Masaryk-Benes "democracy" consistently suppressed anti-Christian and, particularly, anti-Catholic manifestations? Such manifestations evidently did not merit attention of Roucek and other pro-Czech historians. • • • After quoting statistics from "official" Czech sources t o explain population trends in Czecho-Slovakia, which, naturally, favored the Czechs at the expense of the minorities and the Slovaks, Mr. Roucek concludes his chapter (IX in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia") with this propagandistic extravaganza : "The inescapable conclusion is that the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities was not so serious as the German and Magyar propaganda led others to believe; furthermore, that it could have been solved gradually and peacefully if Prague had been allowed to run its own affairs . . . . Did Czecho-Slovakia make a mistake in try- �SLOVAKIA 61 iing to solve her problem of minorities by de1T1ocratic, rather than by brutal and violent, methods, as her neighbors have done?" (p 192). • How naive can one get? We know that the Czechs (Prague) ran not only their own affairs, but also the affairs of the Slovaks, Magyars, Poles, Germans and Ruthenians, in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Masaryk-Benes regimes were anti-Slovak and anti-minority, but pro-Soviet at the same time. Hence, the problem of the minorities was more serious than pictured by Roucek, since, in the end, the Slovaks and all minorities were not willing to commit national suicide. The policies of Masaryk and Benes determined the fate of Czecho-Slovakia. By what "democratic" methods did the Masaryk-Benes regimes try to solve the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities? Confiscation and censorship of the press, repudiation of natural rights and the right of free assembly, economic and political oppression - are these the "democratic" methods alluded to by Roucek? And what could have been more brutal and violent than the forced, inhumane expulsion of three and a half million Germans and hundreds of thousands of Magyars, and the complete sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations by Benes to Stalin? • • • • • • Chapter X of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" was contrib, uted by Lucy E. Textor (Vassar College); it is titled "Agriculture and Agrarian Reform." The biblography given at the end of the chapter is dominated by Czech authors. Scandals arising from the Land Reform act, as set up and executed by the Czechs, particularly by leading Czech politicians, are carefully omitted. "Czechoslovakia's Economic Development and Achievements" - Chapter XII of the book under consideration was written by Gerhard Schacher, member of the faculty of Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University. There was no other country in central Europe which was to such a degree able and willing to modernize and rationalize its entire economic system by its own means and almost entirely without foreign support," says Schacher, and "that this was done in Czechoslovakia without aiming at �62 SLOVAKIA self-sufficiency was one of the greatest economic achievements in central Europe after the World War" - (p. 240). Just how Czecho-Slovakia was able to do that, however, is not clearly explained by Mr. Schacher. To him "Czechoslovakia" apparently means "Czech" (Czech: goods, labor, trade, imports, exports, manufacturers, businessmen, workers, armament, plants, crown, etc.). The rise of CZECH industry was phenomenal, indeed, but the professor somehow forgot to put down for the record what hapened to SLOVAK industry, which had existed in the land of the Slovaks during the Hungarian State. The tendency here, as elsewhere, is only too obvious . • • • • • • Brackett Lewis - A.B., Oberlin College; "engaged in war service with the Y. M. C. A. in Russia and in post-war service in central Russia, Archangel, Odessa, Vladivostok, Constantinople, and in Riga, Latvia, 1917-1928; director of the Y. M. C. A. of Czechoslovakia and secretary of the American Institute in Prague, 1928-1938" - wrote Chapter Xill entitled 'Social Reform and Social Legislation." He proves, even though I doubt he did it consciously, that Czecho-Slovkia was a socialistic state from the start. According to Lewis "a democratic outlook, which has been the characteristic of the Czechs since 1848, seemed to pervade all classes, and found expression in literature, education, and the professions, as well as in political life" (p. 253). While in Prague (1928-1938), Mr. Lewis was supposed to have made "special" studies of social and labor legislation and of the political system of the Republic, which resulted in his writing the book "Facts About Democray in Czechoslovakia" (Prague, 1938). The studies must have been "special," indeed, since Mr. Lewis apparently remained quite ignorant about the Slovaks and their country; his "facts" are for the most part Czech propaganda and not objective history. Chapter XIV - "Humanitarian Progress" - is the brain-child of Herbert Adolphus Miller (vd. Chapter V), according to whom: "The seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia lie deep in history. The moral integrity of Hus and the democratic �SLOVAKIA 63 educational theories of Comenius (Komensky) were combined with many other forces through the ages to prepare the people for what they accomplished after 1918. The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved" - (p. 271). But the fact is that "the seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia" do not lie deep in SLOVAK history; the social program was strictly according to Masaryk and Benes and their followers, who tried even to "remake" Czech history. The "moral integrity" of Hus and the democratic educational theories" of Comenius, to: gether with "many other forces," may have prepared T. G. Masaryk, Edward Benes, and other Czech socialists for what they accomplished after 1918, and especially after 1945. We know what happened. Genuine Slovak patriots, however, preferred ta repudiate these "progressive" forces and were content to remain the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. • • • "The Declaration of Independence," according to Miller in his Chapter on "Humanitarian Progress," was written by Masaryk, but what did this same Herbert Adolphus Miller say about this Declaration in a previous Chapter of the same book (pp. 83-86)? For the edification of present and future historians, and in the interest of historical truth, I believe a reproduction is in order. Mr. Miller said: "According to William E. Dodd" (Woodrow Wilson and His Work, p. 278), " 'on July 4, 1918, a mass meeting of the Czechoslovaks in Independence Hall in Philadelphia, issued a formal Declaration of Independence. President Wilson lent his support to this movement and finally announced American recognition of Czechoslovakia on September 2, 1918.' Mr. Dodd confused the frequent claims for independence by an unauthorized group with the official Declaration made by Masaryk, which was dated October 18, 1918. There is, however, a widespread and erroneous belief that Masaryk proclaimed it from Independence Hall. "The facts are as follows. Early in October, through the Swedish Minister, President Wilson had received a communication from Emperor Charles of Austria, proposing a reorganization of the empire. Wilson, as has been stated earlier, had told Masaryk that no decisions would be arrived at about Austria-Hungary without consult- �64 SLOVAKIA ing him. Wilson knew at this time that a Czechoslovak Declaration, of Independence was being prepared by Professor Masaryk. "About four o'clock on the afternoon of October 16, Mr. Cisar, Professor Masaryk's secretary, came to the room of the present writer (Herbert Adolphus Miller) in the Powhatan Hotel and, handing him an envelope, said: 'This is the Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence. The professor wants you to put it into good English.• On reading it over, the present writer decided that its style would be quite without appeal to the American public which it, in part, sought to influence, and that it needed complete revision. Accordingly, through chance assistance, he gathered together seven men,. including two lawyers and Mr. Cisar, and set to work. "Great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original and at the same time to give a vigor of statement that would appeal to Americans. Every word and every sentence was weighed. The original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again. The group worked from seven-thirty in the evening until one- thirty in the morning of October 17, 1918. "Later in the forenoon, with Mr. Calfee, a Cleveland lawyer who had been present the previous evening, the present writer went to Professor Masaryk's residence, where again a detailed study was made of form and content, modifications being made wherever the meaning had been changed in the work of the night before. The rest of the day was spent in working on the text and about two o'clock on the morning of the eighteenth the Declaration was cabled to Dr. Benes in Paris. "In the forenoon of October 18, the present writer had a number of copies multigraphed and a special typewritten copy made for President Wilson. These are the only ORIGINAL copies of the Declaration that ever existed; even the copy that was given to the multigrapher has been lost. The question of when the Declaration should be published, whether in the morning or in the evening papers, was carefully weighed and it was finally decided to have it published in the morning papers, October 19. It was deliberately held until 4:00 P. M. of the eighteenth, for two reasons : that gave time enough for the Declaration to be cabled from Paris, where it was technically issued on October 18, and made its release too late for the evening papers. "In the meantime, President Wilson had been preparing his reply to Emperor Charles. Benes had feared some yielding, but, after receiving the Declaration from Masaryk, Wilson informed Benes in a letter that he was greatly touched by the proclamation and that Masaryk would be satisfied with the reply that was being sent to Austria-Hungary . ... (Continued) � SLOVAKIA 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in �60 SLOVAKIA particular appears paradoxical in relation to the demands that Warsaw made on Prague regarding the Polish minority in Teschen" - p. (188). It is hardly the task of an objective historian to act the role of apologist, but Roucek obviously seemed to forget that. The fact is that Czecho-Slovakia's fate was determined in a very large measure by the way the Masaryk and Benes regimes treated their minorities, and especially their "equal partners," the Slovaks. The "Czecho-Slovak" treatment of minorities and the Slovaks cannot be justified by the argument that the Germans and Poles treated their minorities less justly or more harshly. The historical fact remains that after twenty years of Czech rule, under Masaryk and Benes, all neighboring states hated Czecho-Slovakia, and her citizens, the Czechs included, refused to fire a single shot in her defense. And that tells us just about everything: Czecho-Slovakia was not worth fighting for! • • • "The only democratic country in a world of fascist and semifascist central and eastern European states, Czecho-Slovakia consistently suppressed ant-Jewish manifestations" - (p. 189). Roucek said it and Kerner published it in his "Czechoslovakia," but students of history should demand a bill of full particulars of at least some such actual manifestations. And, of course, we might also ask the "experts" on CzechoSlovakia whether the Masaryk-Benes "democracy" consistently suppressed anti-Christian and, particularly, anti-Catholic manifestations? Such manifestations evidently did not merit attention of Roucek and other pro-Czech historians. • • • After quoting statistics from "official" Czech sources t o explain population trends in Czecho-Slovakia, which, naturally, favored the Czechs at the expense of the minorities and the Slovaks, Mr. Roucek concludes his chapter (IX in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia") with this propagandistic extravaganza : "The inescapable conclusion is that the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities was not so serious as the German and Magyar propaganda led others to believe; furthermore, that it could have been solved gradually and peacefully if Prague had been allowed to run its own affairs . . . . Did Czecho-Slovakia make a mistake in try- �SLOVAKIA 61 iing to solve her problem of minorities by de1T1ocratic, rather than by brutal and violent, methods, as her neighbors have done?" (p 192). • How naive can one get? We know that the Czechs (Prague) ran not only their own affairs, but also the affairs of the Slovaks, Magyars, Poles, Germans and Ruthenians, in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Masaryk-Benes regimes were anti-Slovak and anti-minority, but pro-Soviet at the same time. Hence, the problem of the minorities was more serious than pictured by Roucek, since, in the end, the Slovaks and all minorities were not willing to commit national suicide. The policies of Masaryk and Benes determined the fate of Czecho-Slovakia. By what "democratic" methods did the Masaryk-Benes regimes try to solve the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities? Confiscation and censorship of the press, repudiation of natural rights and the right of free assembly, economic and political oppression - are these the "democratic" methods alluded to by Roucek? And what could have been more brutal and violent than the forced, inhumane expulsion of three and a half million Germans and hundreds of thousands of Magyars, and the complete sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations by Benes to Stalin? • • • • • • Chapter X of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" was contrib, uted by Lucy E. Textor (Vassar College); it is titled "Agriculture and Agrarian Reform." The biblography given at the end of the chapter is dominated by Czech authors. Scandals arising from the Land Reform act, as set up and executed by the Czechs, particularly by leading Czech politicians, are carefully omitted. "Czechoslovakia's Economic Development and Achievements" - Chapter XII of the book under consideration was written by Gerhard Schacher, member of the faculty of Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University. There was no other country in central Europe which was to such a degree able and willing to modernize and rationalize its entire economic system by its own means and almost entirely without foreign support," says Schacher, and "that this was done in Czechoslovakia without aiming at �62 SLOVAKIA self-sufficiency was one of the greatest economic achievements in central Europe after the World War" - (p. 240). Just how Czecho-Slovakia was able to do that, however, is not clearly explained by Mr. Schacher. To him "Czechoslovakia" apparently means "Czech" (Czech: goods, labor, trade, imports, exports, manufacturers, businessmen, workers, armament, plants, crown, etc.). The rise of CZECH industry was phenomenal, indeed, but the professor somehow forgot to put down for the record what hapened to SLOVAK industry, which had existed in the land of the Slovaks during the Hungarian State. The tendency here, as elsewhere, is only too obvious . • • • • • • Brackett Lewis - A.B., Oberlin College; "engaged in war service with the Y. M. C. A. in Russia and in post-war service in central Russia, Archangel, Odessa, Vladivostok, Constantinople, and in Riga, Latvia, 1917-1928; director of the Y. M. C. A. of Czechoslovakia and secretary of the American Institute in Prague, 1928-1938" - wrote Chapter Xill entitled 'Social Reform and Social Legislation." He proves, even though I doubt he did it consciously, that Czecho-Slovkia was a socialistic state from the start. According to Lewis "a democratic outlook, which has been the characteristic of the Czechs since 1848, seemed to pervade all classes, and found expression in literature, education, and the professions, as well as in political life" (p. 253). While in Prague (1928-1938), Mr. Lewis was supposed to have made "special" studies of social and labor legislation and of the political system of the Republic, which resulted in his writing the book "Facts About Democray in Czechoslovakia" (Prague, 1938). The studies must have been "special," indeed, since Mr. Lewis apparently remained quite ignorant about the Slovaks and their country; his "facts" are for the most part Czech propaganda and not objective history. Chapter XIV - "Humanitarian Progress" - is the brain-child of Herbert Adolphus Miller (vd. Chapter V), according to whom: "The seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia lie deep in history. The moral integrity of Hus and the democratic �SLOVAKIA 63 educational theories of Comenius (Komensky) were combined with many other forces through the ages to prepare the people for what they accomplished after 1918. The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved" - (p. 271). But the fact is that "the seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia" do not lie deep in SLOVAK history; the social program was strictly according to Masaryk and Benes and their followers, who tried even to "remake" Czech history. The "moral integrity" of Hus and the democratic educational theories" of Comenius, to: gether with "many other forces," may have prepared T. G. Masaryk, Edward Benes, and other Czech socialists for what they accomplished after 1918, and especially after 1945. We know what happened. Genuine Slovak patriots, however, preferred ta repudiate these "progressive" forces and were content to remain the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. • • • "The Declaration of Independence," according to Miller in his Chapter on "Humanitarian Progress," was written by Masaryk, but what did this same Herbert Adolphus Miller say about this Declaration in a previous Chapter of the same book (pp. 83-86)? For the edification of present and future historians, and in the interest of historical truth, I believe a reproduction is in order. Mr. Miller said: "According to William E. Dodd" (Woodrow Wilson and His Work, p. 278), " 'on July 4, 1918, a mass meeting of the Czechoslovaks in Independence Hall in Philadelphia, issued a formal Declaration of Independence. President Wilson lent his support to this movement and finally announced American recognition of Czechoslovakia on September 2, 1918.' Mr. Dodd confused the frequent claims for independence by an unauthorized group with the official Declaration made by Masaryk, which was dated October 18, 1918. There is, however, a widespread and erroneous belief that Masaryk proclaimed it from Independence Hall. "The facts are as follows. Early in October, through the Swedish Minister, President Wilson had received a communication from Emperor Charles of Austria, proposing a reorganization of the empire. Wilson, as has been stated earlier, had told Masaryk that no decisions would be arrived at about Austria-Hungary without consult- �64 SLOVAKIA ing him. Wilson knew at this time that a Czechoslovak Declaration, of Independence was being prepared by Professor Masaryk. "About four o'clock on the afternoon of October 16, Mr. Cisar, Professor Masaryk's secretary, came to the room of the present writer (Herbert Adolphus Miller) in the Powhatan Hotel and, handing him an envelope, said: 'This is the Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence. The professor wants you to put it into good English.• On reading it over, the present writer decided that its style would be quite without appeal to the American public which it, in part, sought to influence, and that it needed complete revision. Accordingly, through chance assistance, he gathered together seven men,. including two lawyers and Mr. Cisar, and set to work. "Great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original and at the same time to give a vigor of statement that would appeal to Americans. Every word and every sentence was weighed. The original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again. The group worked from seven-thirty in the evening until one- thirty in the morning of October 17, 1918. "Later in the forenoon, with Mr. Calfee, a Cleveland lawyer who had been present the previous evening, the present writer went to Professor Masaryk's residence, where again a detailed study was made of form and content, modifications being made wherever the meaning had been changed in the work of the night before. The rest of the day was spent in working on the text and about two o'clock on the morning of the eighteenth the Declaration was cabled to Dr. Benes in Paris. "In the forenoon of October 18, the present writer had a number of copies multigraphed and a special typewritten copy made for President Wilson. These are the only ORIGINAL copies of the Declaration that ever existed; even the copy that was given to the multigrapher has been lost. The question of when the Declaration should be published, whether in the morning or in the evening papers, was carefully weighed and it was finally decided to have it published in the morning papers, October 19. It was deliberately held until 4:00 P. M. of the eighteenth, for two reasons : that gave time enough for the Declaration to be cabled from Paris, where it was technically issued on October 18, and made its release too late for the evening papers. "In the meantime, President Wilson had been preparing his reply to Emperor Charles. Benes had feared some yielding, but, after receiving the Declaration from Masaryk, Wilson informed Benes in a letter that he was greatly touched by the proclamation and that Masaryk would be satisfied with the reply that was being sent to Austria-Hungary . ... (Continued) � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in 60 SLOVAKIA particular appears paradoxical in relation to the demands that Warsaw made on Prague regarding the Polish minority in Teschen" - p. (188). It is hardly the task of an objective historian to act the role of apologist, but Roucek obviously seemed to forget that. The fact is that Czecho-Slovakia's fate was determined in a very large measure by the way the Masaryk and Benes regimes treated their minorities, and especially their "equal partners," the Slovaks. The "Czecho-Slovak" treatment of minorities and the Slovaks cannot be justified by the argument that the Germans and Poles treated their minorities less justly or more harshly. The historical fact remains that after twenty years of Czech rule, under Masaryk and Benes, all neighboring states hated Czecho-Slovakia, and her citizens, the Czechs included, refused to fire a single shot in her defense. And that tells us just about everything: Czecho-Slovakia was not worth fighting for! • • • "The only democratic country in a world of fascist and semifascist central and eastern European states, Czecho-Slovakia consistently suppressed ant-Jewish manifestations" - (p. 189). Roucek said it and Kerner published it in his "Czechoslovakia," but students of history should demand a bill of full particulars of at least some such actual manifestations. And, of course, we might also ask the "experts" on CzechoSlovakia whether the Masaryk-Benes "democracy" consistently suppressed anti-Christian and, particularly, anti-Catholic manifestations? Such manifestations evidently did not merit attention of Roucek and other pro-Czech historians. • • • After quoting statistics from "official" Czech sources t o explain population trends in Czecho-Slovakia, which, naturally, favored the Czechs at the expense of the minorities and the Slovaks, Mr. Roucek concludes his chapter (IX in Kerner's "Czechoslovakia") with this propagandistic extravaganza : "The inescapable conclusion is that the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities was not so serious as the German and Magyar propaganda led others to believe; furthermore, that it could have been solved gradually and peacefully if Prague had been allowed to run its own affairs . . . . Did Czecho-Slovakia make a mistake in try- SLOVAKIA 61 iing to solve her problem of minorities by de1T1ocratic, rather than by brutal and violent, methods, as her neighbors have done?" (p 192). • How naive can one get? We know that the Czechs (Prague) ran not only their own affairs, but also the affairs of the Slovaks, Magyars, Poles, Germans and Ruthenians, in the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The Masaryk-Benes regimes were anti-Slovak and anti-minority, but pro-Soviet at the same time. Hence, the problem of the minorities was more serious than pictured by Roucek, since, in the end, the Slovaks and all minorities were not willing to commit national suicide. The policies of Masaryk and Benes determined the fate of Czecho-Slovakia. By what "democratic" methods did the Masaryk-Benes regimes try to solve the problem of Czecho-Slovakia's minorities? Confiscation and censorship of the press, repudiation of natural rights and the right of free assembly, economic and political oppression - are these the "democratic" methods alluded to by Roucek? And what could have been more brutal and violent than the forced, inhumane expulsion of three and a half million Germans and hundreds of thousands of Magyars, and the complete sell-out of the Czech and Slovak nations by Benes to Stalin? • • • • • • Chapter X of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" was contrib, uted by Lucy E. Textor (Vassar College); it is titled "Agriculture and Agrarian Reform." The biblography given at the end of the chapter is dominated by Czech authors. Scandals arising from the Land Reform act, as set up and executed by the Czechs, particularly by leading Czech politicians, are carefully omitted. "Czechoslovakia's Economic Development and Achievements" - Chapter XII of the book under consideration was written by Gerhard Schacher, member of the faculty of Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University. There was no other country in central Europe which was to such a degree able and willing to modernize and rationalize its entire economic system by its own means and almost entirely without foreign support," says Schacher, and "that this was done in Czechoslovakia without aiming at 62 SLOVAKIA self-sufficiency was one of the greatest economic achievements in central Europe after the World War" - (p. 240). Just how Czecho-Slovakia was able to do that, however, is not clearly explained by Mr. Schacher. To him "Czechoslovakia" apparently means "Czech" (Czech: goods, labor, trade, imports, exports, manufacturers, businessmen, workers, armament, plants, crown, etc.). The rise of CZECH industry was phenomenal, indeed, but the professor somehow forgot to put down for the record what hapened to SLOVAK industry, which had existed in the land of the Slovaks during the Hungarian State. The tendency here, as elsewhere, is only too obvious . • • • • • • Brackett Lewis - A.B., Oberlin College; "engaged in war service with the Y. M. C. A. in Russia and in post-war service in central Russia, Archangel, Odessa, Vladivostok, Constantinople, and in Riga, Latvia, 1917-1928; director of the Y. M. C. A. of Czechoslovakia and secretary of the American Institute in Prague, 1928-1938" - wrote Chapter Xill entitled 'Social Reform and Social Legislation." He proves, even though I doubt he did it consciously, that Czecho-Slovkia was a socialistic state from the start. According to Lewis "a democratic outlook, which has been the characteristic of the Czechs since 1848, seemed to pervade all classes, and found expression in literature, education, and the professions, as well as in political life" (p. 253). While in Prague (1928-1938), Mr. Lewis was supposed to have made "special" studies of social and labor legislation and of the political system of the Republic, which resulted in his writing the book "Facts About Democray in Czechoslovakia" (Prague, 1938). The studies must have been "special," indeed, since Mr. Lewis apparently remained quite ignorant about the Slovaks and their country; his "facts" are for the most part Czech propaganda and not objective history. Chapter XIV - "Humanitarian Progress" - is the brain-child of Herbert Adolphus Miller (vd. Chapter V), according to whom: "The seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia lie deep in history. The moral integrity of Hus and the democratic SLOVAKIA 63 educational theories of Comenius (Komensky) were combined with many other forces through the ages to prepare the people for what they accomplished after 1918. The Declaration of Independence, written by Masaryk, not only embodied his own philosophy but also reflected the past and foreshadowed a future of which his countrymen approved" - (p. 271). But the fact is that "the seeds that produced the social program of Czechoslovakia" do not lie deep in SLOVAK history; the social program was strictly according to Masaryk and Benes and their followers, who tried even to "remake" Czech history. The "moral integrity" of Hus and the democratic educational theories" of Comenius, to: gether with "many other forces," may have prepared T. G. Masaryk, Edward Benes, and other Czech socialists for what they accomplished after 1918, and especially after 1945. We know what happened. Genuine Slovak patriots, however, preferred ta repudiate these "progressive" forces and were content to remain the nation of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. • • • "The Declaration of Independence," according to Miller in his Chapter on "Humanitarian Progress," was written by Masaryk, but what did this same Herbert Adolphus Miller say about this Declaration in a previous Chapter of the same book (pp. 83-86)? For the edification of present and future historians, and in the interest of historical truth, I believe a reproduction is in order. Mr. Miller said: "According to William E. Dodd" (Woodrow Wilson and His Work, p. 278), " 'on July 4, 1918, a mass meeting of the Czechoslovaks in Independence Hall in Philadelphia, issued a formal Declaration of Independence. President Wilson lent his support to this movement and finally announced American recognition of Czechoslovakia on September 2, 1918.' Mr. Dodd confused the frequent claims for independence by an unauthorized group with the official Declaration made by Masaryk, which was dated October 18, 1918. There is, however, a widespread and erroneous belief that Masaryk proclaimed it from Independence Hall. "The facts are as follows. Early in October, through the Swedish Minister, President Wilson had received a communication from Emperor Charles of Austria, proposing a reorganization of the empire. Wilson, as has been stated earlier, had told Masaryk that no decisions would be arrived at about Austria-Hungary without consult- 64 SLOVAKIA ing him. Wilson knew at this time that a Czechoslovak Declaration, of Independence was being prepared by Professor Masaryk. "About four o'clock on the afternoon of October 16, Mr. Cisar, Professor Masaryk's secretary, came to the room of the present writer (Herbert Adolphus Miller) in the Powhatan Hotel and, handing him an envelope, said: 'This is the Czechoslovak Declaration of Independence. The professor wants you to put it into good English.• On reading it over, the present writer decided that its style would be quite without appeal to the American public which it, in part, sought to influence, and that it needed complete revision. Accordingly, through chance assistance, he gathered together seven men,. including two lawyers and Mr. Cisar, and set to work. "Great care was taken to keep all the meaning of the original and at the same time to give a vigor of statement that would appeal to Americans. Every word and every sentence was weighed. The original typewritten copy was cut into more than a hundred pieces and pasted together in different order and then revised again and again. The group worked from seven-thirty in the evening until one- thirty in the morning of October 17, 1918. "Later in the forenoon, with Mr. Calfee, a Cleveland lawyer who had been present the previous evening, the present writer went to Professor Masaryk's residence, where again a detailed study was made of form and content, modifications being made wherever the meaning had been changed in the work of the night before. The rest of the day was spent in working on the text and about two o'clock on the morning of the eighteenth the Declaration was cabled to Dr. Benes in Paris. "In the forenoon of October 18, the present writer had a number of copies multigraphed and a special typewritten copy made for President Wilson. These are the only ORIGINAL copies of the Declaration that ever existed; even the copy that was given to the multigrapher has been lost. The question of when the Declaration should be published, whether in the morning or in the evening papers, was carefully weighed and it was finally decided to have it published in the morning papers, October 19. It was deliberately held until 4:00 P. M. of the eighteenth, for two reasons : that gave time enough for the Declaration to be cabled from Paris, where it was technically issued on October 18, and made its release too late for the evening papers. "In the meantime, President Wilson had been preparing his reply to Emperor Charles. Benes had feared some yielding, but, after receiving the Declaration from Masaryk, Wilson informed Benes in a letter that he was greatly touched by the proclamation and that Masaryk would be satisfied with the reply that was being sent to Austria-Hungary . ... (Continued)  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 Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (6/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), March 1957 pp. 59-64 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 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/197">Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), pp. 88-96</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/242">Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), pp. 52-57</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/4629f4afa5a3b52f881ee535dd4c3deb.pdf 83b46dc762d873fd23cace63c438b140 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 53 (9) Dr. E. Zatko published three volumes regarding the endeavors of Tuka for Slovak independence. (10) About the origin of national states in Central Europe see: C. A. Macartney, " NATIONAL STATES AND NATIONAL MINORITIES" (London, 1935), also his "HUNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS" (London, 1937), in which he devotes some 100 pages to Slovakia. • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued from last issue) ME'l'HODIUS AGAIN JiN ROME In the meantime Pope John VIII effected the liberation of Arclibishop Methodius and punished the Bavarian bishops. To put a stop to the wars between Germany and the Great Moravian Empire, the Pope forbade the use of the Slovanic liturgy and ordered Methodius to come to Rome. Methodius learned that the German hierarchy had accused him of preaching heresy. Svatopluk sent his personal messenger (Zemezizeii) along with Archbishop Methodius to Rome, because he wanted to place his country under the protection of the Holy See. When Methodius reached Rome, he proved to the Pope's satisfaction that the charges placed against him were without foundation. Pope John VIII approved the apostolic work of Methodius and his priests. He gave the Archbishop a letter for Svatopluk which stated that he again permits the use of the Slovanic liturgy in Svatopluk's country and accepted King Svatopluk and his whole nation under the protection of St. Peter. When Archbishop Methodius returned to the land of the Slovaks, he and his priests labored zealously in the vineyard of the Lord to gain all the people of Svatopluk's country for the kingdom of Christ. But this mission, as we shall see, was soon to be hindered by Svatopluk himself. Svatopluk had accepted Christianity and had begged the Pope to protect the territory of the Slovak people, yet his life was not that of a true Christian. Svatopluk was a �54 SLOVAKIA fearless wairrior; he used any and all means to extend his power and attain his ends. In his private life he followed some pagan practices. Because Archbishop Methodius reproached Sviitopluk for his sinful life, he fell into disfavor with the regent. The regent of Great Moravia hated the Germans, yet he preferred to support the German clergymen, especially Wiching the bishop of Nitra, who conveniently overlooked Sviitopluk's shortcomings and incited him against Methodius. The saintly archbishop was hurt deeply by Sviitopluk's conduct, but suffered the humiliation silently because he knew that open opposition would only threaten the future of his apostolic work and hasten the downfall of haughty Sviitopluk's Great Moravia. When Archbishop Methodius felt that his life was drawing to a close, he called his priests, magnates and people together and, pointing to the priest Gorazd, said: "He is a free man of your country, well versed in Latin books, and orthodox. May it be the will of God and your love as it is mine." With these words Methodius named Gorazd, the Slovak, as his successor and died in 885. After Methodius died, Sviitopluk was dominated completely by German clergymen. He persecuted Slovak priests and finally chased them out of his realm. But this did not enhance his position with the Germans. King Arnulf was determined to prevent the existence of a large Slovanic state as a neighbor of his empire. Secrety he sought allies against Sviitopluk to break him and destroy his kingdom . .Arnn.tlf succeeded in gaining the wild Magyairs who ha,d come over the Carpathians several years before and had begun to colonize the fertile plains of the Danube and the Tisa. Arnulf attacked Sviitopluk's stronghold on several occasions, but in vain. During Sviitopluk's lifetime Great Moravia successfully resisted all assaults of the Germans. One of the mightiest rulers of the land of the Slovaks passed on with the last years of his life shrouded in mystery, when Sviitopluk died in 894. One beautiful legend has it that Sviitopluk realized at the end Ot:f his days that power, glory and military suc~ses cannot -satisfy the soul of a man with a burdened conscience. So, he decided to spend the last years of his life �SLOVAKIA 55 doing penance in a monastery. Svatopluk left ho.s royal palace and went up to Zobor. There in the mountain he divested himself of his royal attire, killed his horse, and buried his sword. Then, dressed as a beggar, he knocked on the gate of the Zobor monastery and begged the monks to let him in. They did. Svatopluk spent the rest of his days in prayer, but nobody knew that he was the mighty ruler of Great Moravia. It was only at his death that Svatopluk revealed to the amazed monks his true identity. In 1885 - when Slavdom celebrated the millell!ial memorial of the death of Methodius - the Russian historian Konstantin Grot asked: "What was Slavdom prior to CyrJ and Methodius ?" and answered: "Scattered over the vast spaces of middle Europe, Russia and the Balkan Peninsula, among foreign and hostile nations, the Slovanic race, although gifted by nature with beautiful spiritual endowments, represented a torn, disjointed mass of different tribes without any consciousness of racial relationship ... " Cyril and Methodius unified the people of Rastislav, and their disciples brought Christian culture and national consciousness to the other Slovanic peoples in a comparatively short time thereafter. Saints Cyril and Methodius performed their mission, spreading the Gospel of Christ, within the territory settled by the ancient Slovaks. This has been well estab~hed by phuological analysis of the Cyrilo-Methodius texts, the Cividalian Gospel Book, legends and chronicles, names of people, rivers, mountains, c'hurches, and places, and, furthermore, ,b y scientific study of dialects am.d "bor.rowed" or foreign words. Dr. John Stanislav, Slovak historian and philologist, states with certainty that Met!hodius resided in Nitra and performed his mission in the land of the Slovaks. Dr. Francis Dvornik, Czech historian and rphilologist, confirmed this,. even though indirectly, when 'he wrote that "Slovanic liturgy in S'lovakia 01\ltlived the catastrophe of the Great Moravian IDmpire," and that the territory of present'day Slovakia was "in a definite sense the most cultured rpart of the Magyar empire" (more co'I'rectly: the Hungarian empire). Dvornik also noted that the Slovanic monks, after being e:,cpelled f:rom Czech lands, from the monastery of �56 SLOVAKIA Sazava, in 1055, found refuge in Slovakia, as well as the historical fact that Slovaikia rund her ancient Slovanic centers served as "half-way transmittin g centers" not only between Croatia, but even Kievian Russia. As far a:s the literary efforts of the Slovax .Aipostles and their immediate disciples are concerned, the document "Skazani" tells us that Constantin e (Cyril) and Methodius translated and wrote ma/Ily other books ( "i proceje knigy") . Dr. Stanislav wrote that "after his arrival in Great Mora,via, Oonstantin e translated abnost the entire ecclesia;stical ritual" and also completed the translation of the Gospel texts of all four evangelists , as well as the Acts of the Apostles and the Psalms. St. Methodius, according to Stanislav, continued in the woJ'lk !begun by his brother and, after the issuance of the glorious Bull, "Industriae tuae," by which the Slova;nic liturgy again was approved and permitted, "made a compendium of everything that was translated during the twelve years (869-881) of 'his independen t lea'dershi!p of t'he Great Moravian mission. He selected two priest 'rapidw,riters' and with them translated - probably dictated to them - the entire text of the Holy Bible - the Old and New Testaments , besides the books of the Maccrubees, within eight months." -Methodius also tra/Ilslated, or had translated, the Latin Missal, whrich is preserved as the so...called Kiev Missal; written in Gla,golic letters it is preserved in a copy from the tenth century with elements of the Great Mora,vian tongue. Stanislav also mentions the translation of the ri-. tual, the breviary and the oredo, which, according to the 'biogrruphy of Methodius, Svatopluk was swpposed to hruve prayed in the Slovak translation . Of the non-liturgic al books of the saintly brothers, Stanislav mentions the translation of the Nomocanon , or the Ko.rmcaja book, i.e., the collection of laws and regulations of the Byzantian rulers and Church Fathers, then Cyril's polemic treatise in Greek against the Jews which was translated by Methodius, and the original works "A P,reface to the Gospels" and "Writings About the True Faith," both written by Constantine . Among the original mementoes b,e- �SLOVAKIA 57 long the so--called Pannonian-Moravian Legends, "The Life of St. Cyril amd Methodius," written, according to Stanislav, without a doubt in Great Moravia, also the "Praises of Cyril and Methodius," a'lld "about the end of the ancient SloV'a!k epoch of Slovak culture" - the legend about Naurn. One of the "1Morarvian-1Slova.k sons," Stanislav claims, also com... posed the ancient Slovak legend about St. Wenceslaus around the year 935. Sltanis1'av states quite clearly that this literary activity developed on Slovak territory and that in the "great wora along with Oyril and Methodius undoubtedly other sons of the Slovaik nation had a part, especially Gorazd. Traces of this are found particularly in many words of these mementoes." And since "these memoiTs were written for the religious, i.e., the cultural needs of the Slovalk nation, and ,p rompted by it, the predecessors of the Sl01Vaks took part in this work passively and actively, and, therefore, this literary work belongs also to our (Slovaik) national treasure." As for the content and extent of the cultural mission of Cyril and Methodius, Slovak scholars of Slavistics agree with K. J. Grot that in Great Moravia was made not only "the most important attempt at a political unification of the Slovanic peoples" - the Greater Moravian Union - but also that: 1. there "were laid the foundations for a national Church and a national Christian education; 2. there originated the draft and the directive for the future, for the entire subsequent, historic development of Slavdom, its world role and relation to Roman-Oermanic Europe, to the West, and to the Asi·a tic question; 3. the foundation of ChurchSlovanic literature and education in the Slovaruc South among the Bu:lgars and Serbs, and in the East among the Russians, and partly also among other western Slavs, was only a continuation of that wo'.t1k which Cyril and Methodius had !begun in Great Moravia." THE FALL OF GRJEAT MORJAVIA The Great Moravian Empire was established after the Slovanic tribes in the Danube region became united to fight a common enemy that threatened their existence - �58 SLOVAKIA the aggressive Germans. The regents of the empire were often forced to take up arms· to safeguard their independ.. ence. The danger of German aggression, however, was never removed. Great Moravia was able to withstand German pressure only as long as she was united and had a strong ruler, a personality like Svatopluk. When the mighty Svatopluk died, the external danger that threatened Great Moravia increased and, at the same time, internal dissention hastened the downfall of the first independent state of central Europe. Svatopluk's eldest son, Mojmir II, succeeded him as ruler of Great Moravia. A younger son, Svatopluk II, received a grant principality which was subject to Mojmir's rule. Mojmir II was a wise ruler and possessed the fighting traits of his illustrious father. He wanted to secure the independence of his country, but the times were very difficult. The Slovanic tribes, which the great Svatopluk had conquered by force, anxiously awaited the first opportunity to secede from Great Moravia. Soon after his accession to the throne, Mojmir Il was forced to relinquish Pannonia. The Czechs had seceded from the empire already in 895, because they preferred to be vassals of the German king than to be subject to Mojmir's rule. Shortly thereafter, the Serbians and the Vislani fell away, so that the total area of the empire under Mojmir II was reduced to that once ruled over by Rastislav. It was a state inhabited only by the Slovaks who formed the nucleus of Great Moravia. After the other Slovanic tribes seceded from the empire, the Slovaks remained alone on the historical crossroads of Europe. Mojmir II used all means at his disposal to secure his country against attack from its neighbors. In the meantime, Mojmir's younger brother, Svatopluk II, dissatisfied with his brother's rule, was being prodded by the Germans to revolt. German armies invaded Slovakia three times and pillaged the border lands, but Mojmir II staunchly defended his domain and successfully repulsed the invading Germans and even took over his brother's domain. The Germans garve Srviitopluk ]I a title land in Bavaria. �SLOVAKIA 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in � SLOVAKIA 53 (9) Dr. E. Zatko published three volumes regarding the endeavors of Tuka for Slovak independence. (10) About the origin of national states in Central Europe see: C. A. Macartney, " NATIONAL STATES AND NATIONAL MINORITIES" (London, 1935), also his "HUNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS" (London, 1937), in which he devotes some 100 pages to Slovakia. • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued from last issue) ME'l'HODIUS AGAIN JiN ROME In the meantime Pope John VIII effected the liberation of Arclibishop Methodius and punished the Bavarian bishops. To put a stop to the wars between Germany and the Great Moravian Empire, the Pope forbade the use of the Slovanic liturgy and ordered Methodius to come to Rome. Methodius learned that the German hierarchy had accused him of preaching heresy. Svatopluk sent his personal messenger (Zemezizeii) along with Archbishop Methodius to Rome, because he wanted to place his country under the protection of the Holy See. When Methodius reached Rome, he proved to the Pope's satisfaction that the charges placed against him were without foundation. Pope John VIII approved the apostolic work of Methodius and his priests. He gave the Archbishop a letter for Svatopluk which stated that he again permits the use of the Slovanic liturgy in Svatopluk's country and accepted King Svatopluk and his whole nation under the protection of St. Peter. When Archbishop Methodius returned to the land of the Slovaks, he and his priests labored zealously in the vineyard of the Lord to gain all the people of Svatopluk's country for the kingdom of Christ. But this mission, as we shall see, was soon to be hindered by Svatopluk himself. Svatopluk had accepted Christianity and had begged the Pope to protect the territory of the Slovak people, yet his life was not that of a true Christian. Svatopluk was a �54 SLOVAKIA fearless wairrior; he used any and all means to extend his power and attain his ends. In his private life he followed some pagan practices. Because Archbishop Methodius reproached Sviitopluk for his sinful life, he fell into disfavor with the regent. The regent of Great Moravia hated the Germans, yet he preferred to support the German clergymen, especially Wiching the bishop of Nitra, who conveniently overlooked Sviitopluk's shortcomings and incited him against Methodius. The saintly archbishop was hurt deeply by Sviitopluk's conduct, but suffered the humiliation silently because he knew that open opposition would only threaten the future of his apostolic work and hasten the downfall of haughty Sviitopluk's Great Moravia. When Archbishop Methodius felt that his life was drawing to a close, he called his priests, magnates and people together and, pointing to the priest Gorazd, said: "He is a free man of your country, well versed in Latin books, and orthodox. May it be the will of God and your love as it is mine." With these words Methodius named Gorazd, the Slovak, as his successor and died in 885. After Methodius died, Sviitopluk was dominated completely by German clergymen. He persecuted Slovak priests and finally chased them out of his realm. But this did not enhance his position with the Germans. King Arnulf was determined to prevent the existence of a large Slovanic state as a neighbor of his empire. Secrety he sought allies against Sviitopluk to break him and destroy his kingdom . .Arnn.tlf succeeded in gaining the wild Magyairs who ha,d come over the Carpathians several years before and had begun to colonize the fertile plains of the Danube and the Tisa. Arnulf attacked Sviitopluk's stronghold on several occasions, but in vain. During Sviitopluk's lifetime Great Moravia successfully resisted all assaults of the Germans. One of the mightiest rulers of the land of the Slovaks passed on with the last years of his life shrouded in mystery, when Sviitopluk died in 894. One beautiful legend has it that Sviitopluk realized at the end Ot:f his days that power, glory and military suc~ses cannot -satisfy the soul of a man with a burdened conscience. So, he decided to spend the last years of his life �SLOVAKIA 55 doing penance in a monastery. Svatopluk left ho.s royal palace and went up to Zobor. There in the mountain he divested himself of his royal attire, killed his horse, and buried his sword. Then, dressed as a beggar, he knocked on the gate of the Zobor monastery and begged the monks to let him in. They did. Svatopluk spent the rest of his days in prayer, but nobody knew that he was the mighty ruler of Great Moravia. It was only at his death that Svatopluk revealed to the amazed monks his true identity. In 1885 - when Slavdom celebrated the millell!ial memorial of the death of Methodius - the Russian historian Konstantin Grot asked: "What was Slavdom prior to CyrJ and Methodius ?" and answered: "Scattered over the vast spaces of middle Europe, Russia and the Balkan Peninsula, among foreign and hostile nations, the Slovanic race, although gifted by nature with beautiful spiritual endowments, represented a torn, disjointed mass of different tribes without any consciousness of racial relationship ... " Cyril and Methodius unified the people of Rastislav, and their disciples brought Christian culture and national consciousness to the other Slovanic peoples in a comparatively short time thereafter. Saints Cyril and Methodius performed their mission, spreading the Gospel of Christ, within the territory settled by the ancient Slovaks. This has been well estab~hed by phuological analysis of the Cyrilo-Methodius texts, the Cividalian Gospel Book, legends and chronicles, names of people, rivers, mountains, c'hurches, and places, and, furthermore, ,b y scientific study of dialects am.d "bor.rowed" or foreign words. Dr. John Stanislav, Slovak historian and philologist, states with certainty that Met!hodius resided in Nitra and performed his mission in the land of the Slovaks. Dr. Francis Dvornik, Czech historian and rphilologist, confirmed this,. even though indirectly, when 'he wrote that "Slovanic liturgy in S'lovakia 01\ltlived the catastrophe of the Great Moravian IDmpire," and that the territory of present'day Slovakia was "in a definite sense the most cultured rpart of the Magyar empire" (more co'I'rectly: the Hungarian empire). Dvornik also noted that the Slovanic monks, after being e:,cpelled f:rom Czech lands, from the monastery of �56 SLOVAKIA Sazava, in 1055, found refuge in Slovakia, as well as the historical fact that Slovaikia rund her ancient Slovanic centers served as "half-way transmittin g centers" not only between Croatia, but even Kievian Russia. As far a:s the literary efforts of the Slovax .Aipostles and their immediate disciples are concerned, the document "Skazani" tells us that Constantin e (Cyril) and Methodius translated and wrote ma/Ily other books ( "i proceje knigy") . Dr. Stanislav wrote that "after his arrival in Great Mora,via, Oonstantin e translated abnost the entire ecclesia;stical ritual" and also completed the translation of the Gospel texts of all four evangelists , as well as the Acts of the Apostles and the Psalms. St. Methodius, according to Stanislav, continued in the woJ'lk !begun by his brother and, after the issuance of the glorious Bull, "Industriae tuae," by which the Slova;nic liturgy again was approved and permitted, "made a compendium of everything that was translated during the twelve years (869-881) of 'his independen t lea'dershi!p of t'he Great Moravian mission. He selected two priest 'rapidw,riters' and with them translated - probably dictated to them - the entire text of the Holy Bible - the Old and New Testaments , besides the books of the Maccrubees, within eight months." -Methodius also tra/Ilslated, or had translated, the Latin Missal, whrich is preserved as the so...called Kiev Missal; written in Gla,golic letters it is preserved in a copy from the tenth century with elements of the Great Mora,vian tongue. Stanislav also mentions the translation of the ri-. tual, the breviary and the oredo, which, according to the 'biogrruphy of Methodius, Svatopluk was swpposed to hruve prayed in the Slovak translation . Of the non-liturgic al books of the saintly brothers, Stanislav mentions the translation of the Nomocanon , or the Ko.rmcaja book, i.e., the collection of laws and regulations of the Byzantian rulers and Church Fathers, then Cyril's polemic treatise in Greek against the Jews which was translated by Methodius, and the original works "A P,reface to the Gospels" and "Writings About the True Faith," both written by Constantine . Among the original mementoes b,e- �SLOVAKIA 57 long the so--called Pannonian-Moravian Legends, "The Life of St. Cyril amd Methodius," written, according to Stanislav, without a doubt in Great Moravia, also the "Praises of Cyril and Methodius," a'lld "about the end of the ancient SloV'a!k epoch of Slovak culture" - the legend about Naurn. One of the "1Morarvian-1Slova.k sons," Stanislav claims, also com... posed the ancient Slovak legend about St. Wenceslaus around the year 935. Sltanis1'av states quite clearly that this literary activity developed on Slovak territory and that in the "great wora along with Oyril and Methodius undoubtedly other sons of the Slovaik nation had a part, especially Gorazd. Traces of this are found particularly in many words of these mementoes." And since "these memoiTs were written for the religious, i.e., the cultural needs of the Slovalk nation, and ,p rompted by it, the predecessors of the Sl01Vaks took part in this work passively and actively, and, therefore, this literary work belongs also to our (Slovaik) national treasure." As for the content and extent of the cultural mission of Cyril and Methodius, Slovak scholars of Slavistics agree with K. J. Grot that in Great Moravia was made not only "the most important attempt at a political unification of the Slovanic peoples" - the Greater Moravian Union - but also that: 1. there "were laid the foundations for a national Church and a national Christian education; 2. there originated the draft and the directive for the future, for the entire subsequent, historic development of Slavdom, its world role and relation to Roman-Oermanic Europe, to the West, and to the Asi·a tic question; 3. the foundation of ChurchSlovanic literature and education in the Slovaruc South among the Bu:lgars and Serbs, and in the East among the Russians, and partly also among other western Slavs, was only a continuation of that wo'.t1k which Cyril and Methodius had !begun in Great Moravia." THE FALL OF GRJEAT MORJAVIA The Great Moravian Empire was established after the Slovanic tribes in the Danube region became united to fight a common enemy that threatened their existence - �58 SLOVAKIA the aggressive Germans. The regents of the empire were often forced to take up arms· to safeguard their independ.. ence. The danger of German aggression, however, was never removed. Great Moravia was able to withstand German pressure only as long as she was united and had a strong ruler, a personality like Svatopluk. When the mighty Svatopluk died, the external danger that threatened Great Moravia increased and, at the same time, internal dissention hastened the downfall of the first independent state of central Europe. Svatopluk's eldest son, Mojmir II, succeeded him as ruler of Great Moravia. A younger son, Svatopluk II, received a grant principality which was subject to Mojmir's rule. Mojmir II was a wise ruler and possessed the fighting traits of his illustrious father. He wanted to secure the independence of his country, but the times were very difficult. The Slovanic tribes, which the great Svatopluk had conquered by force, anxiously awaited the first opportunity to secede from Great Moravia. Soon after his accession to the throne, Mojmir Il was forced to relinquish Pannonia. The Czechs had seceded from the empire already in 895, because they preferred to be vassals of the German king than to be subject to Mojmir's rule. Shortly thereafter, the Serbians and the Vislani fell away, so that the total area of the empire under Mojmir II was reduced to that once ruled over by Rastislav. It was a state inhabited only by the Slovaks who formed the nucleus of Great Moravia. After the other Slovanic tribes seceded from the empire, the Slovaks remained alone on the historical crossroads of Europe. Mojmir II used all means at his disposal to secure his country against attack from its neighbors. In the meantime, Mojmir's younger brother, Svatopluk II, dissatisfied with his brother's rule, was being prodded by the Germans to revolt. German armies invaded Slovakia three times and pillaged the border lands, but Mojmir II staunchly defended his domain and successfully repulsed the invading Germans and even took over his brother's domain. The Germans garve Srviitopluk ]I a title land in Bavaria. �SLOVAKIA 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 53 (9) Dr. E. Zatko published three volumes regarding the endeavors of Tuka for Slovak independence. (10) About the origin of national states in Central Europe see: C. A. Macartney, " NATIONAL STATES AND NATIONAL MINORITIES" (London, 1935), also his "HUNGARY AND HER SUCCESSORS" (London, 1937), in which he devotes some 100 pages to Slovakia. • • • The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued from last issue) ME'l'HODIUS AGAIN JiN ROME In the meantime Pope John VIII effected the liberation of Arclibishop Methodius and punished the Bavarian bishops. To put a stop to the wars between Germany and the Great Moravian Empire, the Pope forbade the use of the Slovanic liturgy and ordered Methodius to come to Rome. Methodius learned that the German hierarchy had accused him of preaching heresy. Svatopluk sent his personal messenger (Zemezizeii) along with Archbishop Methodius to Rome, because he wanted to place his country under the protection of the Holy See. When Methodius reached Rome, he proved to the Pope's satisfaction that the charges placed against him were without foundation. Pope John VIII approved the apostolic work of Methodius and his priests. He gave the Archbishop a letter for Svatopluk which stated that he again permits the use of the Slovanic liturgy in Svatopluk's country and accepted King Svatopluk and his whole nation under the protection of St. Peter. When Archbishop Methodius returned to the land of the Slovaks, he and his priests labored zealously in the vineyard of the Lord to gain all the people of Svatopluk's country for the kingdom of Christ. But this mission, as we shall see, was soon to be hindered by Svatopluk himself. Svatopluk had accepted Christianity and had begged the Pope to protect the territory of the Slovak people, yet his life was not that of a true Christian. Svatopluk was a 54 SLOVAKIA fearless wairrior; he used any and all means to extend his power and attain his ends. In his private life he followed some pagan practices. Because Archbishop Methodius reproached Sviitopluk for his sinful life, he fell into disfavor with the regent. The regent of Great Moravia hated the Germans, yet he preferred to support the German clergymen, especially Wiching the bishop of Nitra, who conveniently overlooked Sviitopluk's shortcomings and incited him against Methodius. The saintly archbishop was hurt deeply by Sviitopluk's conduct, but suffered the humiliation silently because he knew that open opposition would only threaten the future of his apostolic work and hasten the downfall of haughty Sviitopluk's Great Moravia. When Archbishop Methodius felt that his life was drawing to a close, he called his priests, magnates and people together and, pointing to the priest Gorazd, said: "He is a free man of your country, well versed in Latin books, and orthodox. May it be the will of God and your love as it is mine." With these words Methodius named Gorazd, the Slovak, as his successor and died in 885. After Methodius died, Sviitopluk was dominated completely by German clergymen. He persecuted Slovak priests and finally chased them out of his realm. But this did not enhance his position with the Germans. King Arnulf was determined to prevent the existence of a large Slovanic state as a neighbor of his empire. Secrety he sought allies against Sviitopluk to break him and destroy his kingdom . .Arnn.tlf succeeded in gaining the wild Magyairs who ha,d come over the Carpathians several years before and had begun to colonize the fertile plains of the Danube and the Tisa. Arnulf attacked Sviitopluk's stronghold on several occasions, but in vain. During Sviitopluk's lifetime Great Moravia successfully resisted all assaults of the Germans. One of the mightiest rulers of the land of the Slovaks passed on with the last years of his life shrouded in mystery, when Sviitopluk died in 894. One beautiful legend has it that Sviitopluk realized at the end Ot:f his days that power, glory and military suc~ses cannot -satisfy the soul of a man with a burdened conscience. So, he decided to spend the last years of his life SLOVAKIA 55 doing penance in a monastery. Svatopluk left ho.s royal palace and went up to Zobor. There in the mountain he divested himself of his royal attire, killed his horse, and buried his sword. Then, dressed as a beggar, he knocked on the gate of the Zobor monastery and begged the monks to let him in. They did. Svatopluk spent the rest of his days in prayer, but nobody knew that he was the mighty ruler of Great Moravia. It was only at his death that Svatopluk revealed to the amazed monks his true identity. In 1885 - when Slavdom celebrated the millell!ial memorial of the death of Methodius - the Russian historian Konstantin Grot asked: "What was Slavdom prior to CyrJ and Methodius ?" and answered: "Scattered over the vast spaces of middle Europe, Russia and the Balkan Peninsula, among foreign and hostile nations, the Slovanic race, although gifted by nature with beautiful spiritual endowments, represented a torn, disjointed mass of different tribes without any consciousness of racial relationship ... " Cyril and Methodius unified the people of Rastislav, and their disciples brought Christian culture and national consciousness to the other Slovanic peoples in a comparatively short time thereafter. Saints Cyril and Methodius performed their mission, spreading the Gospel of Christ, within the territory settled by the ancient Slovaks. This has been well estab~hed by phuological analysis of the Cyrilo-Methodius texts, the Cividalian Gospel Book, legends and chronicles, names of people, rivers, mountains, c'hurches, and places, and, furthermore, ,b y scientific study of dialects am.d "bor.rowed" or foreign words. Dr. John Stanislav, Slovak historian and philologist, states with certainty that Met!hodius resided in Nitra and performed his mission in the land of the Slovaks. Dr. Francis Dvornik, Czech historian and rphilologist, confirmed this,. even though indirectly, when 'he wrote that "Slovanic liturgy in S'lovakia 01\ltlived the catastrophe of the Great Moravian IDmpire," and that the territory of present'day Slovakia was "in a definite sense the most cultured rpart of the Magyar empire" (more co'I'rectly: the Hungarian empire). Dvornik also noted that the Slovanic monks, after being e:,cpelled f:rom Czech lands, from the monastery of 56 SLOVAKIA Sazava, in 1055, found refuge in Slovakia, as well as the historical fact that Slovaikia rund her ancient Slovanic centers served as "half-way transmittin g centers" not only between Croatia, but even Kievian Russia. As far a:s the literary efforts of the Slovax .Aipostles and their immediate disciples are concerned, the document "Skazani" tells us that Constantin e (Cyril) and Methodius translated and wrote ma/Ily other books ( "i proceje knigy") . Dr. Stanislav wrote that "after his arrival in Great Mora,via, Oonstantin e translated abnost the entire ecclesia;stical ritual" and also completed the translation of the Gospel texts of all four evangelists , as well as the Acts of the Apostles and the Psalms. St. Methodius, according to Stanislav, continued in the woJ'lk !begun by his brother and, after the issuance of the glorious Bull, "Industriae tuae," by which the Slova;nic liturgy again was approved and permitted, "made a compendium of everything that was translated during the twelve years (869-881) of 'his independen t lea'dershi!p of t'he Great Moravian mission. He selected two priest 'rapidw,riters' and with them translated - probably dictated to them - the entire text of the Holy Bible - the Old and New Testaments , besides the books of the Maccrubees, within eight months." -Methodius also tra/Ilslated, or had translated, the Latin Missal, whrich is preserved as the so...called Kiev Missal; written in Gla,golic letters it is preserved in a copy from the tenth century with elements of the Great Mora,vian tongue. Stanislav also mentions the translation of the ri-. tual, the breviary and the oredo, which, according to the 'biogrruphy of Methodius, Svatopluk was swpposed to hruve prayed in the Slovak translation . Of the non-liturgic al books of the saintly brothers, Stanislav mentions the translation of the Nomocanon , or the Ko.rmcaja book, i.e., the collection of laws and regulations of the Byzantian rulers and Church Fathers, then Cyril's polemic treatise in Greek against the Jews which was translated by Methodius, and the original works "A P,reface to the Gospels" and "Writings About the True Faith," both written by Constantine . Among the original mementoes b,e- SLOVAKIA 57 long the so--called Pannonian-Moravian Legends, "The Life of St. Cyril amd Methodius," written, according to Stanislav, without a doubt in Great Moravia, also the "Praises of Cyril and Methodius," a'lld "about the end of the ancient SloV'a!k epoch of Slovak culture" - the legend about Naurn. One of the "1Morarvian-1Slova.k sons," Stanislav claims, also com... posed the ancient Slovak legend about St. Wenceslaus around the year 935. Sltanis1'av states quite clearly that this literary activity developed on Slovak territory and that in the "great wora along with Oyril and Methodius undoubtedly other sons of the Slovaik nation had a part, especially Gorazd. Traces of this are found particularly in many words of these mementoes." And since "these memoiTs were written for the religious, i.e., the cultural needs of the Slovalk nation, and ,p rompted by it, the predecessors of the Sl01Vaks took part in this work passively and actively, and, therefore, this literary work belongs also to our (Slovaik) national treasure." As for the content and extent of the cultural mission of Cyril and Methodius, Slovak scholars of Slavistics agree with K. J. Grot that in Great Moravia was made not only "the most important attempt at a political unification of the Slovanic peoples" - the Greater Moravian Union - but also that: 1. there "were laid the foundations for a national Church and a national Christian education; 2. there originated the draft and the directive for the future, for the entire subsequent, historic development of Slavdom, its world role and relation to Roman-Oermanic Europe, to the West, and to the Asi·a tic question; 3. the foundation of ChurchSlovanic literature and education in the Slovaruc South among the Bu:lgars and Serbs, and in the East among the Russians, and partly also among other western Slavs, was only a continuation of that wo'.t1k which Cyril and Methodius had !begun in Great Moravia." THE FALL OF GRJEAT MORJAVIA The Great Moravian Empire was established after the Slovanic tribes in the Danube region became united to fight a common enemy that threatened their existence - 58 SLOVAKIA the aggressive Germans. The regents of the empire were often forced to take up arms· to safeguard their independ.. ence. The danger of German aggression, however, was never removed. Great Moravia was able to withstand German pressure only as long as she was united and had a strong ruler, a personality like Svatopluk. When the mighty Svatopluk died, the external danger that threatened Great Moravia increased and, at the same time, internal dissention hastened the downfall of the first independent state of central Europe. Svatopluk's eldest son, Mojmir II, succeeded him as ruler of Great Moravia. A younger son, Svatopluk II, received a grant principality which was subject to Mojmir's rule. Mojmir II was a wise ruler and possessed the fighting traits of his illustrious father. He wanted to secure the independence of his country, but the times were very difficult. The Slovanic tribes, which the great Svatopluk had conquered by force, anxiously awaited the first opportunity to secede from Great Moravia. Soon after his accession to the throne, Mojmir Il was forced to relinquish Pannonia. The Czechs had seceded from the empire already in 895, because they preferred to be vassals of the German king than to be subject to Mojmir's rule. Shortly thereafter, the Serbians and the Vislani fell away, so that the total area of the empire under Mojmir II was reduced to that once ruled over by Rastislav. It was a state inhabited only by the Slovaks who formed the nucleus of Great Moravia. After the other Slovanic tribes seceded from the empire, the Slovaks remained alone on the historical crossroads of Europe. Mojmir II used all means at his disposal to secure his country against attack from its neighbors. In the meantime, Mojmir's younger brother, Svatopluk II, dissatisfied with his brother's rule, was being prodded by the Germans to revolt. German armies invaded Slovakia three times and pillaged the border lands, but Mojmir II staunchly defended his domain and successfully repulsed the invading Germans and even took over his brother's domain. The Germans garve Srviitopluk ]I a title land in Bavaria. SLOVAKIA 59 In 900 A. D. the Germans _again invaded Mojmir's territory, this time aided by the Czechs. After a terrific battle Mojmir II was forced to sue for peace, because his country was completely exhausted from constant warfare. After a peace was negotiated with the Germans, Mojmir sought to renew the church organization in the land of the Slovaks. After the expulsion of the disciples of Methodius and the death of Bishop Wiching, the Church was in a state of collapse. Mojmir II sent a special delegation to Rome with his request for aid. Pope John IX heard his plea and appointed an archbishop and two bishops to take over the burdens of the Church in the land of the Slovaks. Mojmir :LI worked assiduously and courageously to save his country from impending doom, but the odds were against him. To the danger from the west was added the menace from the east. The fierce Magyars, who from 896 had settled in the valley of the lower Danube and made continual attacks on their neighbors, tore into Slovakia in 902. Mojmir rallied his forces and successfully repulsed the Magyar hordes. But the nomadic Mongols were not to be denied. After every setback, they retreated and prepared for a new attack. The Slovaks defended the independence of their country heroically, but finally were overpowered by the overwhelming forces of their enemies. In 906 Moj.mir's state collapsed and the Slovak nation lost its independence. (Continu ed) • • • Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "The tragedy of Czecho-Slovakia's fate hinged, of course, not on whether this democracy treated her minorities 'justly' or not, but on the fact that the minorities were used as 'Trojan horses' for the aggressive policies of the neighboring Powers. After all, it is not even debatable that Germany's minorities, and particularly the Jews, have been treated with much less 'justice' than Czecho-Slovakia's minorities. The same statement applies to the fate of the minirities in Hungary and Poland. The Polish treatment of her minorities in  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 (2/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), March 1957 pp. 53-59 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 1957 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/200">Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), pp. 63-83</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/241">Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), pp. 57-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/3b06eafbb103932906c0f41ea6435c28.pdf a73b5b1ffcc7add9063381196649c47c PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 25 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland, �26 SLOVAKIA but it appears that this happened before the sixth, and not later than the beginning of the sixth, century. The question what territory the ancestors of the Slovaks occupied or settled, and whether 1918 or 1938 Slova'k~a was smaller or larger than that territory, intrigued many scholars of history, archeology, and philosophy. Their studies definitely proved that the ancestors of the Slovaks had occupied a territory vastly greater than the area of present-day Slovakia; they proved that the Slovaks settled even beyond the Danube and occupied the northern area between the Tisa and Danube rivers. Paul J. Safarik, in his "Slovanske Starozitnosti" (Slovanic Antiquities), dealt with the question whether the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled also on the territory beyond the Danube. He replied in the affirmative, stating that if we are willing to consider ancient testimonies about the Slovanic inhabitants of that area with an open mind, we shall come to the conviction that they belong nowhere more properly than to the Moravians and the Slovaks. Safarik pla.ced the Slovak boundary in the center of Moravia. About the boundary between the Tisa and the Danube rivers, he said: "At Pest\ Vacov, and beneath Mt. Matra there was at that time a boundary between the Bulgarians and inhabitants of Moravia, and the salt mines in Marmaros were in possession of the former." Saifarik's views were accepted by several excellent scholars, among them: Joseph Skultety (0 byvalom Hornom Uhorsku, 1929, 1932; 0 Slovakoch, 1928; Zo slovenskej minulosti, 1936); Roessler (Zeitpunct, 93); K. J. Grot (Moravija i Mad'jary s poloviny IX. do nacala X. veka Petrograd, 1881) ; Maretic (Slaveni u davnini). :r..ubor Niederle, however, let the question of Pannonia to the philologists. After Safarik, various historians and philologists devoted their time to this question. And the Magyars, who inhabited the territory in question at the present time, did also. Professor John Melich, eminent Magyar historian and philologist, supports Safarik's deduction in his book "A honfoglalaskori Magyarorszag" (Budapest, 1925-29); Ele- �SLOVAKIA 27 mer Moor did also in his excellent, objective work "Westungarn im Mittelalter im Spiegel der Orstnamen (Segedin, 1936; and Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1929); likewise, Stephen Kniezsa, in several articles published in 1:Jhe "Archivum Europae Centro-orientalis" and in the "Ungarische Jahrblicher" (1937-38). Moor's work practically exhausted all sources about western Hungary (Transdanubia); Melich's did not go quite as far, nor did the studies of Kniezsa. These studies, however, even of themselves are sufficient to convince us that the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled on a muc:1 greater territory than present Slovakia. We know that Prince Pribina and his son Kocer fled from Nitra to Pannonia; they resided in Blatnohrad. The source, which describes their activity, comes to us from 871 A.D. and is called: "Libellum de Conversone Bagoariorum et Caranthanorum." This document, recording the events of 850, mentions the names of the magnates in Pribina's escort: 15 are Slovanic, while 17 are German. A careful scrutiny of the Slovanic names will convince us that these names were common with western Slovans, particularly with the dwellers of ancient Nitra. Old Latin documents from Nitra record the names of magnates which have the same linguistic foundation as the names of Pribina's magnates. But so do many personal names of southern and eastern Slovakia, as well as eastern Moravia! Taking all the given data and connecting them with the fact that Pribina and Kocer were Slovaks, we must conclude that the majority of the 15 names are Slovak. Melich, stating that the Magyars found Slovaks in Pannonia when they came there (p. 397), said that the namt':s existing on the territory of the Pribina-Kocer principality make it apparently certain that the 'Slovaks, the western Slovans (Slavs), also inhabited the land from Balaton Lake to the north, probobly to the northern line of Tet-SokoroBakon (p. 395). "It seems to me," said Melidh, "that the proofs presented confirm the testimony of geographical names. Pribina-Kocel"s Slovans (Slavs) were Slovaks. However, in- �28 SLOVAKIA asmuch as even from Balaton Lake to the south the S'lovans live here and there, they were Slovaks for the most part" (p. 396). Names of rivers and places also prove that the Slovaks settled in northern Pannonia. According to Dr. Melich, the name 'B alaton is Slovak, because if it were of southern Slav (Yugoslav) origin, the Magyar equivalent would have to be written "Balaton" (long "a"). Near the Bakon Forest is a stream which the Magyars today call "Cuha;" this is derived from the Slovak "Sucha" (dry); if it were of Yugoslav origin, according to Melich again, it would have t o be written "Cuha" (long "u"). There are many such names in Pannonia. The city of Veszprem (Vesprim) is orf western-Slav origin; it comes from Bezprem. A person named Bezprem is mentioned in the history of Brevnov, Bohemia, in the twelfth century; we also find the name in old Slovak documents. Furthermore, the name orf the town of Tihany is derived from tlte Slovak name Tichoii and is so written in documents of the 11th century. The name of the town Noszlop somes from the Slovak noun "Neostup," just like the Moravian "Ostopovice, Vostopovice" are derived from the noun "Ostup." According to these and similar appellations, Professor Melich concludes (p. 395) the Slovaks lived from the Balaton Lake to the north. His researches, convincing as they are, reveal much more. On the right bank of the Danube we find towns and cities with apparently Slovak names: Ostrihom, Budin, Tetin, Vesprim, Vysegrad-Vysehrad, and opposite P,a rkaii we find Neszmely (from the Slovak Nesmily), which are mentioned as a harbor and a river crossing in 1237-1240. In the west, Slovak settlements extended proba;bly to the river Raab. These names demonstrate that northern Pannonia was occupied by the Slovaks, and partly by the Germans, before the advent of the Magyars. There are not many Slovaks there today. But there is an appreciable number Jf them south of Ostrihom and above the Bako:n Forest. Some chronicles, that of "Anonymous" among them, say that the �SLOVAKIA 29 Magyars annihilated the Slovaks there, but the fact is that even in the 12th and succeeding centuries. many persons with Slovak names are mentioned in the documents of Veszprem, Tihany, and other places. Melich placed the southern Slovans between the Tisa and Danube rivers, because he was particularly influenced by the name of the "Zagy,a" river (p. 101). Of course, he did not know from what southern Slovanic tongue it might be derived. To a 'Slovanic philologist, towever, it is quite obvious that the name of the river which flows through that particul·a r territory cannot be deduced from any other than the Slovak language. The Magyar name "Zagyva," like the Czech "Sazava," comes from the Slovak "Sadzava," the Magyars using "-gy-" in place of the Slovak "-dz-" (Palugya-Paludza; Privigye-Prievidza; Pomogy-Pomedzi; etc.). Moor was correct in this regard, adding that, in the meantime, it appeared that Professor Melich had corrected his earlier views on the subject. Moor showed that names of this type could not be ascribed to any Slovanic language other than Slovak. The city of Miskolc, much in the news during the recent Hungarian revolt, is also of Slovak origin (Miskovec). Amd there are many such names close to and far from the area a:bove the Matra ond the Beech Forest. For example, north of Jager is the community of Balatony; the latter is as much a Slovak name as is Balaton, as well as: Topol'cany, Sucha, Novaky, Trstene, Kl'acany, Vysnova, Vfbove, Hradisfany, Domoslav, Dubie.any, Hlohovec, Suchof, and many others. Today's Ferto-Szent-Miklos was mentioned in the thirteenth century as "Neweg , Neueg;" but in northeastern Vesprem a group of seven communities is also recalled under the common name of "Nywig, Nywog, Neueg." We have the same proofs from that same time (13th century) for N evidzany (Tekov County) , that is, all these settlements were called by one and the same name: Nevidza. These names are especially important in the determination of the tribal adherance of the Slovans beyond the Danube and beneath Mt. Matra. They tell us that these Slovans (Slavs) were the ancestors of the Slovaks. �30 SLOVAKIA Moor literally fought against Kniezsa over the name "Pomogy" (Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1937, p. 278; and 1938. p. 36). A name of this type is also in Zelezna (Vas) County, near Kormend: it is "Geregye (from the Slovak "Gradza," which today would sound "Hradza"). Anotrer such important name is "Bogyoszlo" (from the Slovak "Budislav); if it were derived from a south Slorvanic language, it would have to be written "Bodoszlo" in Magyar. We find this appellation in several counties (Bihar Pese - to the south on the Danube--Sopron, and Zelezna. Names from the area of Balaton Lake, even south of it, are proofs that the ancestors of the Slov8!ks once occupied that territory. They are typical western-Slovanic. One even need not be a philologist to arrive at the fact that they are of Slov.anic origin; for example, Kustany (Kosfany); Nagy-Szokoly (Sokol); Nyedam puszta, Rosztopan puszta, etc. Some of the names may appear a bit "mixed" up, but a knowledge of documentary material and the evolution of the Magyar language always help one to find the original Slovanic or, respectively, Slovak form. The counties of Vesprem, Zalan, Komarno (also the transdanubian paret), Zelezna, Sopron, Moson, Rab, and others up to the Drava river, are swarmed with Slovanic names. Documents of the eleventh century contain a multitude of Slovanic p e r s o n a I names (Budivoj; Kazimir; Vojtech; Dobron; Vranis; Milose; Gnevku (Hnevek) ; Zlauku (Slavek) ; Radoan (Radovan); Vaclav; etc.). On the Danube, in most ancient times, the boundary between the Slovak and the Bulgarian nations was between Vacov (derived from "Vaclav") and Pese. According to what has been uncovered by archeologists, philologists, and historians, we ,a re quite certain that the territory of the ancient Slovaks extended in the west from beyond the Nezider Lake, through Zelezna County probably up to Kormend (from the Slovak "kremen"), below Balaton Lake; of course, we know that north of Balaton Lake there were large Slov·a k settlements in olden times; between the Danube and Tisa rivers the boundary went below the southern slope of Mt. Matra. �SLOVAKIA 31 Today there still may be doubt about the origm of several of these cities and villages, but their names tell us clearly that they were founded by Slovaks. According to Anonymou s, the Slovaks were there before the 12th century; and it is more than probable that the "Slovene" Slovaks were there when the Magyars came to Hungary. According to an ethnograph ic map of 1773, there were not many Slovaks in some places, but a large number in others. A solid Slovak territory extends here deeply to Pese, and even farther south. Beautiful central Slovak is still spoken in the vicinities of Pest', Vacov, and other cities and towns. According to names mentioned in ancient documents, the eastern boundary extended to the Tisa river and most probably went northeast as far as Zemplin. In an ancient Hungaro-P olish chronicle the river Topl'a: is recalled by its old Slova,k name "Cepla" (Tepla). This clearly proves that the Slovaks must have inhabited the area. From the philologica l standpoint, the question of the Slovaks in Moravia is altogether clear. The Slovaks there in the 8-lOth centuries occupied a greater space to the west and south than they do now. To, the south they had fortificatio ns on the river Dyja and reached as far as the Danube. Philologica l studies also show that Slovak influence also extended to southern Poland: the dialects used there indicate that probably from the 13th century there was a common developmen t with the Slovak and not the Polish language. Furthermo re, together with archeologic al studies, they tell us that the Slovaks today occupy only about a third of the territory which was settled by their ancestors before the Magyars came into the Danube area. With the passaga of time, Paul J. Safarik's determinat ion of ancient Slovak frontiers has been confirmed by scientific studies of historians, ethnograph ers, philologists , and archeologis ts. RIDFERENCE S: Risa Verkomoravs ka, 1933, compiled by Dr. Jan Stanislav. Slovensky zivotny priestor v minulosti a dnes, Dr. Frantisek Bokes, 1943. Slovensko v praveku, Dr. Jan Eisner, 1933. Knieza Pribina, Dr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky, 1933; also Slovenske dejiny, �SLOVAKIA 32 1939; Vefka Morava a Pofsko, rn33. Ungarns Volkerschaften im XI. Jahrhundert, Dr. I. Kn iesza, 1938. Zur Geschichte der ungarisch-slowakischen ethnischen Grenze, Dr. I. K niezsa, 19 41. Slovanske starozitnosti, P avel J . Safa rik, Vol. II, 2nd ed., 1863. Slovenske starozitnosti, Dr. I'..ubor Niederle, 1906, 1910. Narodopisni mapa Uher podle ured. lexikonu osad z r. 1n3, A . P e trov , 1924. Pribinovi Vermozi , Dr. J an Stanislav, 1939-40. Nehai'ite l'ud moj, Dr. Jo zef Skult ety, 1928 . • • • MICKIEWICZ IN SLOVAK POETRY AND TRANSLATIONS JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM Ph.D. The University of California recently published an excellent symposium on the great Polish poet and patriot, Adam Mickiewicz, whose centenary has been commemorated throughout the world since 1955. Altogether 30 scholars and experts in Slavistics, representing over 20 nations and universities, contributed to this remarkable volume, edited by the eminent Polish scholar, professor Waclaw Lednicki. The volume has been published under the impressive title "Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature," and the editor actually succeeded in presenting Mickiewicz's influence on World literatures. Slovakia is represented by two contributions and is also mentioned in an article of a Czech scholar, who quite sincerely tried not to make the usual mistake of confusing Slovak and Czech poets and writers. The main article on Slovak literature in connection with Mickiekicz was written by the known expert in Slavic studies, professor Dimitry Cizevsky from Harvard, who in his scholarly study deals mainly with the poetry of two outstanding Slovak romantics: r..udovit Stur and Janka KraP. Cizevsky admits "that Mickiewicz's influence on Slovak literature was undoubtedly significant," but he warns at the same time against the "parallels" which are not parallels at all. This remark refers mainly to a Polish expert on Slovak poetry, Wladyslaw Bobek, whose work twenty-five years ago aimed to demonstrate the part which the poetry of Mickiewicz played in the works of - out of the theo- � SLOVAKIA 25 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland, �26 SLOVAKIA but it appears that this happened before the sixth, and not later than the beginning of the sixth, century. The question what territory the ancestors of the Slovaks occupied or settled, and whether 1918 or 1938 Slova'k~a was smaller or larger than that territory, intrigued many scholars of history, archeology, and philosophy. Their studies definitely proved that the ancestors of the Slovaks had occupied a territory vastly greater than the area of present-day Slovakia; they proved that the Slovaks settled even beyond the Danube and occupied the northern area between the Tisa and Danube rivers. Paul J. Safarik, in his "Slovanske Starozitnosti" (Slovanic Antiquities), dealt with the question whether the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled also on the territory beyond the Danube. He replied in the affirmative, stating that if we are willing to consider ancient testimonies about the Slovanic inhabitants of that area with an open mind, we shall come to the conviction that they belong nowhere more properly than to the Moravians and the Slovaks. Safarik pla.ced the Slovak boundary in the center of Moravia. About the boundary between the Tisa and the Danube rivers, he said: "At Pest\ Vacov, and beneath Mt. Matra there was at that time a boundary between the Bulgarians and inhabitants of Moravia, and the salt mines in Marmaros were in possession of the former." Saifarik's views were accepted by several excellent scholars, among them: Joseph Skultety (0 byvalom Hornom Uhorsku, 1929, 1932; 0 Slovakoch, 1928; Zo slovenskej minulosti, 1936); Roessler (Zeitpunct, 93); K. J. Grot (Moravija i Mad'jary s poloviny IX. do nacala X. veka Petrograd, 1881) ; Maretic (Slaveni u davnini). :r..ubor Niederle, however, let the question of Pannonia to the philologists. After Safarik, various historians and philologists devoted their time to this question. And the Magyars, who inhabited the territory in question at the present time, did also. Professor John Melich, eminent Magyar historian and philologist, supports Safarik's deduction in his book "A honfoglalaskori Magyarorszag" (Budapest, 1925-29); Ele- �SLOVAKIA 27 mer Moor did also in his excellent, objective work "Westungarn im Mittelalter im Spiegel der Orstnamen (Segedin, 1936; and Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1929); likewise, Stephen Kniezsa, in several articles published in 1:Jhe "Archivum Europae Centro-orientalis" and in the "Ungarische Jahrblicher" (1937-38). Moor's work practically exhausted all sources about western Hungary (Transdanubia); Melich's did not go quite as far, nor did the studies of Kniezsa. These studies, however, even of themselves are sufficient to convince us that the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled on a muc:1 greater territory than present Slovakia. We know that Prince Pribina and his son Kocer fled from Nitra to Pannonia; they resided in Blatnohrad. The source, which describes their activity, comes to us from 871 A.D. and is called: "Libellum de Conversone Bagoariorum et Caranthanorum." This document, recording the events of 850, mentions the names of the magnates in Pribina's escort: 15 are Slovanic, while 17 are German. A careful scrutiny of the Slovanic names will convince us that these names were common with western Slovans, particularly with the dwellers of ancient Nitra. Old Latin documents from Nitra record the names of magnates which have the same linguistic foundation as the names of Pribina's magnates. But so do many personal names of southern and eastern Slovakia, as well as eastern Moravia! Taking all the given data and connecting them with the fact that Pribina and Kocer were Slovaks, we must conclude that the majority of the 15 names are Slovak. Melich, stating that the Magyars found Slovaks in Pannonia when they came there (p. 397), said that the namt':s existing on the territory of the Pribina-Kocer principality make it apparently certain that the 'Slovaks, the western Slovans (Slavs), also inhabited the land from Balaton Lake to the north, probobly to the northern line of Tet-SokoroBakon (p. 395). "It seems to me," said Melidh, "that the proofs presented confirm the testimony of geographical names. Pribina-Kocel"s Slovans (Slavs) were Slovaks. However, in- �28 SLOVAKIA asmuch as even from Balaton Lake to the south the S'lovans live here and there, they were Slovaks for the most part" (p. 396). Names of rivers and places also prove that the Slovaks settled in northern Pannonia. According to Dr. Melich, the name 'B alaton is Slovak, because if it were of southern Slav (Yugoslav) origin, the Magyar equivalent would have to be written "Balaton" (long "a"). Near the Bakon Forest is a stream which the Magyars today call "Cuha;" this is derived from the Slovak "Sucha" (dry); if it were of Yugoslav origin, according to Melich again, it would have t o be written "Cuha" (long "u"). There are many such names in Pannonia. The city of Veszprem (Vesprim) is orf western-Slav origin; it comes from Bezprem. A person named Bezprem is mentioned in the history of Brevnov, Bohemia, in the twelfth century; we also find the name in old Slovak documents. Furthermore, the name orf the town of Tihany is derived from tlte Slovak name Tichoii and is so written in documents of the 11th century. The name of the town Noszlop somes from the Slovak noun "Neostup," just like the Moravian "Ostopovice, Vostopovice" are derived from the noun "Ostup." According to these and similar appellations, Professor Melich concludes (p. 395) the Slovaks lived from the Balaton Lake to the north. His researches, convincing as they are, reveal much more. On the right bank of the Danube we find towns and cities with apparently Slovak names: Ostrihom, Budin, Tetin, Vesprim, Vysegrad-Vysehrad, and opposite P,a rkaii we find Neszmely (from the Slovak Nesmily), which are mentioned as a harbor and a river crossing in 1237-1240. In the west, Slovak settlements extended proba;bly to the river Raab. These names demonstrate that northern Pannonia was occupied by the Slovaks, and partly by the Germans, before the advent of the Magyars. There are not many Slovaks there today. But there is an appreciable number Jf them south of Ostrihom and above the Bako:n Forest. Some chronicles, that of "Anonymous" among them, say that the �SLOVAKIA 29 Magyars annihilated the Slovaks there, but the fact is that even in the 12th and succeeding centuries. many persons with Slovak names are mentioned in the documents of Veszprem, Tihany, and other places. Melich placed the southern Slovans between the Tisa and Danube rivers, because he was particularly influenced by the name of the "Zagy,a" river (p. 101). Of course, he did not know from what southern Slovanic tongue it might be derived. To a 'Slovanic philologist, towever, it is quite obvious that the name of the river which flows through that particul·a r territory cannot be deduced from any other than the Slovak language. The Magyar name "Zagyva," like the Czech "Sazava," comes from the Slovak "Sadzava," the Magyars using "-gy-" in place of the Slovak "-dz-" (Palugya-Paludza; Privigye-Prievidza; Pomogy-Pomedzi; etc.). Moor was correct in this regard, adding that, in the meantime, it appeared that Professor Melich had corrected his earlier views on the subject. Moor showed that names of this type could not be ascribed to any Slovanic language other than Slovak. The city of Miskolc, much in the news during the recent Hungarian revolt, is also of Slovak origin (Miskovec). Amd there are many such names close to and far from the area a:bove the Matra ond the Beech Forest. For example, north of Jager is the community of Balatony; the latter is as much a Slovak name as is Balaton, as well as: Topol'cany, Sucha, Novaky, Trstene, Kl'acany, Vysnova, Vfbove, Hradisfany, Domoslav, Dubie.any, Hlohovec, Suchof, and many others. Today's Ferto-Szent-Miklos was mentioned in the thirteenth century as "Neweg , Neueg;" but in northeastern Vesprem a group of seven communities is also recalled under the common name of "Nywig, Nywog, Neueg." We have the same proofs from that same time (13th century) for N evidzany (Tekov County) , that is, all these settlements were called by one and the same name: Nevidza. These names are especially important in the determination of the tribal adherance of the Slovans beyond the Danube and beneath Mt. Matra. They tell us that these Slovans (Slavs) were the ancestors of the Slovaks. �30 SLOVAKIA Moor literally fought against Kniezsa over the name "Pomogy" (Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1937, p. 278; and 1938. p. 36). A name of this type is also in Zelezna (Vas) County, near Kormend: it is "Geregye (from the Slovak "Gradza," which today would sound "Hradza"). Anotrer such important name is "Bogyoszlo" (from the Slovak "Budislav); if it were derived from a south Slorvanic language, it would have to be written "Bodoszlo" in Magyar. We find this appellation in several counties (Bihar Pese - to the south on the Danube--Sopron, and Zelezna. Names from the area of Balaton Lake, even south of it, are proofs that the ancestors of the Slov8!ks once occupied that territory. They are typical western-Slovanic. One even need not be a philologist to arrive at the fact that they are of Slov.anic origin; for example, Kustany (Kosfany); Nagy-Szokoly (Sokol); Nyedam puszta, Rosztopan puszta, etc. Some of the names may appear a bit "mixed" up, but a knowledge of documentary material and the evolution of the Magyar language always help one to find the original Slovanic or, respectively, Slovak form. The counties of Vesprem, Zalan, Komarno (also the transdanubian paret), Zelezna, Sopron, Moson, Rab, and others up to the Drava river, are swarmed with Slovanic names. Documents of the eleventh century contain a multitude of Slovanic p e r s o n a I names (Budivoj; Kazimir; Vojtech; Dobron; Vranis; Milose; Gnevku (Hnevek) ; Zlauku (Slavek) ; Radoan (Radovan); Vaclav; etc.). On the Danube, in most ancient times, the boundary between the Slovak and the Bulgarian nations was between Vacov (derived from "Vaclav") and Pese. According to what has been uncovered by archeologists, philologists, and historians, we ,a re quite certain that the territory of the ancient Slovaks extended in the west from beyond the Nezider Lake, through Zelezna County probably up to Kormend (from the Slovak "kremen"), below Balaton Lake; of course, we know that north of Balaton Lake there were large Slov·a k settlements in olden times; between the Danube and Tisa rivers the boundary went below the southern slope of Mt. Matra. �SLOVAKIA 31 Today there still may be doubt about the origm of several of these cities and villages, but their names tell us clearly that they were founded by Slovaks. According to Anonymou s, the Slovaks were there before the 12th century; and it is more than probable that the "Slovene" Slovaks were there when the Magyars came to Hungary. According to an ethnograph ic map of 1773, there were not many Slovaks in some places, but a large number in others. A solid Slovak territory extends here deeply to Pese, and even farther south. Beautiful central Slovak is still spoken in the vicinities of Pest', Vacov, and other cities and towns. According to names mentioned in ancient documents, the eastern boundary extended to the Tisa river and most probably went northeast as far as Zemplin. In an ancient Hungaro-P olish chronicle the river Topl'a: is recalled by its old Slova,k name "Cepla" (Tepla). This clearly proves that the Slovaks must have inhabited the area. From the philologica l standpoint, the question of the Slovaks in Moravia is altogether clear. The Slovaks there in the 8-lOth centuries occupied a greater space to the west and south than they do now. To, the south they had fortificatio ns on the river Dyja and reached as far as the Danube. Philologica l studies also show that Slovak influence also extended to southern Poland: the dialects used there indicate that probably from the 13th century there was a common developmen t with the Slovak and not the Polish language. Furthermo re, together with archeologic al studies, they tell us that the Slovaks today occupy only about a third of the territory which was settled by their ancestors before the Magyars came into the Danube area. With the passaga of time, Paul J. Safarik's determinat ion of ancient Slovak frontiers has been confirmed by scientific studies of historians, ethnograph ers, philologists , and archeologis ts. RIDFERENCE S: Risa Verkomoravs ka, 1933, compiled by Dr. Jan Stanislav. Slovensky zivotny priestor v minulosti a dnes, Dr. Frantisek Bokes, 1943. Slovensko v praveku, Dr. Jan Eisner, 1933. Knieza Pribina, Dr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky, 1933; also Slovenske dejiny, �SLOVAKIA 32 1939; Vefka Morava a Pofsko, rn33. Ungarns Volkerschaften im XI. Jahrhundert, Dr. I. Kn iesza, 1938. Zur Geschichte der ungarisch-slowakischen ethnischen Grenze, Dr. I. K niezsa, 19 41. Slovanske starozitnosti, P avel J . Safa rik, Vol. II, 2nd ed., 1863. Slovenske starozitnosti, Dr. I'..ubor Niederle, 1906, 1910. Narodopisni mapa Uher podle ured. lexikonu osad z r. 1n3, A . P e trov , 1924. Pribinovi Vermozi , Dr. J an Stanislav, 1939-40. Nehai'ite l'ud moj, Dr. Jo zef Skult ety, 1928 . • • • MICKIEWICZ IN SLOVAK POETRY AND TRANSLATIONS JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM Ph.D. The University of California recently published an excellent symposium on the great Polish poet and patriot, Adam Mickiewicz, whose centenary has been commemorated throughout the world since 1955. Altogether 30 scholars and experts in Slavistics, representing over 20 nations and universities, contributed to this remarkable volume, edited by the eminent Polish scholar, professor Waclaw Lednicki. The volume has been published under the impressive title "Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature," and the editor actually succeeded in presenting Mickiewicz's influence on World literatures. Slovakia is represented by two contributions and is also mentioned in an article of a Czech scholar, who quite sincerely tried not to make the usual mistake of confusing Slovak and Czech poets and writers. The main article on Slovak literature in connection with Mickiekicz was written by the known expert in Slavic studies, professor Dimitry Cizevsky from Harvard, who in his scholarly study deals mainly with the poetry of two outstanding Slovak romantics: r..udovit Stur and Janka KraP. Cizevsky admits "that Mickiewicz's influence on Slovak literature was undoubtedly significant," but he warns at the same time against the "parallels" which are not parallels at all. This remark refers mainly to a Polish expert on Slovak poetry, Wladyslaw Bobek, whose work twenty-five years ago aimed to demonstrate the part which the poetry of Mickiewicz played in the works of - out of the theo- � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland, 26 SLOVAKIA but it appears that this happened before the sixth, and not later than the beginning of the sixth, century. The question what territory the ancestors of the Slovaks occupied or settled, and whether 1918 or 1938 Slova'k~a was smaller or larger than that territory, intrigued many scholars of history, archeology, and philosophy. Their studies definitely proved that the ancestors of the Slovaks had occupied a territory vastly greater than the area of present-day Slovakia; they proved that the Slovaks settled even beyond the Danube and occupied the northern area between the Tisa and Danube rivers. Paul J. Safarik, in his "Slovanske Starozitnosti" (Slovanic Antiquities), dealt with the question whether the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled also on the territory beyond the Danube. He replied in the affirmative, stating that if we are willing to consider ancient testimonies about the Slovanic inhabitants of that area with an open mind, we shall come to the conviction that they belong nowhere more properly than to the Moravians and the Slovaks. Safarik pla.ced the Slovak boundary in the center of Moravia. About the boundary between the Tisa and the Danube rivers, he said: "At Pest\ Vacov, and beneath Mt. Matra there was at that time a boundary between the Bulgarians and inhabitants of Moravia, and the salt mines in Marmaros were in possession of the former." Saifarik's views were accepted by several excellent scholars, among them: Joseph Skultety (0 byvalom Hornom Uhorsku, 1929, 1932; 0 Slovakoch, 1928; Zo slovenskej minulosti, 1936); Roessler (Zeitpunct, 93); K. J. Grot (Moravija i Mad'jary s poloviny IX. do nacala X. veka Petrograd, 1881) ; Maretic (Slaveni u davnini). :r..ubor Niederle, however, let the question of Pannonia to the philologists. After Safarik, various historians and philologists devoted their time to this question. And the Magyars, who inhabited the territory in question at the present time, did also. Professor John Melich, eminent Magyar historian and philologist, supports Safarik's deduction in his book "A honfoglalaskori Magyarorszag" (Budapest, 1925-29); Ele- SLOVAKIA 27 mer Moor did also in his excellent, objective work "Westungarn im Mittelalter im Spiegel der Orstnamen (Segedin, 1936; and Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1929); likewise, Stephen Kniezsa, in several articles published in 1:Jhe "Archivum Europae Centro-orientalis" and in the "Ungarische Jahrblicher" (1937-38). Moor's work practically exhausted all sources about western Hungary (Transdanubia); Melich's did not go quite as far, nor did the studies of Kniezsa. These studies, however, even of themselves are sufficient to convince us that the ancestors of the Slovak nation had settled on a muc:1 greater territory than present Slovakia. We know that Prince Pribina and his son Kocer fled from Nitra to Pannonia; they resided in Blatnohrad. The source, which describes their activity, comes to us from 871 A.D. and is called: "Libellum de Conversone Bagoariorum et Caranthanorum." This document, recording the events of 850, mentions the names of the magnates in Pribina's escort: 15 are Slovanic, while 17 are German. A careful scrutiny of the Slovanic names will convince us that these names were common with western Slovans, particularly with the dwellers of ancient Nitra. Old Latin documents from Nitra record the names of magnates which have the same linguistic foundation as the names of Pribina's magnates. But so do many personal names of southern and eastern Slovakia, as well as eastern Moravia! Taking all the given data and connecting them with the fact that Pribina and Kocer were Slovaks, we must conclude that the majority of the 15 names are Slovak. Melich, stating that the Magyars found Slovaks in Pannonia when they came there (p. 397), said that the namt':s existing on the territory of the Pribina-Kocer principality make it apparently certain that the 'Slovaks, the western Slovans (Slavs), also inhabited the land from Balaton Lake to the north, probobly to the northern line of Tet-SokoroBakon (p. 395). "It seems to me," said Melidh, "that the proofs presented confirm the testimony of geographical names. Pribina-Kocel"s Slovans (Slavs) were Slovaks. However, in- 28 SLOVAKIA asmuch as even from Balaton Lake to the south the S'lovans live here and there, they were Slovaks for the most part" (p. 396). Names of rivers and places also prove that the Slovaks settled in northern Pannonia. According to Dr. Melich, the name 'B alaton is Slovak, because if it were of southern Slav (Yugoslav) origin, the Magyar equivalent would have to be written "Balaton" (long "a"). Near the Bakon Forest is a stream which the Magyars today call "Cuha;" this is derived from the Slovak "Sucha" (dry); if it were of Yugoslav origin, according to Melich again, it would have t o be written "Cuha" (long "u"). There are many such names in Pannonia. The city of Veszprem (Vesprim) is orf western-Slav origin; it comes from Bezprem. A person named Bezprem is mentioned in the history of Brevnov, Bohemia, in the twelfth century; we also find the name in old Slovak documents. Furthermore, the name orf the town of Tihany is derived from tlte Slovak name Tichoii and is so written in documents of the 11th century. The name of the town Noszlop somes from the Slovak noun "Neostup," just like the Moravian "Ostopovice, Vostopovice" are derived from the noun "Ostup." According to these and similar appellations, Professor Melich concludes (p. 395) the Slovaks lived from the Balaton Lake to the north. His researches, convincing as they are, reveal much more. On the right bank of the Danube we find towns and cities with apparently Slovak names: Ostrihom, Budin, Tetin, Vesprim, Vysegrad-Vysehrad, and opposite P,a rkaii we find Neszmely (from the Slovak Nesmily), which are mentioned as a harbor and a river crossing in 1237-1240. In the west, Slovak settlements extended proba;bly to the river Raab. These names demonstrate that northern Pannonia was occupied by the Slovaks, and partly by the Germans, before the advent of the Magyars. There are not many Slovaks there today. But there is an appreciable number Jf them south of Ostrihom and above the Bako:n Forest. Some chronicles, that of "Anonymous" among them, say that the SLOVAKIA 29 Magyars annihilated the Slovaks there, but the fact is that even in the 12th and succeeding centuries. many persons with Slovak names are mentioned in the documents of Veszprem, Tihany, and other places. Melich placed the southern Slovans between the Tisa and Danube rivers, because he was particularly influenced by the name of the "Zagy,a" river (p. 101). Of course, he did not know from what southern Slovanic tongue it might be derived. To a 'Slovanic philologist, towever, it is quite obvious that the name of the river which flows through that particul·a r territory cannot be deduced from any other than the Slovak language. The Magyar name "Zagyva," like the Czech "Sazava," comes from the Slovak "Sadzava," the Magyars using "-gy-" in place of the Slovak "-dz-" (Palugya-Paludza; Privigye-Prievidza; Pomogy-Pomedzi; etc.). Moor was correct in this regard, adding that, in the meantime, it appeared that Professor Melich had corrected his earlier views on the subject. Moor showed that names of this type could not be ascribed to any Slovanic language other than Slovak. The city of Miskolc, much in the news during the recent Hungarian revolt, is also of Slovak origin (Miskovec). Amd there are many such names close to and far from the area a:bove the Matra ond the Beech Forest. For example, north of Jager is the community of Balatony; the latter is as much a Slovak name as is Balaton, as well as: Topol'cany, Sucha, Novaky, Trstene, Kl'acany, Vysnova, Vfbove, Hradisfany, Domoslav, Dubie.any, Hlohovec, Suchof, and many others. Today's Ferto-Szent-Miklos was mentioned in the thirteenth century as "Neweg , Neueg;" but in northeastern Vesprem a group of seven communities is also recalled under the common name of "Nywig, Nywog, Neueg." We have the same proofs from that same time (13th century) for N evidzany (Tekov County) , that is, all these settlements were called by one and the same name: Nevidza. These names are especially important in the determination of the tribal adherance of the Slovans beyond the Danube and beneath Mt. Matra. They tell us that these Slovans (Slavs) were the ancestors of the Slovaks. 30 SLOVAKIA Moor literally fought against Kniezsa over the name "Pomogy" (Ungarische Jahrblicher, 1937, p. 278; and 1938. p. 36). A name of this type is also in Zelezna (Vas) County, near Kormend: it is "Geregye (from the Slovak "Gradza," which today would sound "Hradza"). Anotrer such important name is "Bogyoszlo" (from the Slovak "Budislav); if it were derived from a south Slorvanic language, it would have to be written "Bodoszlo" in Magyar. We find this appellation in several counties (Bihar Pese - to the south on the Danube--Sopron, and Zelezna. Names from the area of Balaton Lake, even south of it, are proofs that the ancestors of the Slov8!ks once occupied that territory. They are typical western-Slovanic. One even need not be a philologist to arrive at the fact that they are of Slov.anic origin; for example, Kustany (Kosfany); Nagy-Szokoly (Sokol); Nyedam puszta, Rosztopan puszta, etc. Some of the names may appear a bit "mixed" up, but a knowledge of documentary material and the evolution of the Magyar language always help one to find the original Slovanic or, respectively, Slovak form. The counties of Vesprem, Zalan, Komarno (also the transdanubian paret), Zelezna, Sopron, Moson, Rab, and others up to the Drava river, are swarmed with Slovanic names. Documents of the eleventh century contain a multitude of Slovanic p e r s o n a I names (Budivoj; Kazimir; Vojtech; Dobron; Vranis; Milose; Gnevku (Hnevek) ; Zlauku (Slavek) ; Radoan (Radovan); Vaclav; etc.). On the Danube, in most ancient times, the boundary between the Slovak and the Bulgarian nations was between Vacov (derived from "Vaclav") and Pese. According to what has been uncovered by archeologists, philologists, and historians, we ,a re quite certain that the territory of the ancient Slovaks extended in the west from beyond the Nezider Lake, through Zelezna County probably up to Kormend (from the Slovak "kremen"), below Balaton Lake; of course, we know that north of Balaton Lake there were large Slov·a k settlements in olden times; between the Danube and Tisa rivers the boundary went below the southern slope of Mt. Matra. SLOVAKIA 31 Today there still may be doubt about the origm of several of these cities and villages, but their names tell us clearly that they were founded by Slovaks. According to Anonymou s, the Slovaks were there before the 12th century; and it is more than probable that the "Slovene" Slovaks were there when the Magyars came to Hungary. According to an ethnograph ic map of 1773, there were not many Slovaks in some places, but a large number in others. A solid Slovak territory extends here deeply to Pese, and even farther south. Beautiful central Slovak is still spoken in the vicinities of Pest', Vacov, and other cities and towns. According to names mentioned in ancient documents, the eastern boundary extended to the Tisa river and most probably went northeast as far as Zemplin. In an ancient Hungaro-P olish chronicle the river Topl'a: is recalled by its old Slova,k name "Cepla" (Tepla). This clearly proves that the Slovaks must have inhabited the area. From the philologica l standpoint, the question of the Slovaks in Moravia is altogether clear. The Slovaks there in the 8-lOth centuries occupied a greater space to the west and south than they do now. To, the south they had fortificatio ns on the river Dyja and reached as far as the Danube. Philologica l studies also show that Slovak influence also extended to southern Poland: the dialects used there indicate that probably from the 13th century there was a common developmen t with the Slovak and not the Polish language. Furthermo re, together with archeologic al studies, they tell us that the Slovaks today occupy only about a third of the territory which was settled by their ancestors before the Magyars came into the Danube area. With the passaga of time, Paul J. Safarik's determinat ion of ancient Slovak frontiers has been confirmed by scientific studies of historians, ethnograph ers, philologists , and archeologis ts. RIDFERENCE S: Risa Verkomoravs ka, 1933, compiled by Dr. Jan Stanislav. Slovensky zivotny priestor v minulosti a dnes, Dr. Frantisek Bokes, 1943. Slovensko v praveku, Dr. Jan Eisner, 1933. Knieza Pribina, Dr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky, 1933; also Slovenske dejiny, SLOVAKIA 32 1939; Vefka Morava a Pofsko, rn33. Ungarns Volkerschaften im XI. Jahrhundert, Dr. I. Kn iesza, 1938. Zur Geschichte der ungarisch-slowakischen ethnischen Grenze, Dr. I. K niezsa, 19 41. Slovanske starozitnosti, P avel J . Safa rik, Vol. II, 2nd ed., 1863. Slovenske starozitnosti, Dr. I'..ubor Niederle, 1906, 1910. Narodopisni mapa Uher podle ured. lexikonu osad z r. 1n3, A . P e trov , 1924. Pribinovi Vermozi , Dr. J an Stanislav, 1939-40. Nehai'ite l'ud moj, Dr. Jo zef Skult ety, 1928 . • • • MICKIEWICZ IN SLOVAK POETRY AND TRANSLATIONS JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM Ph.D. The University of California recently published an excellent symposium on the great Polish poet and patriot, Adam Mickiewicz, whose centenary has been commemorated throughout the world since 1955. Altogether 30 scholars and experts in Slavistics, representing over 20 nations and universities, contributed to this remarkable volume, edited by the eminent Polish scholar, professor Waclaw Lednicki. The volume has been published under the impressive title "Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature," and the editor actually succeeded in presenting Mickiewicz's influence on World literatures. Slovakia is represented by two contributions and is also mentioned in an article of a Czech scholar, who quite sincerely tried not to make the usual mistake of confusing Slovak and Czech poets and writers. The main article on Slovak literature in connection with Mickiekicz was written by the known expert in Slavic studies, professor Dimitry Cizevsky from Harvard, who in his scholarly study deals mainly with the poetry of two outstanding Slovak romantics: r..udovit Stur and Janka KraP. Cizevsky admits "that Mickiewicz's influence on Slovak literature was undoubtedly significant," but he warns at the same time against the "parallels" which are not parallels at all. This remark refers mainly to a Polish expert on Slovak poetry, Wladyslaw Bobek, whose work twenty-five years ago aimed to demonstrate the part which the poetry of Mickiewicz played in the works of - out of the theo-  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 Territory of Ancient Slovakia Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), March 1957 pp. 25-32 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 1957 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/218e2241811501c4c8784e87b1cac2aa.pdf f7d9d2582542081c8057ab064b2c2cf5 PDF Text Text SLOV AKIA PubHshed VOL. VII quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1957 NO. 1 (22) THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF DR. JOSEPH TISO'S EXECUTION JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM When Monsignor Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of thewartime Slovak Republic, was executed on the gallows on April 18, 1947, a victim of Communist and Czech vengeance, with the assistance of the adherents of Czecho-Communist collaboration most of whom are today living in exile, the Vatican broadcast, commenting on the reaction of the world press to Tiso's murder, said: "As a martyr of his love for his country, Dr. Tiso-who finally died in a very nice manner and as a priest internally very dignified, even though the manner of putting him to death was not befitting a priest-shall continue to live in the Catholic Slovak nation. Tendencious articles in the world press cannot change this fact." Ten years later, it is not necessary to prove the truthfulness of that forecast. Shortly after the first President of the Slovak Republic was surrendered to his vengeful political opponents, there resounded in the American and world press so many manifestations of sympathy, admiration, and respect for Dr. Joseph Tiso, as had been tendered no Slovak in the thousand-year-old stirring history of the Slovak people. Verily, Dr. Tiso outgrew the Slovak framework and "continues to live today" not only in the hearts of his Slovak people, but in the hearts of millions of people who love truth and freedom. Slovakia and the Slovak nation still belongs to the world which did not succumb to Communism, to the world which, so to speak, is personified in Dr. Tiso and his fate. And many people even here on the American continent today see in Tiso the first great victim of Communism in the attack on the civilized world. With decent and intelligent people, the name of Tiso has �2 SLOVAKIA become the key to sympathy for and frequently also to the knowledge of Slovakia and our fight and destiny. In this unusual turn of world public opinion, it is interesting to recall what Dr. Joseph Tiso said when he was asked by the so-called National Court in Bratislava why he had left Slovakia. Tiso at that time had replied: "I left Slovakia, because I wished to make the claims of the Slovak nation to its own way of life better known and more understandable to the Western powers." Of course, we know that the Western powers did not allow the living Tiso to do this, but we also have knowledge that they did not know, and still do not know, how to prevent the dead Tiso from fulfilling his mission. 'Dhe political murder, of which Dr. Tiso was the victim, did not bring about a change of heart only in alien circles, in circles frequently unfavorable to Slovakia and disinterested in the fate of Slovak nation. The crime committed against Dr. Tiso has stirred the conscience and awakened from national lethargy and indifference the Slovaks themselves, and especially the Slovaks beyond the borders of Slovakia who could not partake of the blessings of Slovak independence. If at the present time, outside the borders of Slovakia, the absolute majority of informed Slovaks is again in the fight for the sacred Slovak cause of freedom and independence, without any reservations whatsoever, this is due in a large measure to the death of Tiso, the hevo and martyr of the 'Slovak nation. Today there is not a single country in the free world, where the Slovaks do not annually commemorate March 14, 1939, Slovak Independence Day, and the Slovak Day of Infamy, April 18, 1947-the day that the Benes Czechs-Czech Socialists and Communists- shamefully put Dr. Tiso to death on the gallows. And in all these manifestations and celebrations, the personality, heroic fight and martyr's death of President Dr. Joseph Tiso stand out pre-eminently as a symbol, as a permanent light of Slovak history. On this tenth anniversary of the Bratislava murder, it is appropriate, I believe, to point out the fundamental principles, which led Dr. Joseph Tiso in his work for his �SLOVAKIA 3 people all the way up to the gallows and which characterized one historical period of the Slovak nation. Tiso on Politics, Nation and State Like Andrew Hlinka, Dr. Joseph Tiso left to Slovak generations no compact work about his views on Slovak national life, on their mission and on the ideological foundations of Slovak politics. Always in the middle of obstinate struggles for the preservation of his people and Slovak national existence, in which he played the foremost role since 1918, Dr. Tiso had little time to write books, so he probably postponed the task for a time when he would depart from the political arena. But this was denied hilli by the executioner. Although ideologically he formulate<l the Slovak struggles for national life, and systematically in his countless manifestations and reflections placed the foundations of and consciously developed the fundamental principles of Slovak national ideology in a manner as no one else had in his century, or in previous centuries, a systematic explanation of Tiso's views still awaits the efforts of an expert. The first step in this direction was made by Prof. Dr. Stephen Polakovic during the lifetime of Dr. Tiso, when he expertly and systematically collected in the work "Tiso's Doctrine"l the fundamental concept of Dr. Tiso relating to nation, nationalism, state, religion, and social questions. Even though the volume bears the seal of war conditions in Slovakia, it remains for us thusJar, along with the final speech of Dr. Tiso before the Bratislava Court, which was edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco2, a priceless source of knowledge of the fundamental ideas, aims and efforts of Slovak political life in the first half of this century. These two literary works are not only a source of knowing the past, but also a sum total of the fundamental directives for national and political work, about which Dr. Joseph Tiso, as if following the example of the Old Testamnt prophets, said: "In profound humility we are paying tribute to our good God for the lig}:tt of principles of the natural law, according to which we conducted ourselves in the fight for �4 SLOVAKIA independence, as well as in our work of construction. A return to the natural law can be the only foundation upon which a new world can be built, a world of contentment, order, and permanent peace"3. Placing the foundation of Slovak politics on the Natural Law, Dr. Tiso also defined the aims and the ways of Slovak politics. "Our Slovak State was not born out of hatred, but out of our great love for our homeland," proclaimed Dr. Tiso on March 16, 1939. "Let us above all else be led by this thought: no hatred toward anyone, but love, an ardent love for our State, which inspires us to work and sacrifice ... " "A practical manifestation of the Natural Law is an~ shall remain our old goal: Slovakia for the Slovaks. Slovakia in its entirety and indivisible and without reservations in the legal, cultural, economical, and social departments, so that the independent Slovak nation might be the living carrier of all power and the consumer of all that the Slovak country contains and represents." Regarding politics as a service to the nation, Dr. Tiso during his many years of political activity pleaded tha.t political factors learn to depersonalize themselves. His understanding of politics was that "the interest of the nation is the highest directive of political work;" politics is not supposed to be "medium for several individuals, who with it would conceal their own materialistic interests. Politics serves the nation." As Tiso saw it, even "the State should serve the nation, therefore, it has the right to existence only insofar as it does not threaten the interests of the nation." As far as State order is concerned, this must "be subordinated to the law of morality and law; the State must respect the rigihts of the individual, the family, society, and hold sacred the right ,o f parents to educate their children, the right of free confession; it guarantees the right of private ownership and sefeguards the peaceful coexistence of labor and capital, of employer and employee." "Not force, but law which is founded on truth," was the thesis of Dr. Joseph Tiso, and he followed it in the full �SLOVAKIA 5 sense of the word throughout his life, because he preached and believed that "no one will be mistaken who builds on the nation and always has only the interests of his nation in mind. We have ta:ken over this thesis from stirring times for the future so that we might strengthen ourselves in the old convictions that individuals retire but the nation remains, and the person, who, separated completely from his own person, stands unconditionally in the service of the nation, knows how to hold his ground and is the only one fit to lead and to speak in the name of the nation." "The politician, more than any one else, must be the guardian of the traditional values of the nation and must be the ever ready interpreter of the Natural Law in any given situation. Should any one lack the one or the other, he is not fit to be the representative of the nation, because he will either become a figure tossed about by contemporary political or social currents which has no connection with the living corpus of the nation, or else he will be a museum guardian of the nation who stands afar from contemporary routes along which life flows and on which the fate of the future of the nation is determined." "Whoever boasts that he is a loyal son of the nation, he must also ponder what he is giving to his nation. Whether an infection which causes a fever, or bacilli which cause decay and can bring the nation to the grave; or whether he contributes labor which shall forever remain in the nation as a cell of healthy social and cultural development." "A nation whose sons do not know how to bear a blow and personal sacrifices, such a nation will not get far. The nation lives, the whole lives, only by the fight and work of individuals." "Love for the nation is a religious precept, and a person sins against the Fourth Commandment who does not love his nation. He bears a stigma not only as an earthly t raitor, but also as a transgressor who does not keep the Divine Commandmants." Every loyal son of the Slovak nation, acording to Tiso, "sanctifies his nationalism with a Christian spirit, so that �ti SLOVAKIA nationalism be not a slogan or a mantle of dubious aims, but an internal motivating force to create values for the benefit of the national whole." In the Spirit of Tiso for a New Independence From the above quotations it is quite evident that the main principles of Dr. Joseph Tiso's ideology were: 1. Natural Law; 2. Love in place of hatred; 3. Right instead of violence; 4. Respect for morality; 5. Nation above the State. 6. Loyalty to traditions; 7. Personal selflessness and sacrifice of political factors; 8. Nationalism sanctified by Ohristianity; 9. Social justice; and 10. Religious tolerance. During the decades of his successful political activity, Dr. Tiso developed these ideas not only in his manifestations to the people, but also in his classically and stately styled reflections, parliamentary speeches, and presidential messages, so that the expert schooled in statecraft and sociology will have little difficulty in systematically elaborating his ideology. nr. Tiso himself indicated Christianity as the outlet of his ideas, especially the philosophy of St. Thomas4, and in the social sphere the Papal Encyclicals. On the question of nationalism Tiso said that "the symbol of Slovak nationalism is Stur"5, because "Stur's nationalism was the dynamic force in individuals whom he prompted to work and socrifice for the nation; it was the connecting link of individuals into a rock-firm whole with a united aim and a united will ... "6 A study of Dr. Tiso's manifestations reveals that he frequently tied in his talks with the spiritual-political heritage of the followers of Louis Stur, the great Slovak patriot and "father of modern Slovak nationalsm." And Tiso did this consciously to preserve the continuity of Slovak ideological-politica l development and so that the Slovaks could build on traditions. If we compare the basic ideas of Stur's political and philosophical manifestations - which are dealt with in several published works7 - with Tiso's, then the ideological structure, as well as the entire political activity of Dr. Tiso, of course, shows an entire series of preferences and varied outlines. �SLOVAKIA 7 Objectively it may already be said today that tying in with Stur and the idelogical continuity of former Slovak generations, Dr. Tiso anchors more deeply in Christian world outlook on the individual and his relation to the state, nation, family, and society. His ideology is firmly founded on the principles of modern sociology and statecraft; it has solid philosophical foundations and a strictly logical system; it emanates from an idea and stresses the primacy of spirituality, but it depends on the reality of life and respects actuality; it is the result of long years of study and political experience, drawn from daily contact with the nation and into unceasing struggle with its enemies, so that it is, as it were, forged in the fire of battles and tested in confrontation with the actual life of the nation in the phase of its political formation, but also in the phase .of struggles for its natural rights and, finally, also in the period of building up its own state. In comparison to the ideology of the Sturites, we are concerned, therefore, with an ideology whose foundations are not only broader by far, but one which was more thought out, mature and tested ·b y life. Divine Providence had allowed Dr. Joseph Tiso a life of political activity almost as long as Stur's entire life (1815-1856) and, hence, he <!ould see the ideas, which he promulgated and foT which he labored and fought, validated in national life. If we should compare Dr. Tiso as a politician and ideologue with other factors of Slovak life, then objectively it can be said that during the last 100 years there was no political factor in Slovakia who could compare with Dr. Joseph Tiso as far as preparation for political activity, working out of ideology and the concert of expressed principles with their validation unto self-immolation are concerned. If any of them did shine in theoretical expressions and plans, either fate did not grant them to measure up with reality, or they were only gleaners of grain where Dr. Joseph Tiso was the owner of fruitful fields of ideological and character wealth. Living Slovak generations will therefore hardly find a better example than Dr. Tiso, or a better ideology than �8 SLOVAKIA the one he sanctified with his blood. Anchored in eternal principles and designed for the future of the Slovak nation, it can be the most certain course for winning a new and full independence for the Slovaks. Czech chauvinism and Communist hatred did not kill the idea of Slovak indepedence by murdering Dr. Tiso. Conversely, they gave the nation more martyrs and, therefore, the idea shall win out sooner or later. REFERIDNCIDS: 1. "Tisova nauka," Dr. Stefan Polakovic, Bratislava, 1941. ~- "Dr . Joz.e f Tiso o sebe," edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J., 1952. 3. This and other quotations are taken from either one of the previous two references. 4. "All who recall our thesis that 'the nation is the substance and the state only the form' should know that is state-political formula is the practical consequence of the state•.p olitical theory Wihich is built on the foundations O'f Thomistic philosophy." SOOVAK, 1935. 5. See "Prve posolstvo" (The First Message), Ruizomberok, August 16, 1939. Already in 1936 Dr. Tiso had proclaimed: "It is this monument of Louis Stur, built in the Banovce country, that shall be the visible proof of the fact that we have progressed so far that only we, Slovak Catholics, have not forgotten our Slovak past and we pay our respects to the memory of our national awakeners even when they are Evangelicals (Lutherans), as was Stur." - SLOVAK, 1936. 6. Dr. Tiso also characterized Stiir's nationalism in this manner: "Stiir's nationalism - built on the foundation of the independent Slovak nation and the genuine Slovak language, because it acknowledges the law of God and the law nature - was the natural foundation of the life of the Slovak nation." - SLOVAK, 1936. 7. Among the most significant works are those of Professor Cfzevsky, Dr. Stephen Polakovic, Dr. Samuel S. Osusky, Profesor Rap ant, and Dr. Joseph Pauco. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The right of se1f-<leteiimination in:cluded in the .AJtlantic Charter does not carpry wliith it the right O!f any government to commit wholesale muTder or the right to make slaJVes of its own people, or of any other peoples in the world." - F. D. Roosevelt, Feb. 12, 1943. �SLOVAKIA 9 I WAS EDITOR OF PRESIDENT TISO'S NEWSPAPER JOSEPH PAUCO ( Msgr. Joseph Tiso, prelate of the Catholic Church, was president of the Slovak Republic from 1939 to 1945. The proCommunist regime of Dr. Edward Benes executed him on the gallows, April 18, 1947, after a lengthy mock trial, before which the presiding judge had declared, echoing the words of Benes, that "Tiso must hang." Dr. Pauco's article is a brief recollection of the years he spent in free Bratislava as "Tiso's" editor.) Shortly after I was appointed editor of the "SLOVAK," the official organ of the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, my secretary entered my office to announce that President. Dr. Joseph Tiso wished to see me. "Where is he?" I asked excitedly. "In my office," replied the secretary. At that time I had a visitor, whom I requested to be excused because President Tiso had arrived, but the latter was already coming through the door of my office. Overhearing my request of the visitor, the President, greeting me and shaking my hand, said: "Now, Joe, you just finish your business with your visitor. I am a citizen like anyone else." That was characteristic of Dr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slovak Republic, who always considered himself only "one of the people." When my predecessor, Dr. Aladar Kocis, handed over the editoTShip of the "SLOVAK," he reminded me that, among other things, I should visit President Tiso regularly. Dr. Joseph Tiso, he told me, wanted to be informed about what was going on in the editorial office of the largest Slovak daily, which was otherwise regarded as the official newspaper of Dr. Tiso, since he was the chairman of the entire enterprise. But Dr. Tiso did not feel the necessity of personal contacts with the editorial office because of commercial considerations. He was mainly concerned with the spirit of the enterprise. It was necessary to defend Slovak interests. He �10 was aware of the great influence of the press and, hence, fully appreciated it. As a youthful journalist I naturally welcomed the support of the President. I visited Dr. Tiso regularly once a week, and when circumstances called for it even more frequently. Of course, besides personal visi½S, there were also many phone calls between the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" and the president's palace. The editor-in-chief always had the doors to t~e president's office open to him; there was no specified time for his visits. Whenever I phoned Tiso's personal secretary, Dr. Karol Murin, that I would like to see the president, in every instance he replied that I should come over at once. If my memory does not fail me, I believe I had to wait a half-hour or a bit more only twice in three years to see Dr. Tiso; and this happened because Tiso was in conference with foreign diplomatic representatives. Entering the president's office, I usually found Dr. Tiso at his desk, going through his mail or studying various state papers, proposed legislative acts, and activities of the various branches of government or the Hlinka Party, of which he was chairman. When I greeted him, he would raise his head, remove his spectacles and reply: "Welcome, young man, welcome!" Whenever I missed a meeting with the President, for some reason other, at the very next meeting he would ask where I had been, whether I had been i_ll. During these visits there were various matters that interested me. Of these not the least interesting was to observe the effects of the visitor before me. Once it would •b e a prime minister, other times a worker from the countryside; then again some deputy, economic expert, high officer, a foreign correspondent, or a member of the Cabinet. Once in a while some one would come up with an alarming report or rumor. President Tiso excluded no one from visiting him; he listened attentively to all and in every instance did whatever he could to satisfy all comers. Whenever I met him, �SLOVAKIA 11 President Tiso usually was either in a pensive or a smiling mood. Even at times when he appeared in a serious mood, and during our convers,a tion it would seem to me that in his mind he is returning to the fresh impressions of previous visitors, yet in a short while his face would brighten up and his melodious voice would ring out in healthy laughter. President Tiso had a real sense of humor. Dr. Joseph Tiso never acted in an affected or artificial manner. Once in 1939, when he was being welcomed in Nitra, an event which I witnessed, the district official addressed Tiso as "Your Excellency." At that Time Dr. Tiso smilingly reminded him: "Without the excellency, Mr. official!" From that time on, I never heard anyone address Dr. Tiso as "His Excellency." In his study Tiso was happy to be addressed simply as "Mr. President" (Pan prezident), as he was when his parishioners called him "Reverend Deacon." Conversations with Tiso usually began with his asking about one's health, his family, and his work. He was always very much interested in the work of our editorial office. President Tiso was not often curious about details, unless it was a matter of immediate interest, like, for example, the political side of our editorial work. Furthermore there was not a single visit during which we would not touch upon the most serious objective and personal moments which influenced Slovak politics. Dr. Tiso spoke openly about individual resolutions of the Parliament, the deputies, ministers, the Germans, and in general about everything that had any influence on Slovak life and the presidential office. On occasions Dr. Tiso recalled many innovations especially of his political opponents. He criticized them unsparingly and talked about them with feelings of bitterness; his criticism was sincere at all times, whether it concerned Slovaks or foreigners. I always felt refreshed in the President's study. Usu.ally Dr. Tiso gave no directives how any article was to be written. On the other hand, however, he willingly read the �12 SLOVAKIA more delicate articles before they went to print. Even when I asked him what from the ideological standpoint we should deal with most on the pages of the "SLOVAK," he would usually reply: "Hold the line. Don't let yourself be broken. Don't be discouraged-persevere!" Nothing more and nothing less. Otherwise, however, the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" had an exemplary coworker in the person of President Tiso. His speeches, articles and messages were care-fully prepared. Dr. Tiso prepared and wrote them himself. On occasions, especially for Christmas and March 14th, the President gave us articles written in his own hand so that we might have them on time; these were usually accompanied by the remark: "Correct as you see fit." On his visits to us, he would always compliment all the workers connected with the paper, saying: "Fine work, men; keep up the good work; give the best that's in you!" I'll conclude with what I had mentioned at the beginning: the visits of President Tiso to the editorial office of the "SLOVAK." He came among us regularly. When he visited us the first time, all of us were very surprised that he was accompanied only by his personal secretary. No secret, no public police came with him; none in or outside the building; and none in his auto. On occasions he visited us coming on foot alone, without a bodyguard. That was Tiso: his people did not fear him, and he did not fear his people. No man in Slovakia was more revered and loved than was Tiso. I attended many gatherings which Dr. Tiso addressed; I traveled with him. Not once did he have more than one person accompany him. Not to guard him, but simply to accompany him. President Tiso moved about freely and without fear in Bratislava and everywhere in Slovakia, just as he did at the altar where he daily said the Holy Mass to his Divine Master. • • • REOOMMENDED $3.00; SLOVAK FOR (the set); "!Ih-obailr's "SLOVAK DE)SSONS" BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Juircha.k BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 English-Sl01Va:k Dictionary" $4.00 ; (iHroba.k) $3.50. �SLOVAKIA 13 EIGHT FATAL DAYS IN THE LIFE OF DR. JOSEPH TISO KAROL MURiN (The author of this article was the personal secretary of President Dr. Joseph Tiso from 1938 until Tiso's tragic end in 1947. At the present time Dr. Karol Murin is on the profes• sorial staff of Montreal University.) On April 8, 1945, just a month before the conclusion of World War II in the West, at President Tiso's request, I went to Munich to ask for an audience with His Eminence Cardinal Faulhaber. The reason was that I was to inform the Cardinal of Monsignor Tiso's arrivel in Kremsmlinster and petition him to graciously do what he could to protect the President of Slovakia. Munich at that time was a shambles. The Cardinal received me in the afternoon; his residence was damaged extensively by bombs and shells. After waiting for a moment in a small, poorly furnished room, Cardinal Faulhaber made his appearance, the burdens of the war clearly apparent on his features. After the customary Slovak greeting "Laudetur ... ," I went on one knee before him, kissed his ring, and then presented myself. The Cardinal replied to the greeting and asked me to be seated. After a few introductory words, I told him the purpose of my visit. I must admit that I did expect several questions. During the war years it had become the custom to classify people only into two categories: the democrats on the one side, and the nazis and fascists on the other. No one asked why or how a person got to be on the one or the other side, or even what one did. According to that attitude, which excluded all colors between black and white, Stalin and the bolsheviks were regarded as democrats, while Dr. Tiso was supposed to be a nazi; Benes, despite his pro-Soviet and evident bolshevizing tendencies and the fact that he was responsible for the death of thousands of people, was regarded as a "moral" democrat, while Dr. Tiso, despite his prayers and many acts of kindness and his great love for �14 SLOV.AlKIA his Slovak people, or . just because of this, was regarded as a criminal. Cardinal Faulhaber, however, never did belong among the people who measured morality according to their own interest and evaluated their neighbor and acknowledged his right to life only according to the benefit they might reap from him. He was accustomed to judge and measure 9,ccording to the eternal and unchangeable principles of 8hrist. That is why he had become the symbol of the fight against nazi blunders, and the world regarded him highly for it. "I know about your President," began Cardinal Faulhaber, "and I know that he defended the Christian Faith in Slovakia." From what he further said, it was evident that he was well-informed about Slovakia and especially about the activity of President Tiso. He immediately set himself to the task of doing what he could to secure the safety of Tiso in the face of the surge of passions resulting for the most part from the false information propagated by Dr. Edward Benes. The three alternatives mentioned by the Cardinal are proof of his love for President Tiso : 1. He invited the President to his residence; 2. he offered as a temporary abode for President Tiso the Capuchin monastery at Alt Otting; or, 3. the Scheyrn monastery. Both monasteries were in the Freising-Munich Archdiocese which Cardinal Faulhaber administered. According to circumstances, as they might develop in regard to Tiso, the Slovak President was free to resort to the alternative most favorable to him. My audience with Cardinal Faulhaber lasted two hours. He told me about what especially worried him and made him fearful about the future: about the plans formulated by fanatics for the last days of the war, about the night of the long knives ("Nacht der langen Messer"), during which they intended to liquidate revered and respected Catholic priests and laity. The last half hour of my visit I spent with the Cardinal in his study. Looking over a map of Bavaria, His Eminence compared the advantages and disadvantages uf �SLOVAKIA 15 the two monasteries; the Scheyrn Monastery was more advantageous, except, of course, if the "night of the long knives" should be realized. At the end of my visit I thanked Cardinal Faulhaber sincerely for the time he gave me, asked for his blessing, and departed after His Eminence bade me Godspeed. President Tiso was happy to hear my report about my visit to Cardinal Faulhaber after I returned to Kremsmtiunster. In no time at all, President Tiso decided to accept the hospitality of the Archbishop's palace only as a last resort; he did not wish to burden one of the outstanding Princes of the Church with the cares and troubles of his Slovak people and his own person, because he was aware of the fact that the saintly Cardinal was greatly burdened by the troubles of his own German people. At the beginning of May, 1945, when Dr. Joseph Tiso left Kremsmtinster for the West, he was not definitely certain whether he would seek refuge at Alt Otting or Scheyrn. In any event, however, he decided to first stop at Alt Otting. On the first leg of his journey, President Tiso was supposed to leave a written or oral message for me at the rectory of the Bavarian community of Stammham. I set out after President Tiso about two weeks later, stopping first at Stammham, where the pastor told mf': that I would find the person I was seeking at the first place we had talked about. That same afternoon I met with President Tiso in the monastery at Alt Otting. My first task was to again make contact with Cardinal Faulhaber. Since the war had just ended in the West, everything was chaos and confusion; outside the military, there was no public transportation to speak of; and no one was permitted to travel even short distances without a permit. After about a week in Alt Otting, which, by the way, is one of the most famous of pilgrimage cities, I was quite fortunate in getting to Munich. The Cardinal received me shortly after I was nounced. He was in ·b etter spirits than he had been April 8th: the "night of the long knives," thank God, not come about! In due time the Cardinal told me of anon did his �16 SLOV.A.I{JA plan to help President Tiso: he wanted to secure a plane to take Tiso to the Vatican. However, before he could begin working out his plan, the Cardinal said, he wanted to get the assent of the Papal Nuncio. During the entire war, the Nuncio for Germany was Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo. Cardinal Faulhaber asked me to look him up as soon as possible and present his desire to help Dr. Joseph Tiso to him, reckoning also with help to transport Tiso to the Vatican. In the Cardinal's name I was to ask His Excellency whether he agreed with his step. At that time the Papal Nuncio, His Excellency Cesare Orsenigo, resided in Eichstatt in northern Bavaria. To get to him by auto I needed gasoline and to get gasoline I had to see the American authorities. Aware of this, Cardinal Faulhaber wrote a letter telling whoever it may concern that I was his courier, carrying mail and reports from the Cardinal to the Papal Nuncio. For a longer time the Cardinal could not send mail to the Nuncio, so he really appreciated this opportunity to do so. Besides that Cardinal Faulhaber gave me a general recommendat ion which I could use as I thought best. The next day I travelled by auto to Eichstatt. Below the portals to the Archbishop's palace, by sheer accident, I met with a group of four Slovaks, who had come by auto. After hearty handshakes and embraces, all gratefully accompanied me on my journey. Archbishop Orsenigo received me warmly. After I gave him the mail from Cardinal Faulhaber, he listened with great interest to my report about the fate of Preside,1t Tiso. To the Cardinal's question he replied thusly: "Tell His Eminence that I not only agree that he do everything possible in his power to save Dr. Tiso, but that I most ardently beg him to do so." Then the Archbishop said that he was completely out of contact with the world, adding that a certain member of the Swiss diplomatic corps in Berlin is supposed to visit him this same afternoon and take his first mail in a long time to the Vatican. He graciously offered to be of service if I had anything to send outside the borders of Germany. �SLOVAKIA 17 As soon as Cardinal Faulhaber had the Nuncio's reply, he immediately wrote a letter to the Vatican in which he told of his intention to transport Dr. Tiso by plane to the Vatican. His greatest worry was how to send the letter. Besides American planes only an accidental diplomat, who saved his petrol well, could be considered. In about a week I was supposed to return for further reports and advice. After eight days, I visited Cardinal Faulhaber again, who greeted me and then told me of the unfortunate thing tkat had happened. He was almost in tears. The Cardinal told me that the day after he had written the letter to the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he had secured a way of getting the letter to the Vatican. According to a promise made to the Cardinal by a person unknown to me, this person was supposed to take the letter before his departure from Munich. But the day before my last visit to Cardinal Faulhaber, when he asked his chancery whether there was any reply from the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he learned to his utter sorrow that the letter was still in his palace, the person who promised to deliver it to the Vatican evidently forgetting to pick it up. This unexpected delay worried the Cardinal and his concern was great, as if he had a foreboding that so very much depended on those eight days. After giving vent to his great disappointment, Cardinal Faulhaber again gave me his blessing and asked me to return in a week. I did return, but only after over two years. After my last visit to the Cardinal, we learned about the arrest of the members of the Slovak Government in Kremsmlinster. President Tiso asked for reports about what had happened there. My request for a travel permit into Upper Austria lay on the desk of the CIC in Alt btting for several days. Fate came into play. With the CIC in Alt btting there collaborated a man by the name of Spigler who was originally from Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. When he came upon my name, Spigler immediately came to the monastery and forbade me to leave the building. After two days he took me to jail. During my confinement in the monastery, it became �18 SLOVAKIA quite evident that this Bratislava agent, full of personal resentment, found out that President Tiso was in the monastery. After my arrest President Tiso wrote to Cardinal Faulhaber, respectfully requesting His Eminence to notify the American authorities that he was staying in the monastery and that he use his influence to set me free, as well as that he c-o ntinue to give consideration to his own case. The Capuchin Provincial delivered the President's letter to Cardinal Faulhaber. In the meantime, I was transferred to a concentration camp where frightful conditions prevailed. One hot and sultry afternoon, at the beginning of June, 1945, a jeep pulled up before the barbed-wire camp. I became numb when I sighted President Tiso in it. It was at this point that my pilgrimage to various concentrati0!1 camps with President Tiso began, the tour which finally ended in the Bratislava jail. We felt the benefiscence of good Cardinal Faulhaber once again in the concentration camp at Garmisch Partenkirchen. It was on his initiative that the events, which had taken place during the reception of our group in this camp, were investigated. The Cardinal's effort to help Dr. Joseph Tiso did not result in success. Nevertheless, the Slovaks will never forget that Cardinal Faulhaber, now deceased, really did try to save Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the Slovak Republic . • • • WHO SAID IT? "W:t"th eq'll!al enlthusfasm we are today manifesting for the ideaJls of our, and onliy our, Owchoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn . . . . T.he unreseJ:1ved alliance with Oll!r Eastern ncighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, bUft also our friend!ly coot'acts wirtih the rest ,of tlhe world, especiaUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeUng of oerlainty that no mrutter what might h!appen a!broad, O'Ur ,inJternatiiona1 positt'ion is £i:nm rund we need not fea1r that we can come uipon new d'aingera aind dlnifiou[ties." ([)r. Joseph Lettrich, Vice,Ohairm.an of the Exem.rt.ive Oommittee of the "Coundl of Free Czechoslov.aJkia,'' CAIS, November 18, 1947). �SLOVAKIA 19 SLOVAKIA: TRIAL OF DR. JOSEPH TISO (Under previous order of the House, the Hon. Ray J . Madden from Indiana, was recognized for 20 minutes to make the following address on the floor of the House of Representatives, March 31, 1947): Mr. Speaker, America and all liberty-loving nations should at this time concentrate against international situations which might bring about war in the future. I have, on several occasions, stated on the floor of Congress that the application of the principles of the Atlantic Charter is our greatest antidote for future peace. Self-government, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion is essential for smaller countries as it is for th~ large nations. Our Nation, during World War II, spent billions of dollars and sacrificed in lives and casualties to preserve the above principles in order to insure liberty and fnture peace. Since VJ-day, aggression and tyranny has again launched in certain areas of Europe. The latest example of persecution, unfair trial, and threatened execution for political belief is that of Dr. Joseph Tiso, former President of the Interim Republic of Slovakia. Dr. Tiso has been acclaimed a hero in the eyes of nearly all the people of Slovakia and the prevailing majority of Americans of Slovak ancestry. My attention has been called to the fact that over 80 percent of the Slovak American fraternal organizations have forthrightly declared themselves to be of the opinion that Tiso was a hero in the defense of the best interests of the Slovak people. During his presidency, Slovakia thrived, progressed, and developed internally more than it had during any five years of the existence of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The communistic control now over the country of Slovakia will execute Dr. Tiso, a political prisoner, unless our Government intervenes. This communistic control is inflicted upon the people of Slovakia in spite of the fact that the election of May 26, 1946, gave over 64 percent of the total vote cast against the present government. The press is likewise controlled, at least to the extent that the newspaper cannot publish what they think. This is evidenced in the fact that four American newspapers have �20 SLOVAKIA been barred in Slovakia. The present communistic government will brook no freedom of political thought; though the people voted for Christian democracy, they received totalitarian communism. The archbishop of Slovakia testified at the trial of Dr. Tiso. He is and has been a respected member not only of the hierarchy of Czecho-Slovakia, but of the official family of Czecho-Slovakia, including its President Edward Benes. Appearing as a witness for Dr. Tiso, the archbishop testified that: Tiso acted and worked in the interest of Slovakia and was never a traitor, and that his electeion as President of Slovakia was the will of 90 percent of the Slovaks at that time and was acclaimed by the bishops, priests, and ministers of both the Catholic and Protestant churches. It is apparent that Czecho-Slovakia has been re-created with the aid of Moscow and that Moscow will undoubtedly demand the extinction of Slovak national leaders of ability and high intelelct. The ways of the Communists are devious and it behooves us to understand more of the Slovak situation. In the meantime, the least that freedom loving nations can ask is that the so-called peoples courts in the Communist-dominated countries in eastern Europe, refrain from any further political executions or from liquidating political opposition by long-term imprisonment as in the case of Archbishop Stepinac. All of this adds up to the price we will have to pay to aid in the establishing of true democracy in the countries of eastern Europe to insure world peace. In supporting President Truman's international program, we cannot be unmindful of what is happening throughout this region in Europe, comprising over 100,000,000 Christians who have nothing in common with communism. We have heard of political executions, imprisonment, and banishment of outstanding citizens in Poland, Lithuania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and other small countries. Thousands of brave Polish soldiers who fought to stamp out fascism are now prohibited from returning to their native Poland by a communistic controlled government. Americans are asking the question "do we not have at least a moral obli- �SLOVAKIA 21 gation to veice our protest against such trials and executions?" The judge who presided at the trial of Dr. Tiso, previous to the trial, vowed personal vengeance on Tiso and was provided this opportunity by being placed in charge ef the case. These facts, though not appearing in the American press releases, are not disputed. Almost uninimously, the people of Slovak descent in America, are rising in protest to the impending execution of Dr. Tiso. I ask the Members of Congress to join with me in protesting this unjust conviction by interceding with President Truman and Secretary Marshall to use their good offices to prevent this injustice. We might as well apply the words of the Honorable Judge Robert H. Jackson: All experience teaches that there are certain things you cannot do under guise of judicial trial. * * * You must put no man on trial before anything that is called a court, if you are not prepared to establish his personal guilt * * * If you are determined to execute a man in any case, there is no occasion for trial. The world yields no respect to courts that are merely organized to convict. - Congressional Record. • ON TISO'S BEHALF: • • PLEA OF THE COUNCIL OF SLOVAK BISHOPS To the Presidium of the Slovak National Council in Bratislava: The Catholic Episcopal Council of Slovakia, in past years, has more frequently turned to appropriate governmental offices in the interest of those who were suffering, were imprisoned or persecuted - without regard to whetlier Catholics or non-Catholics were concerned. The example of the Divine Samaritan and His positive command prompted and encouraged us to raise our protective voice in the interests of the people who were suffering on account of political or racial reasons and we did that at a time when we could expect various humiliations in return. �22 SLOVAKIA This noblest Model in all history and His commandment, expressed in the Gospel, we bear in mind even now, when we respectfully commend to Your graciousness the fate of the former President Dr. Joseph Tiso. We do this not only because a Catholic priest is concerned, but also because the solution of his personal problem shall have a far-reaching influence on the thinking and behavior of a part of the Slovak nation in respect to the renovated Czecho- Slovak Republic and its representatives. Furthermore, we are prompted to take this step also by the generally known actuality, which is conceded by all objective critics, that Dr. Joseph Tiso always was a zealous priest, of a virtuous life. In his extensive activity he tried to work for the good of the whole, and personally did not enrich himself. The administration of justice belongs among the most difficult tasks of state power. Experience proves that this delicate task is aggravated when the judgment of political transgressions is concerned. History tells us how many fatal mistakes were made during political trials - and this results from the delicate task of impartially judging the activities of a political opponent. So, it is no rarity that after rendering severe verdicts in political trials, sooner or later a call for their revision was made. In judging the activity especially of a political factor his intentions also should be given · consideration. The majority of the Slovak nation is convinced with us that the intentions of Dr. Joseph Tiso while performing public functions were the best. Certainly some mistakes were made and the Catholic Bishops of Slovakia did not fail to bring these to his attention. However, here we must mention the generally known reality that even the most clever political factors frequently made serious mistakes. Nevertheless an unbiased observer - whether a contemporary or historian - can deduce an over-all judgment only when he evaluates also the good and positive things they did. And this thesis often outweighs the mistakes which they made in their weakness. �S LOVAKIA 23 It will be pertinent to the matter at hand to shed some light also from another viewpoint on the mistakes which are ascribed to Dr. Joseph Tiso. We respectfully point out at least some of the circumstances. After the most recent announcements of the present governmental factors even the 2ilina events of October, 1938, are presented in a different light than that shed by the one-sided propaganda to persuade the public; nay, even in the press it was demonstrated that in these political changes practically all Slovak political parties had participated. Here it is necessary to recall also the very important document which has just now been made public during the Nuremberg trials; we mean the letter of the ruler of the Hungarian realm sent to Berlin in March 13, 1939. This weighty circumstance gives an altogether different significance to the March 14, 1939, decision of Dr. Joseph Tiso and the other political factors of that time. One should think about what would have happened with the Slovak nation if the plan of Horthy had succeeded? We also know that after the issuance of anti-Jewish regulations, Dr. Joseph Tiso did want to resign from the presidency. That he did not do so happened because he tried to hamper and ameliorate the effects of those provisions, as well as to prevent a greater evil. It is worthy of consideration that what the ruler of the larger and more independent Hungary could not prevent in his country Dr. Joseph Tiso could not prevent in Slovakia. After considering all the circumstances after the passage of time, even other pilloried political mistakes - such as the war in the east, the events of August 29, 1944 can be judged otherwise than the manner in which it is done by a one-sided propaganda. The entire Slovak public is following the developments of events around Dr. Joseph Tiso with attention and in its majority is taking a negative stand towards those efforts which would incite hatred against his person. Thereby the unfortunate splintering of the nation is increased when unity of all forces is so greatly desired for the important �24 SLOVAKIA work of construction. It will be to the credit of the farsightedness of the State and will serve the peace of the nation, if the case of Dr. Joseph Tiso is solved in a cautious way and not with merciless hardness. The above thoughts have prompted us to respectfully submit our plea for your gracious consideration and favorable decision. With an expression of profound respect: (Signatures) : Dr. Karol Kmefko, Archbishop-Bishop of Nitra; Jozef Carsky, Bishop-Apostolic Administrator; Dr. Andrej Skraltik, Bishop on Banska Bystrica; Dr. Jozef Tomanocy; Dr. Karol Jantausch; Dr. Eduard Necsey, ordaining Bishop. Bratislava, January 8, 1946. • • • HERO AND PATRIOT OF SLOVAKIA The smaller nations have been the marytrs in tlte maelstrom that evil men made out of Europe in the last decade. Changing fortunes of war often presented a double crown of martyrdom. Honest men in these minor states often found it difficult to see where the path of honor lay, but once their conscience revealed the way they remained steadfast in what they believed their sacred duty. Slovakia has presented such a puzzling picture. The Slovaks had long sought and had long been denied their independence. When the moment dawned for freedom before the last war, there is no doubt that the patriots of that land felt that their long-deferred ambitions had been realized. There was outside wonder at the auspices under which freedom came but there can be no question about the sincerity of the Slovak patriots who meant to use their new prerogatives solely for the good of Slovakia. Chief among these was Monsignor Joseph Tiso who was elected president of the new republic. The war's outcome threw Slovakia as part of the old Czecho-Slovakian state into the Red orbit. Monsignor Tiso was placed on trial for treason. It could not be proved that he was a traitor to Slovakia for the simple reason that he never was a traitor to Slovakia. But that did not prevent �SLOVAKIA 25 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland, � SLOV AKIA PubHshed VOL. VII quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1957 NO. 1 (22) THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF DR. JOSEPH TISO'S EXECUTION JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM When Monsignor Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of thewartime Slovak Republic, was executed on the gallows on April 18, 1947, a victim of Communist and Czech vengeance, with the assistance of the adherents of Czecho-Communist collaboration most of whom are today living in exile, the Vatican broadcast, commenting on the reaction of the world press to Tiso's murder, said: "As a martyr of his love for his country, Dr. Tiso-who finally died in a very nice manner and as a priest internally very dignified, even though the manner of putting him to death was not befitting a priest-shall continue to live in the Catholic Slovak nation. Tendencious articles in the world press cannot change this fact." Ten years later, it is not necessary to prove the truthfulness of that forecast. Shortly after the first President of the Slovak Republic was surrendered to his vengeful political opponents, there resounded in the American and world press so many manifestations of sympathy, admiration, and respect for Dr. Joseph Tiso, as had been tendered no Slovak in the thousand-year-old stirring history of the Slovak people. Verily, Dr. Tiso outgrew the Slovak framework and "continues to live today" not only in the hearts of his Slovak people, but in the hearts of millions of people who love truth and freedom. Slovakia and the Slovak nation still belongs to the world which did not succumb to Communism, to the world which, so to speak, is personified in Dr. Tiso and his fate. And many people even here on the American continent today see in Tiso the first great victim of Communism in the attack on the civilized world. With decent and intelligent people, the name of Tiso has �2 SLOVAKIA become the key to sympathy for and frequently also to the knowledge of Slovakia and our fight and destiny. In this unusual turn of world public opinion, it is interesting to recall what Dr. Joseph Tiso said when he was asked by the so-called National Court in Bratislava why he had left Slovakia. Tiso at that time had replied: "I left Slovakia, because I wished to make the claims of the Slovak nation to its own way of life better known and more understandable to the Western powers." Of course, we know that the Western powers did not allow the living Tiso to do this, but we also have knowledge that they did not know, and still do not know, how to prevent the dead Tiso from fulfilling his mission. 'Dhe political murder, of which Dr. Tiso was the victim, did not bring about a change of heart only in alien circles, in circles frequently unfavorable to Slovakia and disinterested in the fate of Slovak nation. The crime committed against Dr. Tiso has stirred the conscience and awakened from national lethargy and indifference the Slovaks themselves, and especially the Slovaks beyond the borders of Slovakia who could not partake of the blessings of Slovak independence. If at the present time, outside the borders of Slovakia, the absolute majority of informed Slovaks is again in the fight for the sacred Slovak cause of freedom and independence, without any reservations whatsoever, this is due in a large measure to the death of Tiso, the hevo and martyr of the 'Slovak nation. Today there is not a single country in the free world, where the Slovaks do not annually commemorate March 14, 1939, Slovak Independence Day, and the Slovak Day of Infamy, April 18, 1947-the day that the Benes Czechs-Czech Socialists and Communists- shamefully put Dr. Tiso to death on the gallows. And in all these manifestations and celebrations, the personality, heroic fight and martyr's death of President Dr. Joseph Tiso stand out pre-eminently as a symbol, as a permanent light of Slovak history. On this tenth anniversary of the Bratislava murder, it is appropriate, I believe, to point out the fundamental principles, which led Dr. Joseph Tiso in his work for his �SLOVAKIA 3 people all the way up to the gallows and which characterized one historical period of the Slovak nation. Tiso on Politics, Nation and State Like Andrew Hlinka, Dr. Joseph Tiso left to Slovak generations no compact work about his views on Slovak national life, on their mission and on the ideological foundations of Slovak politics. Always in the middle of obstinate struggles for the preservation of his people and Slovak national existence, in which he played the foremost role since 1918, Dr. Tiso had little time to write books, so he probably postponed the task for a time when he would depart from the political arena. But this was denied hilli by the executioner. Although ideologically he formulate<l the Slovak struggles for national life, and systematically in his countless manifestations and reflections placed the foundations of and consciously developed the fundamental principles of Slovak national ideology in a manner as no one else had in his century, or in previous centuries, a systematic explanation of Tiso's views still awaits the efforts of an expert. The first step in this direction was made by Prof. Dr. Stephen Polakovic during the lifetime of Dr. Tiso, when he expertly and systematically collected in the work "Tiso's Doctrine"l the fundamental concept of Dr. Tiso relating to nation, nationalism, state, religion, and social questions. Even though the volume bears the seal of war conditions in Slovakia, it remains for us thusJar, along with the final speech of Dr. Tiso before the Bratislava Court, which was edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco2, a priceless source of knowledge of the fundamental ideas, aims and efforts of Slovak political life in the first half of this century. These two literary works are not only a source of knowing the past, but also a sum total of the fundamental directives for national and political work, about which Dr. Joseph Tiso, as if following the example of the Old Testamnt prophets, said: "In profound humility we are paying tribute to our good God for the lig}:tt of principles of the natural law, according to which we conducted ourselves in the fight for �4 SLOVAKIA independence, as well as in our work of construction. A return to the natural law can be the only foundation upon which a new world can be built, a world of contentment, order, and permanent peace"3. Placing the foundation of Slovak politics on the Natural Law, Dr. Tiso also defined the aims and the ways of Slovak politics. "Our Slovak State was not born out of hatred, but out of our great love for our homeland," proclaimed Dr. Tiso on March 16, 1939. "Let us above all else be led by this thought: no hatred toward anyone, but love, an ardent love for our State, which inspires us to work and sacrifice ... " "A practical manifestation of the Natural Law is an~ shall remain our old goal: Slovakia for the Slovaks. Slovakia in its entirety and indivisible and without reservations in the legal, cultural, economical, and social departments, so that the independent Slovak nation might be the living carrier of all power and the consumer of all that the Slovak country contains and represents." Regarding politics as a service to the nation, Dr. Tiso during his many years of political activity pleaded tha.t political factors learn to depersonalize themselves. His understanding of politics was that "the interest of the nation is the highest directive of political work;" politics is not supposed to be "medium for several individuals, who with it would conceal their own materialistic interests. Politics serves the nation." As Tiso saw it, even "the State should serve the nation, therefore, it has the right to existence only insofar as it does not threaten the interests of the nation." As far as State order is concerned, this must "be subordinated to the law of morality and law; the State must respect the rigihts of the individual, the family, society, and hold sacred the right ,o f parents to educate their children, the right of free confession; it guarantees the right of private ownership and sefeguards the peaceful coexistence of labor and capital, of employer and employee." "Not force, but law which is founded on truth," was the thesis of Dr. Joseph Tiso, and he followed it in the full �SLOVAKIA 5 sense of the word throughout his life, because he preached and believed that "no one will be mistaken who builds on the nation and always has only the interests of his nation in mind. We have ta:ken over this thesis from stirring times for the future so that we might strengthen ourselves in the old convictions that individuals retire but the nation remains, and the person, who, separated completely from his own person, stands unconditionally in the service of the nation, knows how to hold his ground and is the only one fit to lead and to speak in the name of the nation." "The politician, more than any one else, must be the guardian of the traditional values of the nation and must be the ever ready interpreter of the Natural Law in any given situation. Should any one lack the one or the other, he is not fit to be the representative of the nation, because he will either become a figure tossed about by contemporary political or social currents which has no connection with the living corpus of the nation, or else he will be a museum guardian of the nation who stands afar from contemporary routes along which life flows and on which the fate of the future of the nation is determined." "Whoever boasts that he is a loyal son of the nation, he must also ponder what he is giving to his nation. Whether an infection which causes a fever, or bacilli which cause decay and can bring the nation to the grave; or whether he contributes labor which shall forever remain in the nation as a cell of healthy social and cultural development." "A nation whose sons do not know how to bear a blow and personal sacrifices, such a nation will not get far. The nation lives, the whole lives, only by the fight and work of individuals." "Love for the nation is a religious precept, and a person sins against the Fourth Commandment who does not love his nation. He bears a stigma not only as an earthly t raitor, but also as a transgressor who does not keep the Divine Commandmants." Every loyal son of the Slovak nation, acording to Tiso, "sanctifies his nationalism with a Christian spirit, so that �ti SLOVAKIA nationalism be not a slogan or a mantle of dubious aims, but an internal motivating force to create values for the benefit of the national whole." In the Spirit of Tiso for a New Independence From the above quotations it is quite evident that the main principles of Dr. Joseph Tiso's ideology were: 1. Natural Law; 2. Love in place of hatred; 3. Right instead of violence; 4. Respect for morality; 5. Nation above the State. 6. Loyalty to traditions; 7. Personal selflessness and sacrifice of political factors; 8. Nationalism sanctified by Ohristianity; 9. Social justice; and 10. Religious tolerance. During the decades of his successful political activity, Dr. Tiso developed these ideas not only in his manifestations to the people, but also in his classically and stately styled reflections, parliamentary speeches, and presidential messages, so that the expert schooled in statecraft and sociology will have little difficulty in systematically elaborating his ideology. nr. Tiso himself indicated Christianity as the outlet of his ideas, especially the philosophy of St. Thomas4, and in the social sphere the Papal Encyclicals. On the question of nationalism Tiso said that "the symbol of Slovak nationalism is Stur"5, because "Stur's nationalism was the dynamic force in individuals whom he prompted to work and socrifice for the nation; it was the connecting link of individuals into a rock-firm whole with a united aim and a united will ... "6 A study of Dr. Tiso's manifestations reveals that he frequently tied in his talks with the spiritual-political heritage of the followers of Louis Stur, the great Slovak patriot and "father of modern Slovak nationalsm." And Tiso did this consciously to preserve the continuity of Slovak ideological-politica l development and so that the Slovaks could build on traditions. If we compare the basic ideas of Stur's political and philosophical manifestations - which are dealt with in several published works7 - with Tiso's, then the ideological structure, as well as the entire political activity of Dr. Tiso, of course, shows an entire series of preferences and varied outlines. �SLOVAKIA 7 Objectively it may already be said today that tying in with Stur and the idelogical continuity of former Slovak generations, Dr. Tiso anchors more deeply in Christian world outlook on the individual and his relation to the state, nation, family, and society. His ideology is firmly founded on the principles of modern sociology and statecraft; it has solid philosophical foundations and a strictly logical system; it emanates from an idea and stresses the primacy of spirituality, but it depends on the reality of life and respects actuality; it is the result of long years of study and political experience, drawn from daily contact with the nation and into unceasing struggle with its enemies, so that it is, as it were, forged in the fire of battles and tested in confrontation with the actual life of the nation in the phase of its political formation, but also in the phase .of struggles for its natural rights and, finally, also in the period of building up its own state. In comparison to the ideology of the Sturites, we are concerned, therefore, with an ideology whose foundations are not only broader by far, but one which was more thought out, mature and tested ·b y life. Divine Providence had allowed Dr. Joseph Tiso a life of political activity almost as long as Stur's entire life (1815-1856) and, hence, he <!ould see the ideas, which he promulgated and foT which he labored and fought, validated in national life. If we should compare Dr. Tiso as a politician and ideologue with other factors of Slovak life, then objectively it can be said that during the last 100 years there was no political factor in Slovakia who could compare with Dr. Joseph Tiso as far as preparation for political activity, working out of ideology and the concert of expressed principles with their validation unto self-immolation are concerned. If any of them did shine in theoretical expressions and plans, either fate did not grant them to measure up with reality, or they were only gleaners of grain where Dr. Joseph Tiso was the owner of fruitful fields of ideological and character wealth. Living Slovak generations will therefore hardly find a better example than Dr. Tiso, or a better ideology than �8 SLOVAKIA the one he sanctified with his blood. Anchored in eternal principles and designed for the future of the Slovak nation, it can be the most certain course for winning a new and full independence for the Slovaks. Czech chauvinism and Communist hatred did not kill the idea of Slovak indepedence by murdering Dr. Tiso. Conversely, they gave the nation more martyrs and, therefore, the idea shall win out sooner or later. REFERIDNCIDS: 1. "Tisova nauka," Dr. Stefan Polakovic, Bratislava, 1941. ~- "Dr . Joz.e f Tiso o sebe," edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J., 1952. 3. This and other quotations are taken from either one of the previous two references. 4. "All who recall our thesis that 'the nation is the substance and the state only the form' should know that is state-political formula is the practical consequence of the state•.p olitical theory Wihich is built on the foundations O'f Thomistic philosophy." SOOVAK, 1935. 5. See "Prve posolstvo" (The First Message), Ruizomberok, August 16, 1939. Already in 1936 Dr. Tiso had proclaimed: "It is this monument of Louis Stur, built in the Banovce country, that shall be the visible proof of the fact that we have progressed so far that only we, Slovak Catholics, have not forgotten our Slovak past and we pay our respects to the memory of our national awakeners even when they are Evangelicals (Lutherans), as was Stur." - SLOVAK, 1936. 6. Dr. Tiso also characterized Stiir's nationalism in this manner: "Stiir's nationalism - built on the foundation of the independent Slovak nation and the genuine Slovak language, because it acknowledges the law of God and the law nature - was the natural foundation of the life of the Slovak nation." - SLOVAK, 1936. 7. Among the most significant works are those of Professor Cfzevsky, Dr. Stephen Polakovic, Dr. Samuel S. Osusky, Profesor Rap ant, and Dr. Joseph Pauco. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The right of se1f-<leteiimination in:cluded in the .AJtlantic Charter does not carpry wliith it the right O!f any government to commit wholesale muTder or the right to make slaJVes of its own people, or of any other peoples in the world." - F. D. Roosevelt, Feb. 12, 1943. �SLOVAKIA 9 I WAS EDITOR OF PRESIDENT TISO'S NEWSPAPER JOSEPH PAUCO ( Msgr. Joseph Tiso, prelate of the Catholic Church, was president of the Slovak Republic from 1939 to 1945. The proCommunist regime of Dr. Edward Benes executed him on the gallows, April 18, 1947, after a lengthy mock trial, before which the presiding judge had declared, echoing the words of Benes, that "Tiso must hang." Dr. Pauco's article is a brief recollection of the years he spent in free Bratislava as "Tiso's" editor.) Shortly after I was appointed editor of the "SLOVAK," the official organ of the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, my secretary entered my office to announce that President. Dr. Joseph Tiso wished to see me. "Where is he?" I asked excitedly. "In my office," replied the secretary. At that time I had a visitor, whom I requested to be excused because President Tiso had arrived, but the latter was already coming through the door of my office. Overhearing my request of the visitor, the President, greeting me and shaking my hand, said: "Now, Joe, you just finish your business with your visitor. I am a citizen like anyone else." That was characteristic of Dr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slovak Republic, who always considered himself only "one of the people." When my predecessor, Dr. Aladar Kocis, handed over the editoTShip of the "SLOVAK," he reminded me that, among other things, I should visit President Tiso regularly. Dr. Joseph Tiso, he told me, wanted to be informed about what was going on in the editorial office of the largest Slovak daily, which was otherwise regarded as the official newspaper of Dr. Tiso, since he was the chairman of the entire enterprise. But Dr. Tiso did not feel the necessity of personal contacts with the editorial office because of commercial considerations. He was mainly concerned with the spirit of the enterprise. It was necessary to defend Slovak interests. He �10 was aware of the great influence of the press and, hence, fully appreciated it. As a youthful journalist I naturally welcomed the support of the President. I visited Dr. Tiso regularly once a week, and when circumstances called for it even more frequently. Of course, besides personal visi½S, there were also many phone calls between the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" and the president's palace. The editor-in-chief always had the doors to t~e president's office open to him; there was no specified time for his visits. Whenever I phoned Tiso's personal secretary, Dr. Karol Murin, that I would like to see the president, in every instance he replied that I should come over at once. If my memory does not fail me, I believe I had to wait a half-hour or a bit more only twice in three years to see Dr. Tiso; and this happened because Tiso was in conference with foreign diplomatic representatives. Entering the president's office, I usually found Dr. Tiso at his desk, going through his mail or studying various state papers, proposed legislative acts, and activities of the various branches of government or the Hlinka Party, of which he was chairman. When I greeted him, he would raise his head, remove his spectacles and reply: "Welcome, young man, welcome!" Whenever I missed a meeting with the President, for some reason other, at the very next meeting he would ask where I had been, whether I had been i_ll. During these visits there were various matters that interested me. Of these not the least interesting was to observe the effects of the visitor before me. Once it would •b e a prime minister, other times a worker from the countryside; then again some deputy, economic expert, high officer, a foreign correspondent, or a member of the Cabinet. Once in a while some one would come up with an alarming report or rumor. President Tiso excluded no one from visiting him; he listened attentively to all and in every instance did whatever he could to satisfy all comers. Whenever I met him, �SLOVAKIA 11 President Tiso usually was either in a pensive or a smiling mood. Even at times when he appeared in a serious mood, and during our convers,a tion it would seem to me that in his mind he is returning to the fresh impressions of previous visitors, yet in a short while his face would brighten up and his melodious voice would ring out in healthy laughter. President Tiso had a real sense of humor. Dr. Joseph Tiso never acted in an affected or artificial manner. Once in 1939, when he was being welcomed in Nitra, an event which I witnessed, the district official addressed Tiso as "Your Excellency." At that Time Dr. Tiso smilingly reminded him: "Without the excellency, Mr. official!" From that time on, I never heard anyone address Dr. Tiso as "His Excellency." In his study Tiso was happy to be addressed simply as "Mr. President" (Pan prezident), as he was when his parishioners called him "Reverend Deacon." Conversations with Tiso usually began with his asking about one's health, his family, and his work. He was always very much interested in the work of our editorial office. President Tiso was not often curious about details, unless it was a matter of immediate interest, like, for example, the political side of our editorial work. Furthermore there was not a single visit during which we would not touch upon the most serious objective and personal moments which influenced Slovak politics. Dr. Tiso spoke openly about individual resolutions of the Parliament, the deputies, ministers, the Germans, and in general about everything that had any influence on Slovak life and the presidential office. On occasions Dr. Tiso recalled many innovations especially of his political opponents. He criticized them unsparingly and talked about them with feelings of bitterness; his criticism was sincere at all times, whether it concerned Slovaks or foreigners. I always felt refreshed in the President's study. Usu.ally Dr. Tiso gave no directives how any article was to be written. On the other hand, however, he willingly read the �12 SLOVAKIA more delicate articles before they went to print. Even when I asked him what from the ideological standpoint we should deal with most on the pages of the "SLOVAK," he would usually reply: "Hold the line. Don't let yourself be broken. Don't be discouraged-persevere!" Nothing more and nothing less. Otherwise, however, the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" had an exemplary coworker in the person of President Tiso. His speeches, articles and messages were care-fully prepared. Dr. Tiso prepared and wrote them himself. On occasions, especially for Christmas and March 14th, the President gave us articles written in his own hand so that we might have them on time; these were usually accompanied by the remark: "Correct as you see fit." On his visits to us, he would always compliment all the workers connected with the paper, saying: "Fine work, men; keep up the good work; give the best that's in you!" I'll conclude with what I had mentioned at the beginning: the visits of President Tiso to the editorial office of the "SLOVAK." He came among us regularly. When he visited us the first time, all of us were very surprised that he was accompanied only by his personal secretary. No secret, no public police came with him; none in or outside the building; and none in his auto. On occasions he visited us coming on foot alone, without a bodyguard. That was Tiso: his people did not fear him, and he did not fear his people. No man in Slovakia was more revered and loved than was Tiso. I attended many gatherings which Dr. Tiso addressed; I traveled with him. Not once did he have more than one person accompany him. Not to guard him, but simply to accompany him. President Tiso moved about freely and without fear in Bratislava and everywhere in Slovakia, just as he did at the altar where he daily said the Holy Mass to his Divine Master. • • • REOOMMENDED $3.00; SLOVAK FOR (the set); "!Ih-obailr's "SLOVAK DE)SSONS" BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Juircha.k BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 English-Sl01Va:k Dictionary" $4.00 ; (iHroba.k) $3.50. �SLOVAKIA 13 EIGHT FATAL DAYS IN THE LIFE OF DR. JOSEPH TISO KAROL MURiN (The author of this article was the personal secretary of President Dr. Joseph Tiso from 1938 until Tiso's tragic end in 1947. At the present time Dr. Karol Murin is on the profes• sorial staff of Montreal University.) On April 8, 1945, just a month before the conclusion of World War II in the West, at President Tiso's request, I went to Munich to ask for an audience with His Eminence Cardinal Faulhaber. The reason was that I was to inform the Cardinal of Monsignor Tiso's arrivel in Kremsmlinster and petition him to graciously do what he could to protect the President of Slovakia. Munich at that time was a shambles. The Cardinal received me in the afternoon; his residence was damaged extensively by bombs and shells. After waiting for a moment in a small, poorly furnished room, Cardinal Faulhaber made his appearance, the burdens of the war clearly apparent on his features. After the customary Slovak greeting "Laudetur ... ," I went on one knee before him, kissed his ring, and then presented myself. The Cardinal replied to the greeting and asked me to be seated. After a few introductory words, I told him the purpose of my visit. I must admit that I did expect several questions. During the war years it had become the custom to classify people only into two categories: the democrats on the one side, and the nazis and fascists on the other. No one asked why or how a person got to be on the one or the other side, or even what one did. According to that attitude, which excluded all colors between black and white, Stalin and the bolsheviks were regarded as democrats, while Dr. Tiso was supposed to be a nazi; Benes, despite his pro-Soviet and evident bolshevizing tendencies and the fact that he was responsible for the death of thousands of people, was regarded as a "moral" democrat, while Dr. Tiso, despite his prayers and many acts of kindness and his great love for �14 SLOV.AlKIA his Slovak people, or . just because of this, was regarded as a criminal. Cardinal Faulhaber, however, never did belong among the people who measured morality according to their own interest and evaluated their neighbor and acknowledged his right to life only according to the benefit they might reap from him. He was accustomed to judge and measure 9,ccording to the eternal and unchangeable principles of 8hrist. That is why he had become the symbol of the fight against nazi blunders, and the world regarded him highly for it. "I know about your President," began Cardinal Faulhaber, "and I know that he defended the Christian Faith in Slovakia." From what he further said, it was evident that he was well-informed about Slovakia and especially about the activity of President Tiso. He immediately set himself to the task of doing what he could to secure the safety of Tiso in the face of the surge of passions resulting for the most part from the false information propagated by Dr. Edward Benes. The three alternatives mentioned by the Cardinal are proof of his love for President Tiso : 1. He invited the President to his residence; 2. he offered as a temporary abode for President Tiso the Capuchin monastery at Alt Otting; or, 3. the Scheyrn monastery. Both monasteries were in the Freising-Munich Archdiocese which Cardinal Faulhaber administered. According to circumstances, as they might develop in regard to Tiso, the Slovak President was free to resort to the alternative most favorable to him. My audience with Cardinal Faulhaber lasted two hours. He told me about what especially worried him and made him fearful about the future: about the plans formulated by fanatics for the last days of the war, about the night of the long knives ("Nacht der langen Messer"), during which they intended to liquidate revered and respected Catholic priests and laity. The last half hour of my visit I spent with the Cardinal in his study. Looking over a map of Bavaria, His Eminence compared the advantages and disadvantages uf �SLOVAKIA 15 the two monasteries; the Scheyrn Monastery was more advantageous, except, of course, if the "night of the long knives" should be realized. At the end of my visit I thanked Cardinal Faulhaber sincerely for the time he gave me, asked for his blessing, and departed after His Eminence bade me Godspeed. President Tiso was happy to hear my report about my visit to Cardinal Faulhaber after I returned to Kremsmtiunster. In no time at all, President Tiso decided to accept the hospitality of the Archbishop's palace only as a last resort; he did not wish to burden one of the outstanding Princes of the Church with the cares and troubles of his Slovak people and his own person, because he was aware of the fact that the saintly Cardinal was greatly burdened by the troubles of his own German people. At the beginning of May, 1945, when Dr. Joseph Tiso left Kremsmtinster for the West, he was not definitely certain whether he would seek refuge at Alt Otting or Scheyrn. In any event, however, he decided to first stop at Alt Otting. On the first leg of his journey, President Tiso was supposed to leave a written or oral message for me at the rectory of the Bavarian community of Stammham. I set out after President Tiso about two weeks later, stopping first at Stammham, where the pastor told mf': that I would find the person I was seeking at the first place we had talked about. That same afternoon I met with President Tiso in the monastery at Alt Otting. My first task was to again make contact with Cardinal Faulhaber. Since the war had just ended in the West, everything was chaos and confusion; outside the military, there was no public transportation to speak of; and no one was permitted to travel even short distances without a permit. After about a week in Alt Otting, which, by the way, is one of the most famous of pilgrimage cities, I was quite fortunate in getting to Munich. The Cardinal received me shortly after I was nounced. He was in ·b etter spirits than he had been April 8th: the "night of the long knives," thank God, not come about! In due time the Cardinal told me of anon did his �16 SLOV.A.I{JA plan to help President Tiso: he wanted to secure a plane to take Tiso to the Vatican. However, before he could begin working out his plan, the Cardinal said, he wanted to get the assent of the Papal Nuncio. During the entire war, the Nuncio for Germany was Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo. Cardinal Faulhaber asked me to look him up as soon as possible and present his desire to help Dr. Joseph Tiso to him, reckoning also with help to transport Tiso to the Vatican. In the Cardinal's name I was to ask His Excellency whether he agreed with his step. At that time the Papal Nuncio, His Excellency Cesare Orsenigo, resided in Eichstatt in northern Bavaria. To get to him by auto I needed gasoline and to get gasoline I had to see the American authorities. Aware of this, Cardinal Faulhaber wrote a letter telling whoever it may concern that I was his courier, carrying mail and reports from the Cardinal to the Papal Nuncio. For a longer time the Cardinal could not send mail to the Nuncio, so he really appreciated this opportunity to do so. Besides that Cardinal Faulhaber gave me a general recommendat ion which I could use as I thought best. The next day I travelled by auto to Eichstatt. Below the portals to the Archbishop's palace, by sheer accident, I met with a group of four Slovaks, who had come by auto. After hearty handshakes and embraces, all gratefully accompanied me on my journey. Archbishop Orsenigo received me warmly. After I gave him the mail from Cardinal Faulhaber, he listened with great interest to my report about the fate of Preside,1t Tiso. To the Cardinal's question he replied thusly: "Tell His Eminence that I not only agree that he do everything possible in his power to save Dr. Tiso, but that I most ardently beg him to do so." Then the Archbishop said that he was completely out of contact with the world, adding that a certain member of the Swiss diplomatic corps in Berlin is supposed to visit him this same afternoon and take his first mail in a long time to the Vatican. He graciously offered to be of service if I had anything to send outside the borders of Germany. �SLOVAKIA 17 As soon as Cardinal Faulhaber had the Nuncio's reply, he immediately wrote a letter to the Vatican in which he told of his intention to transport Dr. Tiso by plane to the Vatican. His greatest worry was how to send the letter. Besides American planes only an accidental diplomat, who saved his petrol well, could be considered. In about a week I was supposed to return for further reports and advice. After eight days, I visited Cardinal Faulhaber again, who greeted me and then told me of the unfortunate thing tkat had happened. He was almost in tears. The Cardinal told me that the day after he had written the letter to the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he had secured a way of getting the letter to the Vatican. According to a promise made to the Cardinal by a person unknown to me, this person was supposed to take the letter before his departure from Munich. But the day before my last visit to Cardinal Faulhaber, when he asked his chancery whether there was any reply from the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he learned to his utter sorrow that the letter was still in his palace, the person who promised to deliver it to the Vatican evidently forgetting to pick it up. This unexpected delay worried the Cardinal and his concern was great, as if he had a foreboding that so very much depended on those eight days. After giving vent to his great disappointment, Cardinal Faulhaber again gave me his blessing and asked me to return in a week. I did return, but only after over two years. After my last visit to the Cardinal, we learned about the arrest of the members of the Slovak Government in Kremsmlinster. President Tiso asked for reports about what had happened there. My request for a travel permit into Upper Austria lay on the desk of the CIC in Alt btting for several days. Fate came into play. With the CIC in Alt btting there collaborated a man by the name of Spigler who was originally from Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. When he came upon my name, Spigler immediately came to the monastery and forbade me to leave the building. After two days he took me to jail. During my confinement in the monastery, it became �18 SLOVAKIA quite evident that this Bratislava agent, full of personal resentment, found out that President Tiso was in the monastery. After my arrest President Tiso wrote to Cardinal Faulhaber, respectfully requesting His Eminence to notify the American authorities that he was staying in the monastery and that he use his influence to set me free, as well as that he c-o ntinue to give consideration to his own case. The Capuchin Provincial delivered the President's letter to Cardinal Faulhaber. In the meantime, I was transferred to a concentration camp where frightful conditions prevailed. One hot and sultry afternoon, at the beginning of June, 1945, a jeep pulled up before the barbed-wire camp. I became numb when I sighted President Tiso in it. It was at this point that my pilgrimage to various concentrati0!1 camps with President Tiso began, the tour which finally ended in the Bratislava jail. We felt the benefiscence of good Cardinal Faulhaber once again in the concentration camp at Garmisch Partenkirchen. It was on his initiative that the events, which had taken place during the reception of our group in this camp, were investigated. The Cardinal's effort to help Dr. Joseph Tiso did not result in success. Nevertheless, the Slovaks will never forget that Cardinal Faulhaber, now deceased, really did try to save Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the Slovak Republic . • • • WHO SAID IT? "W:t"th eq'll!al enlthusfasm we are today manifesting for the ideaJls of our, and onliy our, Owchoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn . . . . T.he unreseJ:1ved alliance with Oll!r Eastern ncighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, bUft also our friend!ly coot'acts wirtih the rest ,of tlhe world, especiaUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeUng of oerlainty that no mrutter what might h!appen a!broad, O'Ur ,inJternatiiona1 positt'ion is £i:nm rund we need not fea1r that we can come uipon new d'aingera aind dlnifiou[ties." ([)r. Joseph Lettrich, Vice,Ohairm.an of the Exem.rt.ive Oommittee of the "Coundl of Free Czechoslov.aJkia,'' CAIS, November 18, 1947). �SLOVAKIA 19 SLOVAKIA: TRIAL OF DR. JOSEPH TISO (Under previous order of the House, the Hon. Ray J . Madden from Indiana, was recognized for 20 minutes to make the following address on the floor of the House of Representatives, March 31, 1947): Mr. Speaker, America and all liberty-loving nations should at this time concentrate against international situations which might bring about war in the future. I have, on several occasions, stated on the floor of Congress that the application of the principles of the Atlantic Charter is our greatest antidote for future peace. Self-government, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion is essential for smaller countries as it is for th~ large nations. Our Nation, during World War II, spent billions of dollars and sacrificed in lives and casualties to preserve the above principles in order to insure liberty and fnture peace. Since VJ-day, aggression and tyranny has again launched in certain areas of Europe. The latest example of persecution, unfair trial, and threatened execution for political belief is that of Dr. Joseph Tiso, former President of the Interim Republic of Slovakia. Dr. Tiso has been acclaimed a hero in the eyes of nearly all the people of Slovakia and the prevailing majority of Americans of Slovak ancestry. My attention has been called to the fact that over 80 percent of the Slovak American fraternal organizations have forthrightly declared themselves to be of the opinion that Tiso was a hero in the defense of the best interests of the Slovak people. During his presidency, Slovakia thrived, progressed, and developed internally more than it had during any five years of the existence of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The communistic control now over the country of Slovakia will execute Dr. Tiso, a political prisoner, unless our Government intervenes. This communistic control is inflicted upon the people of Slovakia in spite of the fact that the election of May 26, 1946, gave over 64 percent of the total vote cast against the present government. The press is likewise controlled, at least to the extent that the newspaper cannot publish what they think. This is evidenced in the fact that four American newspapers have �20 SLOVAKIA been barred in Slovakia. The present communistic government will brook no freedom of political thought; though the people voted for Christian democracy, they received totalitarian communism. The archbishop of Slovakia testified at the trial of Dr. Tiso. He is and has been a respected member not only of the hierarchy of Czecho-Slovakia, but of the official family of Czecho-Slovakia, including its President Edward Benes. Appearing as a witness for Dr. Tiso, the archbishop testified that: Tiso acted and worked in the interest of Slovakia and was never a traitor, and that his electeion as President of Slovakia was the will of 90 percent of the Slovaks at that time and was acclaimed by the bishops, priests, and ministers of both the Catholic and Protestant churches. It is apparent that Czecho-Slovakia has been re-created with the aid of Moscow and that Moscow will undoubtedly demand the extinction of Slovak national leaders of ability and high intelelct. The ways of the Communists are devious and it behooves us to understand more of the Slovak situation. In the meantime, the least that freedom loving nations can ask is that the so-called peoples courts in the Communist-dominated countries in eastern Europe, refrain from any further political executions or from liquidating political opposition by long-term imprisonment as in the case of Archbishop Stepinac. All of this adds up to the price we will have to pay to aid in the establishing of true democracy in the countries of eastern Europe to insure world peace. In supporting President Truman's international program, we cannot be unmindful of what is happening throughout this region in Europe, comprising over 100,000,000 Christians who have nothing in common with communism. We have heard of political executions, imprisonment, and banishment of outstanding citizens in Poland, Lithuania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and other small countries. Thousands of brave Polish soldiers who fought to stamp out fascism are now prohibited from returning to their native Poland by a communistic controlled government. Americans are asking the question "do we not have at least a moral obli- �SLOVAKIA 21 gation to veice our protest against such trials and executions?" The judge who presided at the trial of Dr. Tiso, previous to the trial, vowed personal vengeance on Tiso and was provided this opportunity by being placed in charge ef the case. These facts, though not appearing in the American press releases, are not disputed. Almost uninimously, the people of Slovak descent in America, are rising in protest to the impending execution of Dr. Tiso. I ask the Members of Congress to join with me in protesting this unjust conviction by interceding with President Truman and Secretary Marshall to use their good offices to prevent this injustice. We might as well apply the words of the Honorable Judge Robert H. Jackson: All experience teaches that there are certain things you cannot do under guise of judicial trial. * * * You must put no man on trial before anything that is called a court, if you are not prepared to establish his personal guilt * * * If you are determined to execute a man in any case, there is no occasion for trial. The world yields no respect to courts that are merely organized to convict. - Congressional Record. • ON TISO'S BEHALF: • • PLEA OF THE COUNCIL OF SLOVAK BISHOPS To the Presidium of the Slovak National Council in Bratislava: The Catholic Episcopal Council of Slovakia, in past years, has more frequently turned to appropriate governmental offices in the interest of those who were suffering, were imprisoned or persecuted - without regard to whetlier Catholics or non-Catholics were concerned. The example of the Divine Samaritan and His positive command prompted and encouraged us to raise our protective voice in the interests of the people who were suffering on account of political or racial reasons and we did that at a time when we could expect various humiliations in return. �22 SLOVAKIA This noblest Model in all history and His commandment, expressed in the Gospel, we bear in mind even now, when we respectfully commend to Your graciousness the fate of the former President Dr. Joseph Tiso. We do this not only because a Catholic priest is concerned, but also because the solution of his personal problem shall have a far-reaching influence on the thinking and behavior of a part of the Slovak nation in respect to the renovated Czecho- Slovak Republic and its representatives. Furthermore, we are prompted to take this step also by the generally known actuality, which is conceded by all objective critics, that Dr. Joseph Tiso always was a zealous priest, of a virtuous life. In his extensive activity he tried to work for the good of the whole, and personally did not enrich himself. The administration of justice belongs among the most difficult tasks of state power. Experience proves that this delicate task is aggravated when the judgment of political transgressions is concerned. History tells us how many fatal mistakes were made during political trials - and this results from the delicate task of impartially judging the activities of a political opponent. So, it is no rarity that after rendering severe verdicts in political trials, sooner or later a call for their revision was made. In judging the activity especially of a political factor his intentions also should be given · consideration. The majority of the Slovak nation is convinced with us that the intentions of Dr. Joseph Tiso while performing public functions were the best. Certainly some mistakes were made and the Catholic Bishops of Slovakia did not fail to bring these to his attention. However, here we must mention the generally known reality that even the most clever political factors frequently made serious mistakes. Nevertheless an unbiased observer - whether a contemporary or historian - can deduce an over-all judgment only when he evaluates also the good and positive things they did. And this thesis often outweighs the mistakes which they made in their weakness. �S LOVAKIA 23 It will be pertinent to the matter at hand to shed some light also from another viewpoint on the mistakes which are ascribed to Dr. Joseph Tiso. We respectfully point out at least some of the circumstances. After the most recent announcements of the present governmental factors even the 2ilina events of October, 1938, are presented in a different light than that shed by the one-sided propaganda to persuade the public; nay, even in the press it was demonstrated that in these political changes practically all Slovak political parties had participated. Here it is necessary to recall also the very important document which has just now been made public during the Nuremberg trials; we mean the letter of the ruler of the Hungarian realm sent to Berlin in March 13, 1939. This weighty circumstance gives an altogether different significance to the March 14, 1939, decision of Dr. Joseph Tiso and the other political factors of that time. One should think about what would have happened with the Slovak nation if the plan of Horthy had succeeded? We also know that after the issuance of anti-Jewish regulations, Dr. Joseph Tiso did want to resign from the presidency. That he did not do so happened because he tried to hamper and ameliorate the effects of those provisions, as well as to prevent a greater evil. It is worthy of consideration that what the ruler of the larger and more independent Hungary could not prevent in his country Dr. Joseph Tiso could not prevent in Slovakia. After considering all the circumstances after the passage of time, even other pilloried political mistakes - such as the war in the east, the events of August 29, 1944 can be judged otherwise than the manner in which it is done by a one-sided propaganda. The entire Slovak public is following the developments of events around Dr. Joseph Tiso with attention and in its majority is taking a negative stand towards those efforts which would incite hatred against his person. Thereby the unfortunate splintering of the nation is increased when unity of all forces is so greatly desired for the important �24 SLOVAKIA work of construction. It will be to the credit of the farsightedness of the State and will serve the peace of the nation, if the case of Dr. Joseph Tiso is solved in a cautious way and not with merciless hardness. The above thoughts have prompted us to respectfully submit our plea for your gracious consideration and favorable decision. With an expression of profound respect: (Signatures) : Dr. Karol Kmefko, Archbishop-Bishop of Nitra; Jozef Carsky, Bishop-Apostolic Administrator; Dr. Andrej Skraltik, Bishop on Banska Bystrica; Dr. Jozef Tomanocy; Dr. Karol Jantausch; Dr. Eduard Necsey, ordaining Bishop. Bratislava, January 8, 1946. • • • HERO AND PATRIOT OF SLOVAKIA The smaller nations have been the marytrs in tlte maelstrom that evil men made out of Europe in the last decade. Changing fortunes of war often presented a double crown of martyrdom. Honest men in these minor states often found it difficult to see where the path of honor lay, but once their conscience revealed the way they remained steadfast in what they believed their sacred duty. Slovakia has presented such a puzzling picture. The Slovaks had long sought and had long been denied their independence. When the moment dawned for freedom before the last war, there is no doubt that the patriots of that land felt that their long-deferred ambitions had been realized. There was outside wonder at the auspices under which freedom came but there can be no question about the sincerity of the Slovak patriots who meant to use their new prerogatives solely for the good of Slovakia. Chief among these was Monsignor Joseph Tiso who was elected president of the new republic. The war's outcome threw Slovakia as part of the old Czecho-Slovakian state into the Red orbit. Monsignor Tiso was placed on trial for treason. It could not be proved that he was a traitor to Slovakia for the simple reason that he never was a traitor to Slovakia. But that did not prevent �SLOVAKIA 25 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland, � 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 1957, Vol. 7 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 22), March 1957.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 23), June 1957.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 24-25), September-December 1957.</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 1957 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 SLOV AKIA PubHshed VOL. VII quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1957 NO. 1 (22) THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF DR. JOSEPH TISO'S EXECUTION JOSEPH KIRSCHBAUM When Monsignor Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of thewartime Slovak Republic, was executed on the gallows on April 18, 1947, a victim of Communist and Czech vengeance, with the assistance of the adherents of Czecho-Communist collaboration most of whom are today living in exile, the Vatican broadcast, commenting on the reaction of the world press to Tiso's murder, said: "As a martyr of his love for his country, Dr. Tiso-who finally died in a very nice manner and as a priest internally very dignified, even though the manner of putting him to death was not befitting a priest-shall continue to live in the Catholic Slovak nation. Tendencious articles in the world press cannot change this fact." Ten years later, it is not necessary to prove the truthfulness of that forecast. Shortly after the first President of the Slovak Republic was surrendered to his vengeful political opponents, there resounded in the American and world press so many manifestations of sympathy, admiration, and respect for Dr. Joseph Tiso, as had been tendered no Slovak in the thousand-year-old stirring history of the Slovak people. Verily, Dr. Tiso outgrew the Slovak framework and "continues to live today" not only in the hearts of his Slovak people, but in the hearts of millions of people who love truth and freedom. Slovakia and the Slovak nation still belongs to the world which did not succumb to Communism, to the world which, so to speak, is personified in Dr. Tiso and his fate. And many people even here on the American continent today see in Tiso the first great victim of Communism in the attack on the civilized world. With decent and intelligent people, the name of Tiso has 2 SLOVAKIA become the key to sympathy for and frequently also to the knowledge of Slovakia and our fight and destiny. In this unusual turn of world public opinion, it is interesting to recall what Dr. Joseph Tiso said when he was asked by the so-called National Court in Bratislava why he had left Slovakia. Tiso at that time had replied: "I left Slovakia, because I wished to make the claims of the Slovak nation to its own way of life better known and more understandable to the Western powers." Of course, we know that the Western powers did not allow the living Tiso to do this, but we also have knowledge that they did not know, and still do not know, how to prevent the dead Tiso from fulfilling his mission. 'Dhe political murder, of which Dr. Tiso was the victim, did not bring about a change of heart only in alien circles, in circles frequently unfavorable to Slovakia and disinterested in the fate of Slovak nation. The crime committed against Dr. Tiso has stirred the conscience and awakened from national lethargy and indifference the Slovaks themselves, and especially the Slovaks beyond the borders of Slovakia who could not partake of the blessings of Slovak independence. If at the present time, outside the borders of Slovakia, the absolute majority of informed Slovaks is again in the fight for the sacred Slovak cause of freedom and independence, without any reservations whatsoever, this is due in a large measure to the death of Tiso, the hevo and martyr of the 'Slovak nation. Today there is not a single country in the free world, where the Slovaks do not annually commemorate March 14, 1939, Slovak Independence Day, and the Slovak Day of Infamy, April 18, 1947-the day that the Benes Czechs-Czech Socialists and Communists- shamefully put Dr. Tiso to death on the gallows. And in all these manifestations and celebrations, the personality, heroic fight and martyr's death of President Dr. Joseph Tiso stand out pre-eminently as a symbol, as a permanent light of Slovak history. On this tenth anniversary of the Bratislava murder, it is appropriate, I believe, to point out the fundamental principles, which led Dr. Joseph Tiso in his work for his SLOVAKIA 3 people all the way up to the gallows and which characterized one historical period of the Slovak nation. Tiso on Politics, Nation and State Like Andrew Hlinka, Dr. Joseph Tiso left to Slovak generations no compact work about his views on Slovak national life, on their mission and on the ideological foundations of Slovak politics. Always in the middle of obstinate struggles for the preservation of his people and Slovak national existence, in which he played the foremost role since 1918, Dr. Tiso had little time to write books, so he probably postponed the task for a time when he would depart from the political arena. But this was denied hilli by the executioner. Although ideologically he formulate<l the Slovak struggles for national life, and systematically in his countless manifestations and reflections placed the foundations of and consciously developed the fundamental principles of Slovak national ideology in a manner as no one else had in his century, or in previous centuries, a systematic explanation of Tiso's views still awaits the efforts of an expert. The first step in this direction was made by Prof. Dr. Stephen Polakovic during the lifetime of Dr. Tiso, when he expertly and systematically collected in the work "Tiso's Doctrine"l the fundamental concept of Dr. Tiso relating to nation, nationalism, state, religion, and social questions. Even though the volume bears the seal of war conditions in Slovakia, it remains for us thusJar, along with the final speech of Dr. Tiso before the Bratislava Court, which was edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco2, a priceless source of knowledge of the fundamental ideas, aims and efforts of Slovak political life in the first half of this century. These two literary works are not only a source of knowing the past, but also a sum total of the fundamental directives for national and political work, about which Dr. Joseph Tiso, as if following the example of the Old Testamnt prophets, said: "In profound humility we are paying tribute to our good God for the lig}:tt of principles of the natural law, according to which we conducted ourselves in the fight for 4 SLOVAKIA independence, as well as in our work of construction. A return to the natural law can be the only foundation upon which a new world can be built, a world of contentment, order, and permanent peace"3. Placing the foundation of Slovak politics on the Natural Law, Dr. Tiso also defined the aims and the ways of Slovak politics. "Our Slovak State was not born out of hatred, but out of our great love for our homeland," proclaimed Dr. Tiso on March 16, 1939. "Let us above all else be led by this thought: no hatred toward anyone, but love, an ardent love for our State, which inspires us to work and sacrifice ... " "A practical manifestation of the Natural Law is an~ shall remain our old goal: Slovakia for the Slovaks. Slovakia in its entirety and indivisible and without reservations in the legal, cultural, economical, and social departments, so that the independent Slovak nation might be the living carrier of all power and the consumer of all that the Slovak country contains and represents." Regarding politics as a service to the nation, Dr. Tiso during his many years of political activity pleaded tha.t political factors learn to depersonalize themselves. His understanding of politics was that "the interest of the nation is the highest directive of political work;" politics is not supposed to be "medium for several individuals, who with it would conceal their own materialistic interests. Politics serves the nation." As Tiso saw it, even "the State should serve the nation, therefore, it has the right to existence only insofar as it does not threaten the interests of the nation." As far as State order is concerned, this must "be subordinated to the law of morality and law; the State must respect the rigihts of the individual, the family, society, and hold sacred the right ,o f parents to educate their children, the right of free confession; it guarantees the right of private ownership and sefeguards the peaceful coexistence of labor and capital, of employer and employee." "Not force, but law which is founded on truth," was the thesis of Dr. Joseph Tiso, and he followed it in the full SLOVAKIA 5 sense of the word throughout his life, because he preached and believed that "no one will be mistaken who builds on the nation and always has only the interests of his nation in mind. We have ta:ken over this thesis from stirring times for the future so that we might strengthen ourselves in the old convictions that individuals retire but the nation remains, and the person, who, separated completely from his own person, stands unconditionally in the service of the nation, knows how to hold his ground and is the only one fit to lead and to speak in the name of the nation." "The politician, more than any one else, must be the guardian of the traditional values of the nation and must be the ever ready interpreter of the Natural Law in any given situation. Should any one lack the one or the other, he is not fit to be the representative of the nation, because he will either become a figure tossed about by contemporary political or social currents which has no connection with the living corpus of the nation, or else he will be a museum guardian of the nation who stands afar from contemporary routes along which life flows and on which the fate of the future of the nation is determined." "Whoever boasts that he is a loyal son of the nation, he must also ponder what he is giving to his nation. Whether an infection which causes a fever, or bacilli which cause decay and can bring the nation to the grave; or whether he contributes labor which shall forever remain in the nation as a cell of healthy social and cultural development." "A nation whose sons do not know how to bear a blow and personal sacrifices, such a nation will not get far. The nation lives, the whole lives, only by the fight and work of individuals." "Love for the nation is a religious precept, and a person sins against the Fourth Commandment who does not love his nation. He bears a stigma not only as an earthly t raitor, but also as a transgressor who does not keep the Divine Commandmants." Every loyal son of the Slovak nation, acording to Tiso, "sanctifies his nationalism with a Christian spirit, so that ti SLOVAKIA nationalism be not a slogan or a mantle of dubious aims, but an internal motivating force to create values for the benefit of the national whole." In the Spirit of Tiso for a New Independence From the above quotations it is quite evident that the main principles of Dr. Joseph Tiso's ideology were: 1. Natural Law; 2. Love in place of hatred; 3. Right instead of violence; 4. Respect for morality; 5. Nation above the State. 6. Loyalty to traditions; 7. Personal selflessness and sacrifice of political factors; 8. Nationalism sanctified by Ohristianity; 9. Social justice; and 10. Religious tolerance. During the decades of his successful political activity, Dr. Tiso developed these ideas not only in his manifestations to the people, but also in his classically and stately styled reflections, parliamentary speeches, and presidential messages, so that the expert schooled in statecraft and sociology will have little difficulty in systematically elaborating his ideology. nr. Tiso himself indicated Christianity as the outlet of his ideas, especially the philosophy of St. Thomas4, and in the social sphere the Papal Encyclicals. On the question of nationalism Tiso said that "the symbol of Slovak nationalism is Stur"5, because "Stur's nationalism was the dynamic force in individuals whom he prompted to work and socrifice for the nation; it was the connecting link of individuals into a rock-firm whole with a united aim and a united will ... "6 A study of Dr. Tiso's manifestations reveals that he frequently tied in his talks with the spiritual-political heritage of the followers of Louis Stur, the great Slovak patriot and "father of modern Slovak nationalsm." And Tiso did this consciously to preserve the continuity of Slovak ideological-politica l development and so that the Slovaks could build on traditions. If we compare the basic ideas of Stur's political and philosophical manifestations - which are dealt with in several published works7 - with Tiso's, then the ideological structure, as well as the entire political activity of Dr. Tiso, of course, shows an entire series of preferences and varied outlines. SLOVAKIA 7 Objectively it may already be said today that tying in with Stur and the idelogical continuity of former Slovak generations, Dr. Tiso anchors more deeply in Christian world outlook on the individual and his relation to the state, nation, family, and society. His ideology is firmly founded on the principles of modern sociology and statecraft; it has solid philosophical foundations and a strictly logical system; it emanates from an idea and stresses the primacy of spirituality, but it depends on the reality of life and respects actuality; it is the result of long years of study and political experience, drawn from daily contact with the nation and into unceasing struggle with its enemies, so that it is, as it were, forged in the fire of battles and tested in confrontation with the actual life of the nation in the phase of its political formation, but also in the phase .of struggles for its natural rights and, finally, also in the period of building up its own state. In comparison to the ideology of the Sturites, we are concerned, therefore, with an ideology whose foundations are not only broader by far, but one which was more thought out, mature and tested ·b y life. Divine Providence had allowed Dr. Joseph Tiso a life of political activity almost as long as Stur's entire life (1815-1856) and, hence, he <!ould see the ideas, which he promulgated and foT which he labored and fought, validated in national life. If we should compare Dr. Tiso as a politician and ideologue with other factors of Slovak life, then objectively it can be said that during the last 100 years there was no political factor in Slovakia who could compare with Dr. Joseph Tiso as far as preparation for political activity, working out of ideology and the concert of expressed principles with their validation unto self-immolation are concerned. If any of them did shine in theoretical expressions and plans, either fate did not grant them to measure up with reality, or they were only gleaners of grain where Dr. Joseph Tiso was the owner of fruitful fields of ideological and character wealth. Living Slovak generations will therefore hardly find a better example than Dr. Tiso, or a better ideology than 8 SLOVAKIA the one he sanctified with his blood. Anchored in eternal principles and designed for the future of the Slovak nation, it can be the most certain course for winning a new and full independence for the Slovaks. Czech chauvinism and Communist hatred did not kill the idea of Slovak indepedence by murdering Dr. Tiso. Conversely, they gave the nation more martyrs and, therefore, the idea shall win out sooner or later. REFERIDNCIDS: 1. "Tisova nauka," Dr. Stefan Polakovic, Bratislava, 1941. ~- "Dr . Joz.e f Tiso o sebe," edited by Dr. Joseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J., 1952. 3. This and other quotations are taken from either one of the previous two references. 4. "All who recall our thesis that 'the nation is the substance and the state only the form' should know that is state-political formula is the practical consequence of the state•.p olitical theory Wihich is built on the foundations O'f Thomistic philosophy." SOOVAK, 1935. 5. See "Prve posolstvo" (The First Message), Ruizomberok, August 16, 1939. Already in 1936 Dr. Tiso had proclaimed: "It is this monument of Louis Stur, built in the Banovce country, that shall be the visible proof of the fact that we have progressed so far that only we, Slovak Catholics, have not forgotten our Slovak past and we pay our respects to the memory of our national awakeners even when they are Evangelicals (Lutherans), as was Stur." - SLOVAK, 1936. 6. Dr. Tiso also characterized Stiir's nationalism in this manner: "Stiir's nationalism - built on the foundation of the independent Slovak nation and the genuine Slovak language, because it acknowledges the law of God and the law nature - was the natural foundation of the life of the Slovak nation." - SLOVAK, 1936. 7. Among the most significant works are those of Professor Cfzevsky, Dr. Stephen Polakovic, Dr. Samuel S. Osusky, Profesor Rap ant, and Dr. Joseph Pauco. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The right of se1f-<leteiimination in:cluded in the .AJtlantic Charter does not carpry wliith it the right O!f any government to commit wholesale muTder or the right to make slaJVes of its own people, or of any other peoples in the world." - F. D. Roosevelt, Feb. 12, 1943. SLOVAKIA 9 I WAS EDITOR OF PRESIDENT TISO'S NEWSPAPER JOSEPH PAUCO ( Msgr. Joseph Tiso, prelate of the Catholic Church, was president of the Slovak Republic from 1939 to 1945. The proCommunist regime of Dr. Edward Benes executed him on the gallows, April 18, 1947, after a lengthy mock trial, before which the presiding judge had declared, echoing the words of Benes, that "Tiso must hang." Dr. Pauco's article is a brief recollection of the years he spent in free Bratislava as "Tiso's" editor.) Shortly after I was appointed editor of the "SLOVAK," the official organ of the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, my secretary entered my office to announce that President. Dr. Joseph Tiso wished to see me. "Where is he?" I asked excitedly. "In my office," replied the secretary. At that time I had a visitor, whom I requested to be excused because President Tiso had arrived, but the latter was already coming through the door of my office. Overhearing my request of the visitor, the President, greeting me and shaking my hand, said: "Now, Joe, you just finish your business with your visitor. I am a citizen like anyone else." That was characteristic of Dr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slovak Republic, who always considered himself only "one of the people." When my predecessor, Dr. Aladar Kocis, handed over the editoTShip of the "SLOVAK," he reminded me that, among other things, I should visit President Tiso regularly. Dr. Joseph Tiso, he told me, wanted to be informed about what was going on in the editorial office of the largest Slovak daily, which was otherwise regarded as the official newspaper of Dr. Tiso, since he was the chairman of the entire enterprise. But Dr. Tiso did not feel the necessity of personal contacts with the editorial office because of commercial considerations. He was mainly concerned with the spirit of the enterprise. It was necessary to defend Slovak interests. He 10 was aware of the great influence of the press and, hence, fully appreciated it. As a youthful journalist I naturally welcomed the support of the President. I visited Dr. Tiso regularly once a week, and when circumstances called for it even more frequently. Of course, besides personal visi½S, there were also many phone calls between the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" and the president's palace. The editor-in-chief always had the doors to t~e president's office open to him; there was no specified time for his visits. Whenever I phoned Tiso's personal secretary, Dr. Karol Murin, that I would like to see the president, in every instance he replied that I should come over at once. If my memory does not fail me, I believe I had to wait a half-hour or a bit more only twice in three years to see Dr. Tiso; and this happened because Tiso was in conference with foreign diplomatic representatives. Entering the president's office, I usually found Dr. Tiso at his desk, going through his mail or studying various state papers, proposed legislative acts, and activities of the various branches of government or the Hlinka Party, of which he was chairman. When I greeted him, he would raise his head, remove his spectacles and reply: "Welcome, young man, welcome!" Whenever I missed a meeting with the President, for some reason other, at the very next meeting he would ask where I had been, whether I had been i_ll. During these visits there were various matters that interested me. Of these not the least interesting was to observe the effects of the visitor before me. Once it would •b e a prime minister, other times a worker from the countryside; then again some deputy, economic expert, high officer, a foreign correspondent, or a member of the Cabinet. Once in a while some one would come up with an alarming report or rumor. President Tiso excluded no one from visiting him; he listened attentively to all and in every instance did whatever he could to satisfy all comers. Whenever I met him, SLOVAKIA 11 President Tiso usually was either in a pensive or a smiling mood. Even at times when he appeared in a serious mood, and during our convers,a tion it would seem to me that in his mind he is returning to the fresh impressions of previous visitors, yet in a short while his face would brighten up and his melodious voice would ring out in healthy laughter. President Tiso had a real sense of humor. Dr. Joseph Tiso never acted in an affected or artificial manner. Once in 1939, when he was being welcomed in Nitra, an event which I witnessed, the district official addressed Tiso as "Your Excellency." At that Time Dr. Tiso smilingly reminded him: "Without the excellency, Mr. official!" From that time on, I never heard anyone address Dr. Tiso as "His Excellency." In his study Tiso was happy to be addressed simply as "Mr. President" (Pan prezident), as he was when his parishioners called him "Reverend Deacon." Conversations with Tiso usually began with his asking about one's health, his family, and his work. He was always very much interested in the work of our editorial office. President Tiso was not often curious about details, unless it was a matter of immediate interest, like, for example, the political side of our editorial work. Furthermore there was not a single visit during which we would not touch upon the most serious objective and personal moments which influenced Slovak politics. Dr. Tiso spoke openly about individual resolutions of the Parliament, the deputies, ministers, the Germans, and in general about everything that had any influence on Slovak life and the presidential office. On occasions Dr. Tiso recalled many innovations especially of his political opponents. He criticized them unsparingly and talked about them with feelings of bitterness; his criticism was sincere at all times, whether it concerned Slovaks or foreigners. I always felt refreshed in the President's study. Usu.ally Dr. Tiso gave no directives how any article was to be written. On the other hand, however, he willingly read the 12 SLOVAKIA more delicate articles before they went to print. Even when I asked him what from the ideological standpoint we should deal with most on the pages of the "SLOVAK," he would usually reply: "Hold the line. Don't let yourself be broken. Don't be discouraged-persevere!" Nothing more and nothing less. Otherwise, however, the editorial office of the "SLOVAK" had an exemplary coworker in the person of President Tiso. His speeches, articles and messages were care-fully prepared. Dr. Tiso prepared and wrote them himself. On occasions, especially for Christmas and March 14th, the President gave us articles written in his own hand so that we might have them on time; these were usually accompanied by the remark: "Correct as you see fit." On his visits to us, he would always compliment all the workers connected with the paper, saying: "Fine work, men; keep up the good work; give the best that's in you!" I'll conclude with what I had mentioned at the beginning: the visits of President Tiso to the editorial office of the "SLOVAK." He came among us regularly. When he visited us the first time, all of us were very surprised that he was accompanied only by his personal secretary. No secret, no public police came with him; none in or outside the building; and none in his auto. On occasions he visited us coming on foot alone, without a bodyguard. That was Tiso: his people did not fear him, and he did not fear his people. No man in Slovakia was more revered and loved than was Tiso. I attended many gatherings which Dr. Tiso addressed; I traveled with him. Not once did he have more than one person accompany him. Not to guard him, but simply to accompany him. President Tiso moved about freely and without fear in Bratislava and everywhere in Slovakia, just as he did at the altar where he daily said the Holy Mass to his Divine Master. • • • REOOMMENDED $3.00; SLOVAK FOR (the set); "!Ih-obailr's "SLOVAK DE)SSONS" BOOKS: "The Slovaks" (Juircha.k BEGINNERS" (Books I-III) $1.50 English-Sl01Va:k Dictionary" $4.00 ; (iHroba.k) $3.50. SLOVAKIA 13 EIGHT FATAL DAYS IN THE LIFE OF DR. JOSEPH TISO KAROL MURiN (The author of this article was the personal secretary of President Dr. Joseph Tiso from 1938 until Tiso's tragic end in 1947. At the present time Dr. Karol Murin is on the profes• sorial staff of Montreal University.) On April 8, 1945, just a month before the conclusion of World War II in the West, at President Tiso's request, I went to Munich to ask for an audience with His Eminence Cardinal Faulhaber. The reason was that I was to inform the Cardinal of Monsignor Tiso's arrivel in Kremsmlinster and petition him to graciously do what he could to protect the President of Slovakia. Munich at that time was a shambles. The Cardinal received me in the afternoon; his residence was damaged extensively by bombs and shells. After waiting for a moment in a small, poorly furnished room, Cardinal Faulhaber made his appearance, the burdens of the war clearly apparent on his features. After the customary Slovak greeting "Laudetur ... ," I went on one knee before him, kissed his ring, and then presented myself. The Cardinal replied to the greeting and asked me to be seated. After a few introductory words, I told him the purpose of my visit. I must admit that I did expect several questions. During the war years it had become the custom to classify people only into two categories: the democrats on the one side, and the nazis and fascists on the other. No one asked why or how a person got to be on the one or the other side, or even what one did. According to that attitude, which excluded all colors between black and white, Stalin and the bolsheviks were regarded as democrats, while Dr. Tiso was supposed to be a nazi; Benes, despite his pro-Soviet and evident bolshevizing tendencies and the fact that he was responsible for the death of thousands of people, was regarded as a "moral" democrat, while Dr. Tiso, despite his prayers and many acts of kindness and his great love for 14 SLOV.AlKIA his Slovak people, or . just because of this, was regarded as a criminal. Cardinal Faulhaber, however, never did belong among the people who measured morality according to their own interest and evaluated their neighbor and acknowledged his right to life only according to the benefit they might reap from him. He was accustomed to judge and measure 9,ccording to the eternal and unchangeable principles of 8hrist. That is why he had become the symbol of the fight against nazi blunders, and the world regarded him highly for it. "I know about your President," began Cardinal Faulhaber, "and I know that he defended the Christian Faith in Slovakia." From what he further said, it was evident that he was well-informed about Slovakia and especially about the activity of President Tiso. He immediately set himself to the task of doing what he could to secure the safety of Tiso in the face of the surge of passions resulting for the most part from the false information propagated by Dr. Edward Benes. The three alternatives mentioned by the Cardinal are proof of his love for President Tiso : 1. He invited the President to his residence; 2. he offered as a temporary abode for President Tiso the Capuchin monastery at Alt Otting; or, 3. the Scheyrn monastery. Both monasteries were in the Freising-Munich Archdiocese which Cardinal Faulhaber administered. According to circumstances, as they might develop in regard to Tiso, the Slovak President was free to resort to the alternative most favorable to him. My audience with Cardinal Faulhaber lasted two hours. He told me about what especially worried him and made him fearful about the future: about the plans formulated by fanatics for the last days of the war, about the night of the long knives ("Nacht der langen Messer"), during which they intended to liquidate revered and respected Catholic priests and laity. The last half hour of my visit I spent with the Cardinal in his study. Looking over a map of Bavaria, His Eminence compared the advantages and disadvantages uf SLOVAKIA 15 the two monasteries; the Scheyrn Monastery was more advantageous, except, of course, if the "night of the long knives" should be realized. At the end of my visit I thanked Cardinal Faulhaber sincerely for the time he gave me, asked for his blessing, and departed after His Eminence bade me Godspeed. President Tiso was happy to hear my report about my visit to Cardinal Faulhaber after I returned to Kremsmtiunster. In no time at all, President Tiso decided to accept the hospitality of the Archbishop's palace only as a last resort; he did not wish to burden one of the outstanding Princes of the Church with the cares and troubles of his Slovak people and his own person, because he was aware of the fact that the saintly Cardinal was greatly burdened by the troubles of his own German people. At the beginning of May, 1945, when Dr. Joseph Tiso left Kremsmtinster for the West, he was not definitely certain whether he would seek refuge at Alt Otting or Scheyrn. In any event, however, he decided to first stop at Alt Otting. On the first leg of his journey, President Tiso was supposed to leave a written or oral message for me at the rectory of the Bavarian community of Stammham. I set out after President Tiso about two weeks later, stopping first at Stammham, where the pastor told mf': that I would find the person I was seeking at the first place we had talked about. That same afternoon I met with President Tiso in the monastery at Alt Otting. My first task was to again make contact with Cardinal Faulhaber. Since the war had just ended in the West, everything was chaos and confusion; outside the military, there was no public transportation to speak of; and no one was permitted to travel even short distances without a permit. After about a week in Alt Otting, which, by the way, is one of the most famous of pilgrimage cities, I was quite fortunate in getting to Munich. The Cardinal received me shortly after I was nounced. He was in ·b etter spirits than he had been April 8th: the "night of the long knives," thank God, not come about! In due time the Cardinal told me of anon did his 16 SLOV.A.I{JA plan to help President Tiso: he wanted to secure a plane to take Tiso to the Vatican. However, before he could begin working out his plan, the Cardinal said, he wanted to get the assent of the Papal Nuncio. During the entire war, the Nuncio for Germany was Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo. Cardinal Faulhaber asked me to look him up as soon as possible and present his desire to help Dr. Joseph Tiso to him, reckoning also with help to transport Tiso to the Vatican. In the Cardinal's name I was to ask His Excellency whether he agreed with his step. At that time the Papal Nuncio, His Excellency Cesare Orsenigo, resided in Eichstatt in northern Bavaria. To get to him by auto I needed gasoline and to get gasoline I had to see the American authorities. Aware of this, Cardinal Faulhaber wrote a letter telling whoever it may concern that I was his courier, carrying mail and reports from the Cardinal to the Papal Nuncio. For a longer time the Cardinal could not send mail to the Nuncio, so he really appreciated this opportunity to do so. Besides that Cardinal Faulhaber gave me a general recommendat ion which I could use as I thought best. The next day I travelled by auto to Eichstatt. Below the portals to the Archbishop's palace, by sheer accident, I met with a group of four Slovaks, who had come by auto. After hearty handshakes and embraces, all gratefully accompanied me on my journey. Archbishop Orsenigo received me warmly. After I gave him the mail from Cardinal Faulhaber, he listened with great interest to my report about the fate of Preside,1t Tiso. To the Cardinal's question he replied thusly: "Tell His Eminence that I not only agree that he do everything possible in his power to save Dr. Tiso, but that I most ardently beg him to do so." Then the Archbishop said that he was completely out of contact with the world, adding that a certain member of the Swiss diplomatic corps in Berlin is supposed to visit him this same afternoon and take his first mail in a long time to the Vatican. He graciously offered to be of service if I had anything to send outside the borders of Germany. SLOVAKIA 17 As soon as Cardinal Faulhaber had the Nuncio's reply, he immediately wrote a letter to the Vatican in which he told of his intention to transport Dr. Tiso by plane to the Vatican. His greatest worry was how to send the letter. Besides American planes only an accidental diplomat, who saved his petrol well, could be considered. In about a week I was supposed to return for further reports and advice. After eight days, I visited Cardinal Faulhaber again, who greeted me and then told me of the unfortunate thing tkat had happened. He was almost in tears. The Cardinal told me that the day after he had written the letter to the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he had secured a way of getting the letter to the Vatican. According to a promise made to the Cardinal by a person unknown to me, this person was supposed to take the letter before his departure from Munich. But the day before my last visit to Cardinal Faulhaber, when he asked his chancery whether there was any reply from the Vatican in regard to Tiso, he learned to his utter sorrow that the letter was still in his palace, the person who promised to deliver it to the Vatican evidently forgetting to pick it up. This unexpected delay worried the Cardinal and his concern was great, as if he had a foreboding that so very much depended on those eight days. After giving vent to his great disappointment, Cardinal Faulhaber again gave me his blessing and asked me to return in a week. I did return, but only after over two years. After my last visit to the Cardinal, we learned about the arrest of the members of the Slovak Government in Kremsmlinster. President Tiso asked for reports about what had happened there. My request for a travel permit into Upper Austria lay on the desk of the CIC in Alt btting for several days. Fate came into play. With the CIC in Alt btting there collaborated a man by the name of Spigler who was originally from Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia. When he came upon my name, Spigler immediately came to the monastery and forbade me to leave the building. After two days he took me to jail. During my confinement in the monastery, it became 18 SLOVAKIA quite evident that this Bratislava agent, full of personal resentment, found out that President Tiso was in the monastery. After my arrest President Tiso wrote to Cardinal Faulhaber, respectfully requesting His Eminence to notify the American authorities that he was staying in the monastery and that he use his influence to set me free, as well as that he c-o ntinue to give consideration to his own case. The Capuchin Provincial delivered the President's letter to Cardinal Faulhaber. In the meantime, I was transferred to a concentration camp where frightful conditions prevailed. One hot and sultry afternoon, at the beginning of June, 1945, a jeep pulled up before the barbed-wire camp. I became numb when I sighted President Tiso in it. It was at this point that my pilgrimage to various concentrati0!1 camps with President Tiso began, the tour which finally ended in the Bratislava jail. We felt the benefiscence of good Cardinal Faulhaber once again in the concentration camp at Garmisch Partenkirchen. It was on his initiative that the events, which had taken place during the reception of our group in this camp, were investigated. The Cardinal's effort to help Dr. Joseph Tiso did not result in success. Nevertheless, the Slovaks will never forget that Cardinal Faulhaber, now deceased, really did try to save Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the Slovak Republic . • • • WHO SAID IT? "W:t"th eq'll!al enlthusfasm we are today manifesting for the ideaJls of our, and onliy our, Owchoslovruk Democracy, which is on its way of development ,t o a new poople's fomn . . . . T.he unreseJ:1ved alliance with Oll!r Eastern ncighbor, witlh the mighty USSR, bUft also our friend!ly coot'acts wirtih the rest ,of tlhe world, especiaUy with our western democracies, gives us the feeUng of oerlainty that no mrutter what might h!appen a!broad, O'Ur ,inJternatiiona1 positt'ion is £i:nm rund we need not fea1r that we can come uipon new d'aingera aind dlnifiou[ties." ([)r. Joseph Lettrich, Vice,Ohairm.an of the Exem.rt.ive Oommittee of the "Coundl of Free Czechoslov.aJkia,'' CAIS, November 18, 1947). SLOVAKIA 19 SLOVAKIA: TRIAL OF DR. JOSEPH TISO (Under previous order of the House, the Hon. Ray J . Madden from Indiana, was recognized for 20 minutes to make the following address on the floor of the House of Representatives, March 31, 1947): Mr. Speaker, America and all liberty-loving nations should at this time concentrate against international situations which might bring about war in the future. I have, on several occasions, stated on the floor of Congress that the application of the principles of the Atlantic Charter is our greatest antidote for future peace. Self-government, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion is essential for smaller countries as it is for th~ large nations. Our Nation, during World War II, spent billions of dollars and sacrificed in lives and casualties to preserve the above principles in order to insure liberty and fnture peace. Since VJ-day, aggression and tyranny has again launched in certain areas of Europe. The latest example of persecution, unfair trial, and threatened execution for political belief is that of Dr. Joseph Tiso, former President of the Interim Republic of Slovakia. Dr. Tiso has been acclaimed a hero in the eyes of nearly all the people of Slovakia and the prevailing majority of Americans of Slovak ancestry. My attention has been called to the fact that over 80 percent of the Slovak American fraternal organizations have forthrightly declared themselves to be of the opinion that Tiso was a hero in the defense of the best interests of the Slovak people. During his presidency, Slovakia thrived, progressed, and developed internally more than it had during any five years of the existence of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The communistic control now over the country of Slovakia will execute Dr. Tiso, a political prisoner, unless our Government intervenes. This communistic control is inflicted upon the people of Slovakia in spite of the fact that the election of May 26, 1946, gave over 64 percent of the total vote cast against the present government. The press is likewise controlled, at least to the extent that the newspaper cannot publish what they think. This is evidenced in the fact that four American newspapers have 20 SLOVAKIA been barred in Slovakia. The present communistic government will brook no freedom of political thought; though the people voted for Christian democracy, they received totalitarian communism. The archbishop of Slovakia testified at the trial of Dr. Tiso. He is and has been a respected member not only of the hierarchy of Czecho-Slovakia, but of the official family of Czecho-Slovakia, including its President Edward Benes. Appearing as a witness for Dr. Tiso, the archbishop testified that: Tiso acted and worked in the interest of Slovakia and was never a traitor, and that his electeion as President of Slovakia was the will of 90 percent of the Slovaks at that time and was acclaimed by the bishops, priests, and ministers of both the Catholic and Protestant churches. It is apparent that Czecho-Slovakia has been re-created with the aid of Moscow and that Moscow will undoubtedly demand the extinction of Slovak national leaders of ability and high intelelct. The ways of the Communists are devious and it behooves us to understand more of the Slovak situation. In the meantime, the least that freedom loving nations can ask is that the so-called peoples courts in the Communist-dominated countries in eastern Europe, refrain from any further political executions or from liquidating political opposition by long-term imprisonment as in the case of Archbishop Stepinac. All of this adds up to the price we will have to pay to aid in the establishing of true democracy in the countries of eastern Europe to insure world peace. In supporting President Truman's international program, we cannot be unmindful of what is happening throughout this region in Europe, comprising over 100,000,000 Christians who have nothing in common with communism. We have heard of political executions, imprisonment, and banishment of outstanding citizens in Poland, Lithuania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and other small countries. Thousands of brave Polish soldiers who fought to stamp out fascism are now prohibited from returning to their native Poland by a communistic controlled government. Americans are asking the question "do we not have at least a moral obli- SLOVAKIA 21 gation to veice our protest against such trials and executions?" The judge who presided at the trial of Dr. Tiso, previous to the trial, vowed personal vengeance on Tiso and was provided this opportunity by being placed in charge ef the case. These facts, though not appearing in the American press releases, are not disputed. Almost uninimously, the people of Slovak descent in America, are rising in protest to the impending execution of Dr. Tiso. I ask the Members of Congress to join with me in protesting this unjust conviction by interceding with President Truman and Secretary Marshall to use their good offices to prevent this injustice. We might as well apply the words of the Honorable Judge Robert H. Jackson: All experience teaches that there are certain things you cannot do under guise of judicial trial. * * * You must put no man on trial before anything that is called a court, if you are not prepared to establish his personal guilt * * * If you are determined to execute a man in any case, there is no occasion for trial. The world yields no respect to courts that are merely organized to convict. - Congressional Record. • ON TISO'S BEHALF: • • PLEA OF THE COUNCIL OF SLOVAK BISHOPS To the Presidium of the Slovak National Council in Bratislava: The Catholic Episcopal Council of Slovakia, in past years, has more frequently turned to appropriate governmental offices in the interest of those who were suffering, were imprisoned or persecuted - without regard to whetlier Catholics or non-Catholics were concerned. The example of the Divine Samaritan and His positive command prompted and encouraged us to raise our protective voice in the interests of the people who were suffering on account of political or racial reasons and we did that at a time when we could expect various humiliations in return. 22 SLOVAKIA This noblest Model in all history and His commandment, expressed in the Gospel, we bear in mind even now, when we respectfully commend to Your graciousness the fate of the former President Dr. Joseph Tiso. We do this not only because a Catholic priest is concerned, but also because the solution of his personal problem shall have a far-reaching influence on the thinking and behavior of a part of the Slovak nation in respect to the renovated Czecho- Slovak Republic and its representatives. Furthermore, we are prompted to take this step also by the generally known actuality, which is conceded by all objective critics, that Dr. Joseph Tiso always was a zealous priest, of a virtuous life. In his extensive activity he tried to work for the good of the whole, and personally did not enrich himself. The administration of justice belongs among the most difficult tasks of state power. Experience proves that this delicate task is aggravated when the judgment of political transgressions is concerned. History tells us how many fatal mistakes were made during political trials - and this results from the delicate task of impartially judging the activities of a political opponent. So, it is no rarity that after rendering severe verdicts in political trials, sooner or later a call for their revision was made. In judging the activity especially of a political factor his intentions also should be given · consideration. The majority of the Slovak nation is convinced with us that the intentions of Dr. Joseph Tiso while performing public functions were the best. Certainly some mistakes were made and the Catholic Bishops of Slovakia did not fail to bring these to his attention. However, here we must mention the generally known reality that even the most clever political factors frequently made serious mistakes. Nevertheless an unbiased observer - whether a contemporary or historian - can deduce an over-all judgment only when he evaluates also the good and positive things they did. And this thesis often outweighs the mistakes which they made in their weakness. S LOVAKIA 23 It will be pertinent to the matter at hand to shed some light also from another viewpoint on the mistakes which are ascribed to Dr. Joseph Tiso. We respectfully point out at least some of the circumstances. After the most recent announcements of the present governmental factors even the 2ilina events of October, 1938, are presented in a different light than that shed by the one-sided propaganda to persuade the public; nay, even in the press it was demonstrated that in these political changes practically all Slovak political parties had participated. Here it is necessary to recall also the very important document which has just now been made public during the Nuremberg trials; we mean the letter of the ruler of the Hungarian realm sent to Berlin in March 13, 1939. This weighty circumstance gives an altogether different significance to the March 14, 1939, decision of Dr. Joseph Tiso and the other political factors of that time. One should think about what would have happened with the Slovak nation if the plan of Horthy had succeeded? We also know that after the issuance of anti-Jewish regulations, Dr. Joseph Tiso did want to resign from the presidency. That he did not do so happened because he tried to hamper and ameliorate the effects of those provisions, as well as to prevent a greater evil. It is worthy of consideration that what the ruler of the larger and more independent Hungary could not prevent in his country Dr. Joseph Tiso could not prevent in Slovakia. After considering all the circumstances after the passage of time, even other pilloried political mistakes - such as the war in the east, the events of August 29, 1944 can be judged otherwise than the manner in which it is done by a one-sided propaganda. The entire Slovak public is following the developments of events around Dr. Joseph Tiso with attention and in its majority is taking a negative stand towards those efforts which would incite hatred against his person. Thereby the unfortunate splintering of the nation is increased when unity of all forces is so greatly desired for the important 24 SLOVAKIA work of construction. It will be to the credit of the farsightedness of the State and will serve the peace of the nation, if the case of Dr. Joseph Tiso is solved in a cautious way and not with merciless hardness. The above thoughts have prompted us to respectfully submit our plea for your gracious consideration and favorable decision. With an expression of profound respect: (Signatures) : Dr. Karol Kmefko, Archbishop-Bishop of Nitra; Jozef Carsky, Bishop-Apostolic Administrator; Dr. Andrej Skraltik, Bishop on Banska Bystrica; Dr. Jozef Tomanocy; Dr. Karol Jantausch; Dr. Eduard Necsey, ordaining Bishop. Bratislava, January 8, 1946. • • • HERO AND PATRIOT OF SLOVAKIA The smaller nations have been the marytrs in tlte maelstrom that evil men made out of Europe in the last decade. Changing fortunes of war often presented a double crown of martyrdom. Honest men in these minor states often found it difficult to see where the path of honor lay, but once their conscience revealed the way they remained steadfast in what they believed their sacred duty. Slovakia has presented such a puzzling picture. The Slovaks had long sought and had long been denied their independence. When the moment dawned for freedom before the last war, there is no doubt that the patriots of that land felt that their long-deferred ambitions had been realized. There was outside wonder at the auspices under which freedom came but there can be no question about the sincerity of the Slovak patriots who meant to use their new prerogatives solely for the good of Slovakia. Chief among these was Monsignor Joseph Tiso who was elected president of the new republic. The war's outcome threw Slovakia as part of the old Czecho-Slovakian state into the Red orbit. Monsignor Tiso was placed on trial for treason. It could not be proved that he was a traitor to Slovakia for the simple reason that he never was a traitor to Slovakia. But that did not prevent SLOVAKIA 25 his condemnation and execution. History is filled with these rigged trials and martyrs deaths. The condemned priest left a noble testament to his beloved Slovak people. On the eve of his unjust execution he wrote: "In the spirit of the sacrifice I am about to make, I send this message to the Slovak nation: "In harmony and unison pursue always, everywhere and in every respect the great principle: FOR GOD AND FOR THE NATION. "This is not only the unequivocal intent of Slovak history, but also the explicit command of God, Who has made it the law of nature a11J has inculcated it into the soul of the nation and every one of its members. "This precept I have served all my life and, therefore, I consider myself first of all a martyr of God's law. Secondly, I feel that I am a martyr in the defense of Christianity against bolshevism, against which our nation must in all possible ways defend itself, not only in the spirit of its Christian character, but also in the interest of its future. "As I beg you to remember me in your prayers, so do I promise. to pray to God Almighty for you and supplicate that he bless the Slovak nation in its vital struggle for God artd for the nation, so that the Slovak nation will always remain a faithful and devoted son of the Church of Christ." When this black night in Europe passes with the destruction of the powers of darkness incarnated in atheistic communism Father Tiso will be seen as the hero that he truly was. - (The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Cleveland, 0 ., 6-27-47). • • • THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT SWVAKIA P.A. HROBAK Today there is no doubt that the original homeland ancestors of present-day Slovaks was somewhere the of beyond the Carpathian Mountains. We know that the Slovaks came into their present territory - which was later incorrectly called "Uhry" (hura=hora; uhor, uhorie= near, at the foot of, the mountains)-through the western Carpathians. Historical records do not tell us exastly when the Slovak ancients migrated from their original homeland,  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 Tenth Anniversary of Dr. Joseph Tiso's Execution Description An account of the resource Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), March 1957<br />pp. 1-25<br /><ul><li>"Dr. Joseph Tiso's Execution," Joseph Kirschbaum, pp. 1-8.</li> <li>"I Was Editor of President Tiso's Newspaper," Joseph Paučo, pp. 9-12.</li> <li>"Eight Fatal Days in the Life of Dr. Joseph Tiso," Karol Murín, pp. 13-18.</li> <li>Slovakia: Trial of Dr. Joseph Tiso, pp. 19-21.</li> <li>On Tiso's Behalf: Plea of the Council of Slovak Bishops, pp. 21-24.</li> <li>Hero and Patriot of Slovakia, pp. 24-25.</li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Paučo, Jozef, 1914-1975 Murín, Karol, 1913-1998 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1957 LCNAF SNK 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/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/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/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/ea7114ef5ca7fee82566ca0db869e3bb.pdf 9b1864922378b5efa3e619289ee3e3ac PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 75 In politics it seldom pays to to sit on two chairs. OsuS'ky began his career when the Slovak League sent him to Europe to Masaryk to work for the establishment of Czecho-,Slovakia and to see to it that Slovakia was granted autonomy. Osusky found it convenient and profitable to forget the League and the rights of his Slovak people to freedom, freedom from a1ien domination. He preferred to serve Masaryk and his senseless concept of "Czechoslovakism." At one time it was said that Osusky claimed "credit" for the fact that the Pittsburgh Pact was not even mentioned dunng the Paris Peace Conference negotiations. Osusky served as a Prague ambassador for over twenty years. He did a commendable job of it. Today, perhaps as he writes his memoirs in Washington, the Czechs don't want him - and the Slovaks, his own people, won't ·have him. • • • ibe History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK 1Continu ed) Slovakia played an important role in the relations of the kingdom which developed between Hungary and Poland during the reign of the Anjous. Louis the Great wanted to ,b ecome Polish king after the death of Casimir the Great, the last male descendant of the Piastov Clan. The agreements by which this union of Poland and Hungary was to be realized, were concluded in Slovak cities, especially in ,Kosice which was on the Cracow-Budin highway. It was at Kosice, after several meetings, that it was decided to have t!he daughter of Louis the Great, succeed him to the cP olish throne after his death. The reign of the Anjous brought Slovakia a notable contribution especially in the field of culture. G001HIC ClJiL'NJRE IN SLOVAKIA Medieval culture is a Christian culture. The Church concerned itself not only with the advancement of Christian faith and morals among the uncivilized nations of Europe, �76 SLOVAKIA but also that of the cultural life. Christianity changed and ennobled the character of the medieval man who learned to realize that his life's goal was the salvation of his immortal soul. The religious spirit of the medieval person knew how to suffer the difficulties and miseries of this life patiently, because he understood that it was in this valley of tears that he prepared for eternal life. The Christian concept of life elevated the human spirit to God and gave medieval culture a special character. Christian culture of the Middle Ages attained its full development in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries and found beautiful expression in the creative arts in the Gothic style of architecture. In the beginning the Church was the only organization which fostered culture, the sciences and the arts, educated youth in its ,p arish, capitulary and monastery schools, and also collected rich treasures of artistic creations in its churches. Later, especially from the thirteneth century on, knights became a significant factor in the cultural life of Europe. They endeavored to excell not only in military accomplishments, but also in Christian virtues. From the fourteenth century the cities became important centers of progress, both cultural and spiritual. Slovakia, because of her geogrruphical position, came under the strong influence of the cultural movements, which swept across Central Europe from the second half of the thirteenth century. In Slovakia, Gothic culture reached a high degree of perfection and beauty in 1:!he fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and its final offshoots extend to the sixteenth century. Artistic works, which have been preserved from those times in Slovakia, are proof that cultural life there developed somewhat belatedly, but in its maturity did not remain behind the cultural devel'o pment of Central Europe. As everywhere in Europe, so in Slovakia, the first and only centers of culture were the monasteries and other ecclesiastical institutions. Supported generously by the royalty and the nobility, they performed not only a religious, but also a highly worthy cultural mission. �SLOVAKIA 77 Besides the old abbeys of the Benedictine Order, which originated in Slovaki'a before the inva:sion of the Turks, a large number of monasteries and churches of the Order of St. Francis a:nd of the Preachers of St. Dominic were founded in the cities of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The Franciscans came from Italy and the Dominicans from Spain. The Premonstratensi'ans and Cistercians originated in France and founded their first monasteries in Slovakia outside the cities. Not only beautiful churches, but also artshops, trade shops and libraries sprang up near all these institutions. To some of these monasteries and chapters the king granted the right of issuing, transcribing and clarifying documents. Such monasteries were called "trustworthy" places. In Slovakia the following enjoyed· that privilege: the Chapters in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis; the Benedictine abbey of St. Benedict near the Hron, the Premonstratensian monastery in Klastor-pod-Znievom and in Jasov. Archives originated in these abbeys in which records, various literary works and documents were deposited. When the Anjous came to the throne in Hungary, and the Luxemburgs to the throne in Bohemia, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, higher western European culture came to Central Europe, which in a twofold way penetrated into the territory of Slovakia. In those times Knighthood developed in Central Europe which with its higher culture and refined morals enlightened and edified the masses of the people. Slovak nobility soon adopted the manner of life of the knights, even to the extent of replacing wooden palisades and fortresses with strong stone citadels with moats, towers and bastions. These castles of the knights, often built on high a:nd impregnable rocks, were not only strongholds, but also witnesses of the active life of the knights. Among the owners of these castles were many Slova:k knights, as it attested to by Slovak names of many citadels Strecno, Lietava, Likava, Vrsatec, Lednica, Hrusov, Hricov, Blatnica, Krasna Horka, etc. Later, rich mining a:nd commercial towns became the most significant centers of culture. The inhabitants of the cities had more of a mind for cultural interests than the �78 SLOVAKIA agricultural inhabitants of the villages. This undoubtedly was due to the influence of their occupation and their economic condition. The German settlers of Slovak cities maintained contacts with their fatherland and its higher culture. This "city" culture made itself manifest not only in the city itself, in the architecture of urban homes and public buildings, but also in the life of the people in general. The city dwellers, as merchants and artisans, came into contact with near and distant lands, and adopted the more progressive ways of living. In the cities there were schools (in Bratislava and in Spisska Kapitula already in the thirteenth century), and foreign artisans and artists came to the cities to build and decorate civic structures, especially the parish churches. At fuat time several universities were set up in Central Europe after the pattern of the University of Paris. These universities (Prague, 1348; Cracow, 1364; Vienna, 1365) were also attended by students from Slovakia, because the first Hungarian university founded ·b y Louis the Great in Patikostoly in 1367, had closed its doors. Some of them won high academic honors and became professors at these universities. In this way Slovakia was in contact with higher European culture, the centers of which were the universities. But most striking is the participation of Slovakia in the contemporary cultural trends in the field of creative art. Gothic art, as it developed in France, Germany and Italy, ex,pressed the loftiness of the Christian spirit which .frees itself from the earth and soars into the heights. This idea received expression especially in the building of Gothic churches, which with their height, ease and gracefulness rose high above the surroundings and elevated the thoughts of the believing man to God. This style was adopted in Slovakia already in the middle of the thirteenth century and, in the church structures, blended with the final echoes of the Romanesque style. An example of early Gothic architecture has been preserved in Slovakia in the church of the former prepositure of Turiec, in Klastor-pod-Z nievom (The Monastery-be neathZniev), built about 1260. The Franciscan church in Brati- �SLOVAKIA 79 slava and the Dominican church in Kosice were built at the end of the thirteenth century. Many imposing Gothic churches were erected in the fourteenth century in the thriving cities of Slovakia, among them the parish churches in Bratislava, Levoca, Trnava, Bardejov, Presov, and, especially, St. Elizabeth's Cathedral in Kosice. Beautiful Gothic temples of worsmp were also con,rtructed in the Spis region and the mining cities of Central Slovakia. The Gothic churches of the Slovak monasteries at St. Beiiadik, Mariatal, Oko1icne, and the church of the Red Monastery ( Cerveny Klastor) date from that time. Vienna and Prague strongly influenced the development of Gothic art in western Slovakia, while Bratislava and Cracow influenced its growth in Central and Eastern Slovakia. Besides the great and imposing Gothic churches of the cities, there arose in Slovakia a large number of small village churches, which even in their simplicity and artistic modesty attest that Gothic culture penetrated deeply into medieval Slovakia arrd left many relics there. While the city churches were, as a rule, designed and built by foreign architects, the small village churches were generally designed and built by native masters, who had adopted the structural characteristics of the Gothic .style of architecture. Besides the ecclesiastical edifices of the city, the medieval castles which ornament the peaks of Slovak mountains are also counted among the relics of Gothic art. Hardly anywhere in Central Europe are there as many castles as in Slovakia. Even this circumstance proves that Slovakia participated in the contemporary growth of Europe. Some of these castles because of their location, size, and structure, are outstanding souvenirs of Gothic architecture. The majority of these castles already has succumbed to the ha:rmful influence of time, but even in the ruins some Gothic gates, windows, high vaults and arches have been preserved in Bratislava, Zvolen, Vigfas, Strecno, Trencin, Orava and Spis. Only a few Gothic homes have been preserved in the cities, because they had to be removed to make way for newer building developments in later centuries. Remnants �80 SLOVAKIA of ancient municipal buildings, city fortifications and Gothic homes are rare; only in Bratislava has, a portion of the ancient City Hall been preserved, while Levoca still has a part of its old city wall and a part of a Gothic home. Several examples of stone decorations have also been preserved; especially the reliefs on the portals of the church in Bratislava, Banska Bystrica, Spisska Nova Ves and Kosice. Woodcarving reached a high degree of perfection in Slovakia and many wooden statues of the Madonna, St. Barbara and St. Catherine have been preserved in Spis and :in the mining towns. The wing altars of the churches of Spis, Saris and other eastern cities, are among the most valuable memorials of Gothic art in Slova!kia. Some wing altars have also been preserved in Banska Bystrica, Stiavnica and other parts of Slovakia. An outstanding woodcarver of that time was Master Paul of Levoca, who made the beautiful altar of the Nativity in Bardejov and the main altar in St. Jacob's church in Levoca. The apprentices of this master artist of Levoca decorated the churches in Spis with remarkable wood-carvings. The development of Gothic painting was subject to several influences. In southern Slovakia, where Gothic frescoes were preserved in Chyzne and Stitnik, the Italian influence predominated. In western Slovakia the Italian style came 'by way of neighboring Austria, while Gothic painting developed in eastern Slovakia under the influence of Silesia. Besides mural frescoes ( the oldest painting in the Spisska Krupitula depicts the coronation of Charles Robert and dates back to 1317), many framed paintings on the wing altars have been preserved. E~amples of high artistic workmanship, especially religious articles ( chalices, monstrances, crucifixes, Mass vestments, etc.) have been preserved in many parish and monastery churches. Many of these relics originated in Slovak workshops which also exported their products. In Spis bells were poured for churches in Poland. This great wealth of mementos from the Gothic period shows clearly that Slovakia lived a rich cultural life from the 13th to the 15th century and did not remain behind neighboring cultured countries in the field of creative arts . � SLOVAKIA 75 In politics it seldom pays to to sit on two chairs. OsuS'ky began his career when the Slovak League sent him to Europe to Masaryk to work for the establishment of Czecho-,Slovakia and to see to it that Slovakia was granted autonomy. Osusky found it convenient and profitable to forget the League and the rights of his Slovak people to freedom, freedom from a1ien domination. He preferred to serve Masaryk and his senseless concept of "Czechoslovakism." At one time it was said that Osusky claimed "credit" for the fact that the Pittsburgh Pact was not even mentioned dunng the Paris Peace Conference negotiations. Osusky served as a Prague ambassador for over twenty years. He did a commendable job of it. Today, perhaps as he writes his memoirs in Washington, the Czechs don't want him - and the Slovaks, his own people, won't ·have him. • • • ibe History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK 1Continu ed) Slovakia played an important role in the relations of the kingdom which developed between Hungary and Poland during the reign of the Anjous. Louis the Great wanted to ,b ecome Polish king after the death of Casimir the Great, the last male descendant of the Piastov Clan. The agreements by which this union of Poland and Hungary was to be realized, were concluded in Slovak cities, especially in ,Kosice which was on the Cracow-Budin highway. It was at Kosice, after several meetings, that it was decided to have t!he daughter of Louis the Great, succeed him to the cP olish throne after his death. The reign of the Anjous brought Slovakia a notable contribution especially in the field of culture. G001HIC ClJiL'NJRE IN SLOVAKIA Medieval culture is a Christian culture. The Church concerned itself not only with the advancement of Christian faith and morals among the uncivilized nations of Europe, �76 SLOVAKIA but also that of the cultural life. Christianity changed and ennobled the character of the medieval man who learned to realize that his life's goal was the salvation of his immortal soul. The religious spirit of the medieval person knew how to suffer the difficulties and miseries of this life patiently, because he understood that it was in this valley of tears that he prepared for eternal life. The Christian concept of life elevated the human spirit to God and gave medieval culture a special character. Christian culture of the Middle Ages attained its full development in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries and found beautiful expression in the creative arts in the Gothic style of architecture. In the beginning the Church was the only organization which fostered culture, the sciences and the arts, educated youth in its ,p arish, capitulary and monastery schools, and also collected rich treasures of artistic creations in its churches. Later, especially from the thirteneth century on, knights became a significant factor in the cultural life of Europe. They endeavored to excell not only in military accomplishments, but also in Christian virtues. From the fourteenth century the cities became important centers of progress, both cultural and spiritual. Slovakia, because of her geogrruphical position, came under the strong influence of the cultural movements, which swept across Central Europe from the second half of the thirteenth century. In Slovakia, Gothic culture reached a high degree of perfection and beauty in 1:!he fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and its final offshoots extend to the sixteenth century. Artistic works, which have been preserved from those times in Slovakia, are proof that cultural life there developed somewhat belatedly, but in its maturity did not remain behind the cultural devel'o pment of Central Europe. As everywhere in Europe, so in Slovakia, the first and only centers of culture were the monasteries and other ecclesiastical institutions. Supported generously by the royalty and the nobility, they performed not only a religious, but also a highly worthy cultural mission. �SLOVAKIA 77 Besides the old abbeys of the Benedictine Order, which originated in Slovaki'a before the inva:sion of the Turks, a large number of monasteries and churches of the Order of St. Francis a:nd of the Preachers of St. Dominic were founded in the cities of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The Franciscans came from Italy and the Dominicans from Spain. The Premonstratensi'ans and Cistercians originated in France and founded their first monasteries in Slovakia outside the cities. Not only beautiful churches, but also artshops, trade shops and libraries sprang up near all these institutions. To some of these monasteries and chapters the king granted the right of issuing, transcribing and clarifying documents. Such monasteries were called "trustworthy" places. In Slovakia the following enjoyed· that privilege: the Chapters in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis; the Benedictine abbey of St. Benedict near the Hron, the Premonstratensian monastery in Klastor-pod-Znievom and in Jasov. Archives originated in these abbeys in which records, various literary works and documents were deposited. When the Anjous came to the throne in Hungary, and the Luxemburgs to the throne in Bohemia, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, higher western European culture came to Central Europe, which in a twofold way penetrated into the territory of Slovakia. In those times Knighthood developed in Central Europe which with its higher culture and refined morals enlightened and edified the masses of the people. Slovak nobility soon adopted the manner of life of the knights, even to the extent of replacing wooden palisades and fortresses with strong stone citadels with moats, towers and bastions. These castles of the knights, often built on high a:nd impregnable rocks, were not only strongholds, but also witnesses of the active life of the knights. Among the owners of these castles were many Slova:k knights, as it attested to by Slovak names of many citadels Strecno, Lietava, Likava, Vrsatec, Lednica, Hrusov, Hricov, Blatnica, Krasna Horka, etc. Later, rich mining a:nd commercial towns became the most significant centers of culture. The inhabitants of the cities had more of a mind for cultural interests than the �78 SLOVAKIA agricultural inhabitants of the villages. This undoubtedly was due to the influence of their occupation and their economic condition. The German settlers of Slovak cities maintained contacts with their fatherland and its higher culture. This "city" culture made itself manifest not only in the city itself, in the architecture of urban homes and public buildings, but also in the life of the people in general. The city dwellers, as merchants and artisans, came into contact with near and distant lands, and adopted the more progressive ways of living. In the cities there were schools (in Bratislava and in Spisska Kapitula already in the thirteenth century), and foreign artisans and artists came to the cities to build and decorate civic structures, especially the parish churches. At fuat time several universities were set up in Central Europe after the pattern of the University of Paris. These universities (Prague, 1348; Cracow, 1364; Vienna, 1365) were also attended by students from Slovakia, because the first Hungarian university founded ·b y Louis the Great in Patikostoly in 1367, had closed its doors. Some of them won high academic honors and became professors at these universities. In this way Slovakia was in contact with higher European culture, the centers of which were the universities. But most striking is the participation of Slovakia in the contemporary cultural trends in the field of creative art. Gothic art, as it developed in France, Germany and Italy, ex,pressed the loftiness of the Christian spirit which .frees itself from the earth and soars into the heights. This idea received expression especially in the building of Gothic churches, which with their height, ease and gracefulness rose high above the surroundings and elevated the thoughts of the believing man to God. This style was adopted in Slovakia already in the middle of the thirteenth century and, in the church structures, blended with the final echoes of the Romanesque style. An example of early Gothic architecture has been preserved in Slovakia in the church of the former prepositure of Turiec, in Klastor-pod-Z nievom (The Monastery-be neathZniev), built about 1260. The Franciscan church in Brati- �SLOVAKIA 79 slava and the Dominican church in Kosice were built at the end of the thirteenth century. Many imposing Gothic churches were erected in the fourteenth century in the thriving cities of Slovakia, among them the parish churches in Bratislava, Levoca, Trnava, Bardejov, Presov, and, especially, St. Elizabeth's Cathedral in Kosice. Beautiful Gothic temples of worsmp were also con,rtructed in the Spis region and the mining cities of Central Slovakia. The Gothic churches of the Slovak monasteries at St. Beiiadik, Mariatal, Oko1icne, and the church of the Red Monastery ( Cerveny Klastor) date from that time. Vienna and Prague strongly influenced the development of Gothic art in western Slovakia, while Bratislava and Cracow influenced its growth in Central and Eastern Slovakia. Besides the great and imposing Gothic churches of the cities, there arose in Slovakia a large number of small village churches, which even in their simplicity and artistic modesty attest that Gothic culture penetrated deeply into medieval Slovakia arrd left many relics there. While the city churches were, as a rule, designed and built by foreign architects, the small village churches were generally designed and built by native masters, who had adopted the structural characteristics of the Gothic .style of architecture. Besides the ecclesiastical edifices of the city, the medieval castles which ornament the peaks of Slovak mountains are also counted among the relics of Gothic art. Hardly anywhere in Central Europe are there as many castles as in Slovakia. Even this circumstance proves that Slovakia participated in the contemporary growth of Europe. Some of these castles because of their location, size, and structure, are outstanding souvenirs of Gothic architecture. The majority of these castles already has succumbed to the ha:rmful influence of time, but even in the ruins some Gothic gates, windows, high vaults and arches have been preserved in Bratislava, Zvolen, Vigfas, Strecno, Trencin, Orava and Spis. Only a few Gothic homes have been preserved in the cities, because they had to be removed to make way for newer building developments in later centuries. Remnants �80 SLOVAKIA of ancient municipal buildings, city fortifications and Gothic homes are rare; only in Bratislava has, a portion of the ancient City Hall been preserved, while Levoca still has a part of its old city wall and a part of a Gothic home. Several examples of stone decorations have also been preserved; especially the reliefs on the portals of the church in Bratislava, Banska Bystrica, Spisska Nova Ves and Kosice. Woodcarving reached a high degree of perfection in Slovakia and many wooden statues of the Madonna, St. Barbara and St. Catherine have been preserved in Spis and :in the mining towns. The wing altars of the churches of Spis, Saris and other eastern cities, are among the most valuable memorials of Gothic art in Slova!kia. Some wing altars have also been preserved in Banska Bystrica, Stiavnica and other parts of Slovakia. An outstanding woodcarver of that time was Master Paul of Levoca, who made the beautiful altar of the Nativity in Bardejov and the main altar in St. Jacob's church in Levoca. The apprentices of this master artist of Levoca decorated the churches in Spis with remarkable wood-carvings. The development of Gothic painting was subject to several influences. In southern Slovakia, where Gothic frescoes were preserved in Chyzne and Stitnik, the Italian influence predominated. In western Slovakia the Italian style came 'by way of neighboring Austria, while Gothic painting developed in eastern Slovakia under the influence of Silesia. Besides mural frescoes ( the oldest painting in the Spisska Krupitula depicts the coronation of Charles Robert and dates back to 1317), many framed paintings on the wing altars have been preserved. E~amples of high artistic workmanship, especially religious articles ( chalices, monstrances, crucifixes, Mass vestments, etc.) have been preserved in many parish and monastery churches. Many of these relics originated in Slovak workshops which also exported their products. In Spis bells were poured for churches in Poland. This great wealth of mementos from the Gothic period shows clearly that Slovakia lived a rich cultural life from the 13th to the 15th century and did not remain behind neighboring cultured countries in the field of creative arts . � 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 1959, Vol. 9 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 4 [sic] (No. 29), March 1959.</li> <li>Issue 5 [sic] (No. 30), June-December 1959.</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 1959 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 75 In politics it seldom pays to to sit on two chairs. OsuS'ky began his career when the Slovak League sent him to Europe to Masaryk to work for the establishment of Czecho-,Slovakia and to see to it that Slovakia was granted autonomy. Osusky found it convenient and profitable to forget the League and the rights of his Slovak people to freedom, freedom from a1ien domination. He preferred to serve Masaryk and his senseless concept of "Czechoslovakism." At one time it was said that Osusky claimed "credit" for the fact that the Pittsburgh Pact was not even mentioned dunng the Paris Peace Conference negotiations. Osusky served as a Prague ambassador for over twenty years. He did a commendable job of it. Today, perhaps as he writes his memoirs in Washington, the Czechs don't want him - and the Slovaks, his own people, won't ·have him. • • • ibe History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK 1Continu ed) Slovakia played an important role in the relations of the kingdom which developed between Hungary and Poland during the reign of the Anjous. Louis the Great wanted to ,b ecome Polish king after the death of Casimir the Great, the last male descendant of the Piastov Clan. The agreements by which this union of Poland and Hungary was to be realized, were concluded in Slovak cities, especially in ,Kosice which was on the Cracow-Budin highway. It was at Kosice, after several meetings, that it was decided to have t!he daughter of Louis the Great, succeed him to the cP olish throne after his death. The reign of the Anjous brought Slovakia a notable contribution especially in the field of culture. G001HIC ClJiL'NJRE IN SLOVAKIA Medieval culture is a Christian culture. The Church concerned itself not only with the advancement of Christian faith and morals among the uncivilized nations of Europe, 76 SLOVAKIA but also that of the cultural life. Christianity changed and ennobled the character of the medieval man who learned to realize that his life's goal was the salvation of his immortal soul. The religious spirit of the medieval person knew how to suffer the difficulties and miseries of this life patiently, because he understood that it was in this valley of tears that he prepared for eternal life. The Christian concept of life elevated the human spirit to God and gave medieval culture a special character. Christian culture of the Middle Ages attained its full development in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries and found beautiful expression in the creative arts in the Gothic style of architecture. In the beginning the Church was the only organization which fostered culture, the sciences and the arts, educated youth in its ,p arish, capitulary and monastery schools, and also collected rich treasures of artistic creations in its churches. Later, especially from the thirteneth century on, knights became a significant factor in the cultural life of Europe. They endeavored to excell not only in military accomplishments, but also in Christian virtues. From the fourteenth century the cities became important centers of progress, both cultural and spiritual. Slovakia, because of her geogrruphical position, came under the strong influence of the cultural movements, which swept across Central Europe from the second half of the thirteenth century. In Slovakia, Gothic culture reached a high degree of perfection and beauty in 1:!he fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and its final offshoots extend to the sixteenth century. Artistic works, which have been preserved from those times in Slovakia, are proof that cultural life there developed somewhat belatedly, but in its maturity did not remain behind the cultural devel'o pment of Central Europe. As everywhere in Europe, so in Slovakia, the first and only centers of culture were the monasteries and other ecclesiastical institutions. Supported generously by the royalty and the nobility, they performed not only a religious, but also a highly worthy cultural mission. SLOVAKIA 77 Besides the old abbeys of the Benedictine Order, which originated in Slovaki'a before the inva:sion of the Turks, a large number of monasteries and churches of the Order of St. Francis a:nd of the Preachers of St. Dominic were founded in the cities of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The Franciscans came from Italy and the Dominicans from Spain. The Premonstratensi'ans and Cistercians originated in France and founded their first monasteries in Slovakia outside the cities. Not only beautiful churches, but also artshops, trade shops and libraries sprang up near all these institutions. To some of these monasteries and chapters the king granted the right of issuing, transcribing and clarifying documents. Such monasteries were called "trustworthy" places. In Slovakia the following enjoyed· that privilege: the Chapters in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis; the Benedictine abbey of St. Benedict near the Hron, the Premonstratensian monastery in Klastor-pod-Znievom and in Jasov. Archives originated in these abbeys in which records, various literary works and documents were deposited. When the Anjous came to the throne in Hungary, and the Luxemburgs to the throne in Bohemia, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, higher western European culture came to Central Europe, which in a twofold way penetrated into the territory of Slovakia. In those times Knighthood developed in Central Europe which with its higher culture and refined morals enlightened and edified the masses of the people. Slovak nobility soon adopted the manner of life of the knights, even to the extent of replacing wooden palisades and fortresses with strong stone citadels with moats, towers and bastions. These castles of the knights, often built on high a:nd impregnable rocks, were not only strongholds, but also witnesses of the active life of the knights. Among the owners of these castles were many Slova:k knights, as it attested to by Slovak names of many citadels Strecno, Lietava, Likava, Vrsatec, Lednica, Hrusov, Hricov, Blatnica, Krasna Horka, etc. Later, rich mining a:nd commercial towns became the most significant centers of culture. The inhabitants of the cities had more of a mind for cultural interests than the 78 SLOVAKIA agricultural inhabitants of the villages. This undoubtedly was due to the influence of their occupation and their economic condition. The German settlers of Slovak cities maintained contacts with their fatherland and its higher culture. This "city" culture made itself manifest not only in the city itself, in the architecture of urban homes and public buildings, but also in the life of the people in general. The city dwellers, as merchants and artisans, came into contact with near and distant lands, and adopted the more progressive ways of living. In the cities there were schools (in Bratislava and in Spisska Kapitula already in the thirteenth century), and foreign artisans and artists came to the cities to build and decorate civic structures, especially the parish churches. At fuat time several universities were set up in Central Europe after the pattern of the University of Paris. These universities (Prague, 1348; Cracow, 1364; Vienna, 1365) were also attended by students from Slovakia, because the first Hungarian university founded ·b y Louis the Great in Patikostoly in 1367, had closed its doors. Some of them won high academic honors and became professors at these universities. In this way Slovakia was in contact with higher European culture, the centers of which were the universities. But most striking is the participation of Slovakia in the contemporary cultural trends in the field of creative art. Gothic art, as it developed in France, Germany and Italy, ex,pressed the loftiness of the Christian spirit which .frees itself from the earth and soars into the heights. This idea received expression especially in the building of Gothic churches, which with their height, ease and gracefulness rose high above the surroundings and elevated the thoughts of the believing man to God. This style was adopted in Slovakia already in the middle of the thirteenth century and, in the church structures, blended with the final echoes of the Romanesque style. An example of early Gothic architecture has been preserved in Slovakia in the church of the former prepositure of Turiec, in Klastor-pod-Z nievom (The Monastery-be neathZniev), built about 1260. The Franciscan church in Brati- SLOVAKIA 79 slava and the Dominican church in Kosice were built at the end of the thirteenth century. Many imposing Gothic churches were erected in the fourteenth century in the thriving cities of Slovakia, among them the parish churches in Bratislava, Levoca, Trnava, Bardejov, Presov, and, especially, St. Elizabeth's Cathedral in Kosice. Beautiful Gothic temples of worsmp were also con,rtructed in the Spis region and the mining cities of Central Slovakia. The Gothic churches of the Slovak monasteries at St. Beiiadik, Mariatal, Oko1icne, and the church of the Red Monastery ( Cerveny Klastor) date from that time. Vienna and Prague strongly influenced the development of Gothic art in western Slovakia, while Bratislava and Cracow influenced its growth in Central and Eastern Slovakia. Besides the great and imposing Gothic churches of the cities, there arose in Slovakia a large number of small village churches, which even in their simplicity and artistic modesty attest that Gothic culture penetrated deeply into medieval Slovakia arrd left many relics there. While the city churches were, as a rule, designed and built by foreign architects, the small village churches were generally designed and built by native masters, who had adopted the structural characteristics of the Gothic .style of architecture. Besides the ecclesiastical edifices of the city, the medieval castles which ornament the peaks of Slovak mountains are also counted among the relics of Gothic art. Hardly anywhere in Central Europe are there as many castles as in Slovakia. Even this circumstance proves that Slovakia participated in the contemporary growth of Europe. Some of these castles because of their location, size, and structure, are outstanding souvenirs of Gothic architecture. The majority of these castles already has succumbed to the ha:rmful influence of time, but even in the ruins some Gothic gates, windows, high vaults and arches have been preserved in Bratislava, Zvolen, Vigfas, Strecno, Trencin, Orava and Spis. Only a few Gothic homes have been preserved in the cities, because they had to be removed to make way for newer building developments in later centuries. Remnants 80 SLOVAKIA of ancient municipal buildings, city fortifications and Gothic homes are rare; only in Bratislava has, a portion of the ancient City Hall been preserved, while Levoca still has a part of its old city wall and a part of a Gothic home. Several examples of stone decorations have also been preserved; especially the reliefs on the portals of the church in Bratislava, Banska Bystrica, Spisska Nova Ves and Kosice. Woodcarving reached a high degree of perfection in Slovakia and many wooden statues of the Madonna, St. Barbara and St. Catherine have been preserved in Spis and :in the mining towns. The wing altars of the churches of Spis, Saris and other eastern cities, are among the most valuable memorials of Gothic art in Slova!kia. Some wing altars have also been preserved in Banska Bystrica, Stiavnica and other parts of Slovakia. An outstanding woodcarver of that time was Master Paul of Levoca, who made the beautiful altar of the Nativity in Bardejov and the main altar in St. Jacob's church in Levoca. The apprentices of this master artist of Levoca decorated the churches in Spis with remarkable wood-carvings. The development of Gothic painting was subject to several influences. In southern Slovakia, where Gothic frescoes were preserved in Chyzne and Stitnik, the Italian influence predominated. In western Slovakia the Italian style came 'by way of neighboring Austria, while Gothic painting developed in eastern Slovakia under the influence of Silesia. Besides mural frescoes ( the oldest painting in the Spisska Krupitula depicts the coronation of Charles Robert and dates back to 1317), many framed paintings on the wing altars have been preserved. E~amples of high artistic workmanship, especially religious articles ( chalices, monstrances, crucifixes, Mass vestments, etc.) have been preserved in many parish and monastery churches. Many of these relics originated in Slovak workshops which also exported their products. In Spis bells were poured for churches in Poland. This great wealth of mementos from the Gothic period shows clearly that Slovakia lived a rich cultural life from the 13th to the 15th century and did not remain behind neighboring cultured countries in the field of creative arts .  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 (9/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 9, No. 5 (30), June-December 1959 pp. 75-80 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 June-December 1959 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/299">Vol. 9, No. 4 (29), pp. 72-80</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cbb7ce60aa3a0e412b377e83ab896a76.pdf 1b1c514b3207fc0bcaa5382ba1dbba99 PDF Text Text 72 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK tContinued) With their economic development the cities and towns also became important centers of cultural life. German settlers brough higher education to the Slovaks, so that many Slovak cities became centers of western European culture. Schools originated near the parish churches and the monasteries. Hospitals were built in many cities. Into all the cities came the architects, contractors and artists, who built and decorated not on:ly churches and city halls, but also the homes of the prosperous citizens. Of course, all this had some influence on the outlying villages and hamlets which were in constant touch with the cities. CRAFTSMEN'S GUILDS IN SLOVAKIA Besides the merchants, who brought various merchandise from the neighboring countries into Slovak cities and formed the wealthiest group, there lived in these cities also the tradesmen, who established their workshops and sold their wares at the markets. Slovaks were acquainted with some trades, others they acquired from their neighbors, but the bulk of trades were introduced into Slovakia by the German colonists in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. At first only those trades were fostered which served the everyday needs of the people (carpentry, cabinet-making, tanning, shoemaking, cloth-making, tailoring, etc.). Other trades originated and developed gradually with the economic and cultural conditions of the country. The higher the standard of living, the more trades were developed and applied in the cities, towns and hamlets. Just as the various types of trades came to the Slovaks by way of Germany, so came also the custom of the tradesmen organizing in associations which were called guilds. In every city there were as many guilds as there were different types of trades. As the number of trades �SLOVAKIA 73 gradually increased, so did the number of guilds. In the large cities each trade had its own independent guild, while in the smaller towns, and later in the larger villages, the closely-related trades were united in one common guild. Only some cities were granted a monopoly on certain types of trade; e.g., only Kosice had the privilege of making linen (barchet) and Bardejov had the right to bleach cloth. In the larger cities work shops were usually grouped in particular streets so that many of these streets derived their names from the type of trade that prevailed there. In Bratislava, even today there still are streets called Sedlarska, Klobucnicka; in Trnava: Pekarska, Halenarska, Ostrozna, Masiarska ; in Banska Bystrica : Kovacska ; in Hlohovec: Mydlarska ; in Zilina and in Kosice: Zvonarska, Kovacska, Masiarska. As a technical organization, the guild took care of all the interests of its member,s. Each guild had its own written by-laws which contained detailed regulations called articles. The furrier's guild in Kosice had its own articles already in 1305. The Bratislava guild of butchers, shoemakers and bakers had written articles already in 1376. The organization of the guilds took place in the fourteenth century, attained its greatest development in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and lasted until modern times, when factory products began to give real competition to the products of the guilds. The by-laws of each city guild had to be approved by the city council and by the landlords; and by secular and church authorities in the smaller towns. The guilds frequently had their statutes approved even by their sovereigns. Due to the fact that many Slovak cities in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries had a majority of German inhabitants, the guild regulations were written at first in German or Latin. But later, when the Slovaks became the majority, the by-laws and correspondence of the guilds were more frequently in the Slovak language. The Trnava Guild of Tailors already in 1558 did its writing in Slovak; the Butchers' Guild in 1562. The guilds of Trencin and Hlohovec used the Slovak language at the end of the sixteenth �74 SLOVAKIA century. In the seventeenth century all the smaller towns (Banovce, Bojnice, Beckov, Bytca, Holic, Humenne, !lava, Jelsava, Myjava, Prievidza, Puchov, Rajec, Skalica, Sastin, Topol'cany, etc.) kept their guild records in Slovak. Only a master-craftsman could become a member of a respectable guild, after he had fulfilled all technical and moral requirements. In each guild the number of mastercraftsmen was limited to prevent overproduction in goods. In Bratislava in 1376, there could be only twenty-eight butchers and sixteen bakers. Every member of a guild was obliged to present only perfect products at prices determined by the guild. All tradesmen had to work in the same way so that their products were of like quality and price, and all competition removed. At the head of each guild was a guildmaster, whom the members elected for a period of one year. If there were a number of master craftsmen in a guild, the leader of the guild was the chief guildmaster. The guildmaster was the head of the guild, represented the guild before the authorities, especially before the city council in whose presence he took the oath of office after his election. He took care of all the guild's interests, ipresided at meetings, held several times a year in his home, and at banquets. He supervised the work of all members of his particular guild, judged th~ir products especially before they went to market, saw to it that all regulations were strictly observed, and in his care were all documents and letters and finances of his guild. The guildmaster was ,s ole arbiter of all arguments between members; he imposed punishment and collected all fines. He was a very respected personality not only among the membership of his guild, but among the general public as well. Members of the guild were divided into senior and junior master craftsmen. The elder masters, authorized by the guildmaster, supervised the work of the members of the guild and maintained order and discipline. The younger masters were obliged to perform various menial duties, such as lighting candles in the church, serving as waiters at banquets, taking care of the weak and sick masters, dig- �SLOVAKIA 75 ging graves and acting as pallbearers for deceased masters. After banquets, if the senior masters were unable to find their way home, the junior members were obliged to escort them. Great care was taken to see that all members of a guild conscientiousl y performed their religious obligations. The wealthier guilds had their own altar in the parish church which was dedicated to the patron saint of their guild. Every guild member was obliged to attend divine services on Sunday and Holy Days, and had to receive the sacraments at least once a year. At church processions the entire guild took part under its own standard, which bore the image of the patron saint and the trademark of the guild. Any member guilty of transgression s, which caused scandal and so harmed the good name of a respectable guild, was obliged to pay a prescribed sum into the guild's treasury, or give candles to his church. In the event of danger, when an enemy threatened the city, the guild members were obliged to defend the ramparts of the city. The city assigned to each guild a tower or bastion which the members had to keep in good order and supply it with weapons and ammunition. City bastions have retained individual guild names even to this day (Pekarska basta, Obuvnicka, Masiarska, etc.). If a fire broke out in the city, each guild had to take part in the rescue work and also bring a prescribed number of buckets of water to help extinguish it. So that only honorable persons could become members of a guild, people of good morals and technically well prepared, many years of apprenticeshi p and str ict education wer e prescribed for applicants. SLOVAKIA AFTER THE TURKISH INVASION When the Turks abandoned plundered Hungary, King Bela IV set out to reconstruct his country. He invited foreign settlers in large numbers, so that some might cultivate the depopulated areas. Many Germans settled in the hilly regions to found new villages and towns. But nomadic Cumans also came again to occupy the lowlands and the southern foothills of the Slovak mountains. The Ger mans �76 SLOVAKIA brought a high degree of culture into the country and contributed handsomely to its economy, while the Cumans were supposed to be the military support of the Hungarian king. But Hungary, even during the reign of Bela IV, was in a difficult situation, which was caused by internal revolutions and the growth of the Bohemian kingdom under Premysl Otokar II and his successors. Bela nr could not maintain the integrity of his kingdom. His son wanted to rule during his lifetime, and Bela was forced to let him rule over the Eastern part of Hungary. This partition of Hungary weakened it terribly and increased the dangers of invasion by outside enemies. While the members of the ruling family quarreled, the wealthy nobles strengthened thei r own positions and prestige. Slovak territory played an important role in the development of these relations, since both the Czechs and the Hungarians were interested in it. Premysl Otokar II became ruler of Austrian lands and extended his rule to the banks of the Adriatic Sea. Since the Hungarian king claimed a part of these lands, especially Styria, hostile relations between the Czechs and Hungarians resulted. But Premysl Otokar II also wanted Slovakia, and this only infuriated the Hungarian monarch more. Wars were inevitable. They were fought on Slovak soil and the Slovaks paid with their lives and property for the enmity existing between two foreign rulers. A part of western Slovakia, including Bratislava, Trnava and Nitra, became prey of the Bohemian king several times after 1271 and the victim of the ruthless devastation of the Czech armies. Finally, this area fell into the hands of Austrian dukes and barons. After Bela's death (1270), the Hungarian throne was occupied by rulers who became friendly with the pagan Cumans, spent most of their time in their camps, where they abandoned themselves to riotous, pagan living. Consequently the whole country suffered. In 1280 the Bishops and nobles persuaded King Ladislaus IV to abandon his reckless adventures and to domesticate the wild Cumans. But the Cumans rebelled and pillaged the whole country, including Slovakia, where they committed the most brutal �SLOVAKIA 77 .atrocities. Later, in 1285, the Tartars again invaded Slovakia and devastated Spis and the whole of eastern Slovakia. This invasion was used by the Cumans to pillage western Slovakia. It was thus that Slovakia had to pay for the weaknesses and defects of the kings of Hungary and their friendly relations with the Cumans. The weaker the king, the more the power of the nobility increased. They appropriated royal and ecclesiastical properties and recognized no government over themselves. When King Ladislaus IV refused to reform and continued to spend most of his time in the Cuman camps, the Hungarian magnates assassinated him. His successor, Andrew III (1290-1301), tried to be a good king and did what he could to save the kingdom from catastrophe; but it was too late. By the end of the thirteenth century Hungary disintegrated into several parts in which wealthy magnates reigned as independent little kings. Among these nobles was Matus Cak (Mahtoosh Tchak) of Trencin, "the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," who become the ruler of a large part of Slovakia at the end of the thirteenth century. Ca:k was not a Slovak by birth, but his ancestors had acquired large tracts of land in Slovakia. When he became the highest official of the royalty during the reign of Andrew III, he took advantage of his position and added new lands and castles to his family's holdings. Matus Cak seized the lands of many nobles, forced others to recognize his sovereignty, appropriated many royal citadels and in his ruthlessness did not even hesitate taking ecclesiastical properties. In 1299 he captured Trencin Castle which became the main stronghold of the mighty lord of the Vah and the Tatras. Ca.k's power extended from the Morava river to Spis and from the Danube to the Tatras, so that all of western Slovakia, except Bratislava and vicinity, and a large part of central Slovakia were under his rule. Beyond the Danube the mighty Vy s e h r a d Castle guarded the borders of Ca.k's country. In his Trencin citadel Matus Cak organized his entire court in regal splendor, and numerous courtiers did his bidding. As an independent ruler, he had his own army, coined his own money in Nitra �78 SLOVAKIA and established relations with neighboring rulers. Cak of Trencin built up his great power on the wealth which flowed to him from his extensive holdings. But the most reliable support of his power was the devotion and loyalty of his land administrators and his people. In Ca.k's army divisions of Slovak warriors also fought; they distinguished themselves by their courage, devotion and heroism. Ca.k's military glory, therefore, was in a large measure the merit of his Slovak subjects. At that time the Amadei Clan ruled over eastern Slovakia, including Kosice. It did not recognize the sovereignty of the Hungarian king. In 1301, when the death of King Andrew ill brought the Arpad dynasty to an end and several rulers sought the Hungarian throne, Slovakia was for all practical purposes an independent state under Matus Cak of Trencin. SLOVAKIA UNDER THE ANJOUS After Andrew ill's death, a part of the Hungarian nobility headed by Matus Cak called a son of King Wenceslaus of Bohemia to the throne, who already then was in possession of the Polish Crown. But the twelve-year-old Crown Prince Wenceslaus, crowned in Stolny Belehrad, was op.p osed by another group which sided with Pope Boniface VIII and chose Charles Robert of the French house of Anjou, who ruled in Naples. Relying on his power, Matus Cak of Trencin opposed Charles Robert and defended the interests of the Bohemian Wenceslaus. He resisted the An jous even after Wenceslaus renounced the Hungarian Crown and died shortly after in 1306 as the last male descendant of the Premysl dynasty. Soon after his accession to the throne, the Hungarian king attempted to break the power of the magnates and unite Hungary under his own rule. Matus Cak of Trencin continued to oppose the rule of Charles Robert. With his army he attacked the royal castle at Budin and fought the magnates and bishops who supported Charles Robert. In 1311, after he succeeded in gaining the support of the majority of the nobility, Charles Robert prepared for a showdown with Matus Cak. But the latter allied himself with �SLOVAKIA 79 the Amadei clan who opposed the king in eastern Slovakia. The combined armies of Matus Cak and the Amadei defended themselves successfully at Saris Castle and forced the king to retreat. The royal army withdrew to Spis to rally the support of the German colonists there. With these new allies Charles again set out after Matus Cak. In the decisive battle, which took place June 15, 1312, at Rozhanovce, not far from Kosice, the king was victorious. The Amadei clan was completely routed, lost all its citadels and properties and was forced to flee to Poland, where it found refuge at the court of Ladislaus Lokietek, whom it had aided a short time before against the Czechs. The Amadei never returned to Hungary, but remained in Poland, and Charles Robert became master of eastern Slovakia. Matus Ca.k's setback at Rozhanovce did not break him completely. He continued to act independently in western Slovakia. Indeed, his power and prestige were still so great that the German King Frederick the Handsome, sought his aid in 1315 against Louis, the Bavarian, and against John of Luxemburg. Even though Charles Robert captured Vysehrad and Komarno in 1317 and dangerously threatened the sovereignty of Matus Cak of Trencin, nevertheless, the lord of the Vah and the 'flatras continued to rule independently to the end of his life. It was only after Matus Cak died in the Trencin castle in 1321, that Charles Robert was able to extend his rule over the western half of Slovakia. The following year Charles Robert also seized Bratislava. which had been in the hands of the Austrian dukes since tht beginning of the fourteenth century. Slovakia, after a brief period of independence, again became a part of the kingdom of Hungary which, under the rule of the Anjou dynasty, enjoyed a period of great political, economic and cultural growth. As soon as Charles Robert reunited the Hungarian kingdom, his first care was to put the economic affairs of Hungary into order. He founded many new cities, supported the development of mining, established a sound financial system, and encouraged commerce with neighboring states. It was during this period that a large number of new cities were founded also in Slovakia ·a nd the older ones were granted new privileges. �80 SLOVAKIA Bratislava, Trnava, Levoca, and Kosice became important centers of international commerce. The king- ipaid special attention to the Slovak mining towns, because their wealth swelled the royal coffers appreciably. Mining commissions supervised all mining projects and regulated the sale of all precious metals. A Count of the Chamber headed the mining commission; he concluded the rental agreement with the ruler and guaranteed the king revenues from the mines. The territory of Slovakia, rich in metallic ores, was divided into two mining chambers: the western half of Slovakia belonged under the management of the mining chamber of Kremnica, while the eastern half was managed by the chamber of Smolnica, which later moved its headquarters to Kosice. Zupan Done, who managed a large part of central Slovakia as the administrator of Zvolen, was a loyal adherent and faithful aide of Robert. At that time the Zvolen region was an extensive area, out of which later were gradually formed the independent districts of Turiec, Orava and Liptov, besides that of Zvolen. Administrator Done founded Liptovsky Hradok, built many churches, endowed monasteries, and served at the pa!pal court in Avignon as a rei[)resentative of Charles Robert. Slovakia played a significant role even in the international relations of the Hungarian kingdom. Already in 1327, Charles Robert and the Bohemian king, met in Trnava, where they formed an alliance against the Habsburgs. Slovakia became the territory on which the interests of the Hungarian, Bohemian and Polish kingdoms were settled. In 1335 the legates of John of Bohemia, Casimir the Great of Po-land and Charles Robert assembled at Trenein to determine the conditions of a friendly alliance. At this meeting an agreement was reached which enabled the meeting of the three kings in Vysehrad Castle and thus contributed largely to safeguard peace in central Europe. Louis the Great (1342-1382), son and successor of Charles Robert, tried to extend the limits of the Hungarian kingdom. He waged frequent wars on the southern borders of Hungary and conquered the northern part of the Balkan peninsula and the territory of present-day Rumania. (To be continued) � 72 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK tContinued) With their economic development the cities and towns also became important centers of cultural life. German settlers brough higher education to the Slovaks, so that many Slovak cities became centers of western European culture. Schools originated near the parish churches and the monasteries. Hospitals were built in many cities. Into all the cities came the architects, contractors and artists, who built and decorated not on:ly churches and city halls, but also the homes of the prosperous citizens. Of course, all this had some influence on the outlying villages and hamlets which were in constant touch with the cities. CRAFTSMEN'S GUILDS IN SLOVAKIA Besides the merchants, who brought various merchandise from the neighboring countries into Slovak cities and formed the wealthiest group, there lived in these cities also the tradesmen, who established their workshops and sold their wares at the markets. Slovaks were acquainted with some trades, others they acquired from their neighbors, but the bulk of trades were introduced into Slovakia by the German colonists in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. At first only those trades were fostered which served the everyday needs of the people (carpentry, cabinet-making, tanning, shoemaking, cloth-making, tailoring, etc.). Other trades originated and developed gradually with the economic and cultural conditions of the country. The higher the standard of living, the more trades were developed and applied in the cities, towns and hamlets. Just as the various types of trades came to the Slovaks by way of Germany, so came also the custom of the tradesmen organizing in associations which were called guilds. In every city there were as many guilds as there were different types of trades. As the number of trades �SLOVAKIA 73 gradually increased, so did the number of guilds. In the large cities each trade had its own independent guild, while in the smaller towns, and later in the larger villages, the closely-related trades were united in one common guild. Only some cities were granted a monopoly on certain types of trade; e.g., only Kosice had the privilege of making linen (barchet) and Bardejov had the right to bleach cloth. In the larger cities work shops were usually grouped in particular streets so that many of these streets derived their names from the type of trade that prevailed there. In Bratislava, even today there still are streets called Sedlarska, Klobucnicka; in Trnava: Pekarska, Halenarska, Ostrozna, Masiarska ; in Banska Bystrica : Kovacska ; in Hlohovec: Mydlarska ; in Zilina and in Kosice: Zvonarska, Kovacska, Masiarska. As a technical organization, the guild took care of all the interests of its member,s. Each guild had its own written by-laws which contained detailed regulations called articles. The furrier's guild in Kosice had its own articles already in 1305. The Bratislava guild of butchers, shoemakers and bakers had written articles already in 1376. The organization of the guilds took place in the fourteenth century, attained its greatest development in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and lasted until modern times, when factory products began to give real competition to the products of the guilds. The by-laws of each city guild had to be approved by the city council and by the landlords; and by secular and church authorities in the smaller towns. The guilds frequently had their statutes approved even by their sovereigns. Due to the fact that many Slovak cities in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries had a majority of German inhabitants, the guild regulations were written at first in German or Latin. But later, when the Slovaks became the majority, the by-laws and correspondence of the guilds were more frequently in the Slovak language. The Trnava Guild of Tailors already in 1558 did its writing in Slovak; the Butchers' Guild in 1562. The guilds of Trencin and Hlohovec used the Slovak language at the end of the sixteenth �74 SLOVAKIA century. In the seventeenth century all the smaller towns (Banovce, Bojnice, Beckov, Bytca, Holic, Humenne, !lava, Jelsava, Myjava, Prievidza, Puchov, Rajec, Skalica, Sastin, Topol'cany, etc.) kept their guild records in Slovak. Only a master-craftsman could become a member of a respectable guild, after he had fulfilled all technical and moral requirements. In each guild the number of mastercraftsmen was limited to prevent overproduction in goods. In Bratislava in 1376, there could be only twenty-eight butchers and sixteen bakers. Every member of a guild was obliged to present only perfect products at prices determined by the guild. All tradesmen had to work in the same way so that their products were of like quality and price, and all competition removed. At the head of each guild was a guildmaster, whom the members elected for a period of one year. If there were a number of master craftsmen in a guild, the leader of the guild was the chief guildmaster. The guildmaster was the head of the guild, represented the guild before the authorities, especially before the city council in whose presence he took the oath of office after his election. He took care of all the guild's interests, ipresided at meetings, held several times a year in his home, and at banquets. He supervised the work of all members of his particular guild, judged th~ir products especially before they went to market, saw to it that all regulations were strictly observed, and in his care were all documents and letters and finances of his guild. The guildmaster was ,s ole arbiter of all arguments between members; he imposed punishment and collected all fines. He was a very respected personality not only among the membership of his guild, but among the general public as well. Members of the guild were divided into senior and junior master craftsmen. The elder masters, authorized by the guildmaster, supervised the work of the members of the guild and maintained order and discipline. The younger masters were obliged to perform various menial duties, such as lighting candles in the church, serving as waiters at banquets, taking care of the weak and sick masters, dig- �SLOVAKIA 75 ging graves and acting as pallbearers for deceased masters. After banquets, if the senior masters were unable to find their way home, the junior members were obliged to escort them. Great care was taken to see that all members of a guild conscientiousl y performed their religious obligations. The wealthier guilds had their own altar in the parish church which was dedicated to the patron saint of their guild. Every guild member was obliged to attend divine services on Sunday and Holy Days, and had to receive the sacraments at least once a year. At church processions the entire guild took part under its own standard, which bore the image of the patron saint and the trademark of the guild. Any member guilty of transgression s, which caused scandal and so harmed the good name of a respectable guild, was obliged to pay a prescribed sum into the guild's treasury, or give candles to his church. In the event of danger, when an enemy threatened the city, the guild members were obliged to defend the ramparts of the city. The city assigned to each guild a tower or bastion which the members had to keep in good order and supply it with weapons and ammunition. City bastions have retained individual guild names even to this day (Pekarska basta, Obuvnicka, Masiarska, etc.). If a fire broke out in the city, each guild had to take part in the rescue work and also bring a prescribed number of buckets of water to help extinguish it. So that only honorable persons could become members of a guild, people of good morals and technically well prepared, many years of apprenticeshi p and str ict education wer e prescribed for applicants. SLOVAKIA AFTER THE TURKISH INVASION When the Turks abandoned plundered Hungary, King Bela IV set out to reconstruct his country. He invited foreign settlers in large numbers, so that some might cultivate the depopulated areas. Many Germans settled in the hilly regions to found new villages and towns. But nomadic Cumans also came again to occupy the lowlands and the southern foothills of the Slovak mountains. The Ger mans �76 SLOVAKIA brought a high degree of culture into the country and contributed handsomely to its economy, while the Cumans were supposed to be the military support of the Hungarian king. But Hungary, even during the reign of Bela IV, was in a difficult situation, which was caused by internal revolutions and the growth of the Bohemian kingdom under Premysl Otokar II and his successors. Bela nr could not maintain the integrity of his kingdom. His son wanted to rule during his lifetime, and Bela was forced to let him rule over the Eastern part of Hungary. This partition of Hungary weakened it terribly and increased the dangers of invasion by outside enemies. While the members of the ruling family quarreled, the wealthy nobles strengthened thei r own positions and prestige. Slovak territory played an important role in the development of these relations, since both the Czechs and the Hungarians were interested in it. Premysl Otokar II became ruler of Austrian lands and extended his rule to the banks of the Adriatic Sea. Since the Hungarian king claimed a part of these lands, especially Styria, hostile relations between the Czechs and Hungarians resulted. But Premysl Otokar II also wanted Slovakia, and this only infuriated the Hungarian monarch more. Wars were inevitable. They were fought on Slovak soil and the Slovaks paid with their lives and property for the enmity existing between two foreign rulers. A part of western Slovakia, including Bratislava, Trnava and Nitra, became prey of the Bohemian king several times after 1271 and the victim of the ruthless devastation of the Czech armies. Finally, this area fell into the hands of Austrian dukes and barons. After Bela's death (1270), the Hungarian throne was occupied by rulers who became friendly with the pagan Cumans, spent most of their time in their camps, where they abandoned themselves to riotous, pagan living. Consequently the whole country suffered. In 1280 the Bishops and nobles persuaded King Ladislaus IV to abandon his reckless adventures and to domesticate the wild Cumans. But the Cumans rebelled and pillaged the whole country, including Slovakia, where they committed the most brutal �SLOVAKIA 77 .atrocities. Later, in 1285, the Tartars again invaded Slovakia and devastated Spis and the whole of eastern Slovakia. This invasion was used by the Cumans to pillage western Slovakia. It was thus that Slovakia had to pay for the weaknesses and defects of the kings of Hungary and their friendly relations with the Cumans. The weaker the king, the more the power of the nobility increased. They appropriated royal and ecclesiastical properties and recognized no government over themselves. When King Ladislaus IV refused to reform and continued to spend most of his time in the Cuman camps, the Hungarian magnates assassinated him. His successor, Andrew III (1290-1301), tried to be a good king and did what he could to save the kingdom from catastrophe; but it was too late. By the end of the thirteenth century Hungary disintegrated into several parts in which wealthy magnates reigned as independent little kings. Among these nobles was Matus Cak (Mahtoosh Tchak) of Trencin, "the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," who become the ruler of a large part of Slovakia at the end of the thirteenth century. Ca:k was not a Slovak by birth, but his ancestors had acquired large tracts of land in Slovakia. When he became the highest official of the royalty during the reign of Andrew III, he took advantage of his position and added new lands and castles to his family's holdings. Matus Cak seized the lands of many nobles, forced others to recognize his sovereignty, appropriated many royal citadels and in his ruthlessness did not even hesitate taking ecclesiastical properties. In 1299 he captured Trencin Castle which became the main stronghold of the mighty lord of the Vah and the Tatras. Ca.k's power extended from the Morava river to Spis and from the Danube to the Tatras, so that all of western Slovakia, except Bratislava and vicinity, and a large part of central Slovakia were under his rule. Beyond the Danube the mighty Vy s e h r a d Castle guarded the borders of Ca.k's country. In his Trencin citadel Matus Cak organized his entire court in regal splendor, and numerous courtiers did his bidding. As an independent ruler, he had his own army, coined his own money in Nitra �78 SLOVAKIA and established relations with neighboring rulers. Cak of Trencin built up his great power on the wealth which flowed to him from his extensive holdings. But the most reliable support of his power was the devotion and loyalty of his land administrators and his people. In Ca.k's army divisions of Slovak warriors also fought; they distinguished themselves by their courage, devotion and heroism. Ca.k's military glory, therefore, was in a large measure the merit of his Slovak subjects. At that time the Amadei Clan ruled over eastern Slovakia, including Kosice. It did not recognize the sovereignty of the Hungarian king. In 1301, when the death of King Andrew ill brought the Arpad dynasty to an end and several rulers sought the Hungarian throne, Slovakia was for all practical purposes an independent state under Matus Cak of Trencin. SLOVAKIA UNDER THE ANJOUS After Andrew ill's death, a part of the Hungarian nobility headed by Matus Cak called a son of King Wenceslaus of Bohemia to the throne, who already then was in possession of the Polish Crown. But the twelve-year-old Crown Prince Wenceslaus, crowned in Stolny Belehrad, was op.p osed by another group which sided with Pope Boniface VIII and chose Charles Robert of the French house of Anjou, who ruled in Naples. Relying on his power, Matus Cak of Trencin opposed Charles Robert and defended the interests of the Bohemian Wenceslaus. He resisted the An jous even after Wenceslaus renounced the Hungarian Crown and died shortly after in 1306 as the last male descendant of the Premysl dynasty. Soon after his accession to the throne, the Hungarian king attempted to break the power of the magnates and unite Hungary under his own rule. Matus Cak of Trencin continued to oppose the rule of Charles Robert. With his army he attacked the royal castle at Budin and fought the magnates and bishops who supported Charles Robert. In 1311, after he succeeded in gaining the support of the majority of the nobility, Charles Robert prepared for a showdown with Matus Cak. But the latter allied himself with �SLOVAKIA 79 the Amadei clan who opposed the king in eastern Slovakia. The combined armies of Matus Cak and the Amadei defended themselves successfully at Saris Castle and forced the king to retreat. The royal army withdrew to Spis to rally the support of the German colonists there. With these new allies Charles again set out after Matus Cak. In the decisive battle, which took place June 15, 1312, at Rozhanovce, not far from Kosice, the king was victorious. The Amadei clan was completely routed, lost all its citadels and properties and was forced to flee to Poland, where it found refuge at the court of Ladislaus Lokietek, whom it had aided a short time before against the Czechs. The Amadei never returned to Hungary, but remained in Poland, and Charles Robert became master of eastern Slovakia. Matus Ca.k's setback at Rozhanovce did not break him completely. He continued to act independently in western Slovakia. Indeed, his power and prestige were still so great that the German King Frederick the Handsome, sought his aid in 1315 against Louis, the Bavarian, and against John of Luxemburg. Even though Charles Robert captured Vysehrad and Komarno in 1317 and dangerously threatened the sovereignty of Matus Cak of Trencin, nevertheless, the lord of the Vah and the 'flatras continued to rule independently to the end of his life. It was only after Matus Cak died in the Trencin castle in 1321, that Charles Robert was able to extend his rule over the western half of Slovakia. The following year Charles Robert also seized Bratislava. which had been in the hands of the Austrian dukes since tht beginning of the fourteenth century. Slovakia, after a brief period of independence, again became a part of the kingdom of Hungary which, under the rule of the Anjou dynasty, enjoyed a period of great political, economic and cultural growth. As soon as Charles Robert reunited the Hungarian kingdom, his first care was to put the economic affairs of Hungary into order. He founded many new cities, supported the development of mining, established a sound financial system, and encouraged commerce with neighboring states. It was during this period that a large number of new cities were founded also in Slovakia ·a nd the older ones were granted new privileges. �80 SLOVAKIA Bratislava, Trnava, Levoca, and Kosice became important centers of international commerce. The king- ipaid special attention to the Slovak mining towns, because their wealth swelled the royal coffers appreciably. Mining commissions supervised all mining projects and regulated the sale of all precious metals. A Count of the Chamber headed the mining commission; he concluded the rental agreement with the ruler and guaranteed the king revenues from the mines. The territory of Slovakia, rich in metallic ores, was divided into two mining chambers: the western half of Slovakia belonged under the management of the mining chamber of Kremnica, while the eastern half was managed by the chamber of Smolnica, which later moved its headquarters to Kosice. Zupan Done, who managed a large part of central Slovakia as the administrator of Zvolen, was a loyal adherent and faithful aide of Robert. At that time the Zvolen region was an extensive area, out of which later were gradually formed the independent districts of Turiec, Orava and Liptov, besides that of Zvolen. Administrator Done founded Liptovsky Hradok, built many churches, endowed monasteries, and served at the pa!pal court in Avignon as a rei[)resentative of Charles Robert. Slovakia played a significant role even in the international relations of the Hungarian kingdom. Already in 1327, Charles Robert and the Bohemian king, met in Trnava, where they formed an alliance against the Habsburgs. Slovakia became the territory on which the interests of the Hungarian, Bohemian and Polish kingdoms were settled. In 1335 the legates of John of Bohemia, Casimir the Great of Po-land and Charles Robert assembled at Trenein to determine the conditions of a friendly alliance. At this meeting an agreement was reached which enabled the meeting of the three kings in Vysehrad Castle and thus contributed largely to safeguard peace in central Europe. Louis the Great (1342-1382), son and successor of Charles Robert, tried to extend the limits of the Hungarian kingdom. He waged frequent wars on the southern borders of Hungary and conquered the northern part of the Balkan peninsula and the territory of present-day Rumania. (To be continued) � 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 1959, Vol. 9 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 4 [sic] (No. 29), March 1959.</li> <li>Issue 5 [sic] (No. 30), June-December 1959.</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 1959 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 72 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK tContinued) With their economic development the cities and towns also became important centers of cultural life. German settlers brough higher education to the Slovaks, so that many Slovak cities became centers of western European culture. Schools originated near the parish churches and the monasteries. Hospitals were built in many cities. Into all the cities came the architects, contractors and artists, who built and decorated not on:ly churches and city halls, but also the homes of the prosperous citizens. Of course, all this had some influence on the outlying villages and hamlets which were in constant touch with the cities. CRAFTSMEN'S GUILDS IN SLOVAKIA Besides the merchants, who brought various merchandise from the neighboring countries into Slovak cities and formed the wealthiest group, there lived in these cities also the tradesmen, who established their workshops and sold their wares at the markets. Slovaks were acquainted with some trades, others they acquired from their neighbors, but the bulk of trades were introduced into Slovakia by the German colonists in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. At first only those trades were fostered which served the everyday needs of the people (carpentry, cabinet-making, tanning, shoemaking, cloth-making, tailoring, etc.). Other trades originated and developed gradually with the economic and cultural conditions of the country. The higher the standard of living, the more trades were developed and applied in the cities, towns and hamlets. Just as the various types of trades came to the Slovaks by way of Germany, so came also the custom of the tradesmen organizing in associations which were called guilds. In every city there were as many guilds as there were different types of trades. As the number of trades SLOVAKIA 73 gradually increased, so did the number of guilds. In the large cities each trade had its own independent guild, while in the smaller towns, and later in the larger villages, the closely-related trades were united in one common guild. Only some cities were granted a monopoly on certain types of trade; e.g., only Kosice had the privilege of making linen (barchet) and Bardejov had the right to bleach cloth. In the larger cities work shops were usually grouped in particular streets so that many of these streets derived their names from the type of trade that prevailed there. In Bratislava, even today there still are streets called Sedlarska, Klobucnicka; in Trnava: Pekarska, Halenarska, Ostrozna, Masiarska ; in Banska Bystrica : Kovacska ; in Hlohovec: Mydlarska ; in Zilina and in Kosice: Zvonarska, Kovacska, Masiarska. As a technical organization, the guild took care of all the interests of its member,s. Each guild had its own written by-laws which contained detailed regulations called articles. The furrier's guild in Kosice had its own articles already in 1305. The Bratislava guild of butchers, shoemakers and bakers had written articles already in 1376. The organization of the guilds took place in the fourteenth century, attained its greatest development in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and lasted until modern times, when factory products began to give real competition to the products of the guilds. The by-laws of each city guild had to be approved by the city council and by the landlords; and by secular and church authorities in the smaller towns. The guilds frequently had their statutes approved even by their sovereigns. Due to the fact that many Slovak cities in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries had a majority of German inhabitants, the guild regulations were written at first in German or Latin. But later, when the Slovaks became the majority, the by-laws and correspondence of the guilds were more frequently in the Slovak language. The Trnava Guild of Tailors already in 1558 did its writing in Slovak; the Butchers' Guild in 1562. The guilds of Trencin and Hlohovec used the Slovak language at the end of the sixteenth 74 SLOVAKIA century. In the seventeenth century all the smaller towns (Banovce, Bojnice, Beckov, Bytca, Holic, Humenne, !lava, Jelsava, Myjava, Prievidza, Puchov, Rajec, Skalica, Sastin, Topol'cany, etc.) kept their guild records in Slovak. Only a master-craftsman could become a member of a respectable guild, after he had fulfilled all technical and moral requirements. In each guild the number of mastercraftsmen was limited to prevent overproduction in goods. In Bratislava in 1376, there could be only twenty-eight butchers and sixteen bakers. Every member of a guild was obliged to present only perfect products at prices determined by the guild. All tradesmen had to work in the same way so that their products were of like quality and price, and all competition removed. At the head of each guild was a guildmaster, whom the members elected for a period of one year. If there were a number of master craftsmen in a guild, the leader of the guild was the chief guildmaster. The guildmaster was the head of the guild, represented the guild before the authorities, especially before the city council in whose presence he took the oath of office after his election. He took care of all the guild's interests, ipresided at meetings, held several times a year in his home, and at banquets. He supervised the work of all members of his particular guild, judged th~ir products especially before they went to market, saw to it that all regulations were strictly observed, and in his care were all documents and letters and finances of his guild. The guildmaster was ,s ole arbiter of all arguments between members; he imposed punishment and collected all fines. He was a very respected personality not only among the membership of his guild, but among the general public as well. Members of the guild were divided into senior and junior master craftsmen. The elder masters, authorized by the guildmaster, supervised the work of the members of the guild and maintained order and discipline. The younger masters were obliged to perform various menial duties, such as lighting candles in the church, serving as waiters at banquets, taking care of the weak and sick masters, dig- SLOVAKIA 75 ging graves and acting as pallbearers for deceased masters. After banquets, if the senior masters were unable to find their way home, the junior members were obliged to escort them. Great care was taken to see that all members of a guild conscientiousl y performed their religious obligations. The wealthier guilds had their own altar in the parish church which was dedicated to the patron saint of their guild. Every guild member was obliged to attend divine services on Sunday and Holy Days, and had to receive the sacraments at least once a year. At church processions the entire guild took part under its own standard, which bore the image of the patron saint and the trademark of the guild. Any member guilty of transgression s, which caused scandal and so harmed the good name of a respectable guild, was obliged to pay a prescribed sum into the guild's treasury, or give candles to his church. In the event of danger, when an enemy threatened the city, the guild members were obliged to defend the ramparts of the city. The city assigned to each guild a tower or bastion which the members had to keep in good order and supply it with weapons and ammunition. City bastions have retained individual guild names even to this day (Pekarska basta, Obuvnicka, Masiarska, etc.). If a fire broke out in the city, each guild had to take part in the rescue work and also bring a prescribed number of buckets of water to help extinguish it. So that only honorable persons could become members of a guild, people of good morals and technically well prepared, many years of apprenticeshi p and str ict education wer e prescribed for applicants. SLOVAKIA AFTER THE TURKISH INVASION When the Turks abandoned plundered Hungary, King Bela IV set out to reconstruct his country. He invited foreign settlers in large numbers, so that some might cultivate the depopulated areas. Many Germans settled in the hilly regions to found new villages and towns. But nomadic Cumans also came again to occupy the lowlands and the southern foothills of the Slovak mountains. The Ger mans 76 SLOVAKIA brought a high degree of culture into the country and contributed handsomely to its economy, while the Cumans were supposed to be the military support of the Hungarian king. But Hungary, even during the reign of Bela IV, was in a difficult situation, which was caused by internal revolutions and the growth of the Bohemian kingdom under Premysl Otokar II and his successors. Bela nr could not maintain the integrity of his kingdom. His son wanted to rule during his lifetime, and Bela was forced to let him rule over the Eastern part of Hungary. This partition of Hungary weakened it terribly and increased the dangers of invasion by outside enemies. While the members of the ruling family quarreled, the wealthy nobles strengthened thei r own positions and prestige. Slovak territory played an important role in the development of these relations, since both the Czechs and the Hungarians were interested in it. Premysl Otokar II became ruler of Austrian lands and extended his rule to the banks of the Adriatic Sea. Since the Hungarian king claimed a part of these lands, especially Styria, hostile relations between the Czechs and Hungarians resulted. But Premysl Otokar II also wanted Slovakia, and this only infuriated the Hungarian monarch more. Wars were inevitable. They were fought on Slovak soil and the Slovaks paid with their lives and property for the enmity existing between two foreign rulers. A part of western Slovakia, including Bratislava, Trnava and Nitra, became prey of the Bohemian king several times after 1271 and the victim of the ruthless devastation of the Czech armies. Finally, this area fell into the hands of Austrian dukes and barons. After Bela's death (1270), the Hungarian throne was occupied by rulers who became friendly with the pagan Cumans, spent most of their time in their camps, where they abandoned themselves to riotous, pagan living. Consequently the whole country suffered. In 1280 the Bishops and nobles persuaded King Ladislaus IV to abandon his reckless adventures and to domesticate the wild Cumans. But the Cumans rebelled and pillaged the whole country, including Slovakia, where they committed the most brutal SLOVAKIA 77 .atrocities. Later, in 1285, the Tartars again invaded Slovakia and devastated Spis and the whole of eastern Slovakia. This invasion was used by the Cumans to pillage western Slovakia. It was thus that Slovakia had to pay for the weaknesses and defects of the kings of Hungary and their friendly relations with the Cumans. The weaker the king, the more the power of the nobility increased. They appropriated royal and ecclesiastical properties and recognized no government over themselves. When King Ladislaus IV refused to reform and continued to spend most of his time in the Cuman camps, the Hungarian magnates assassinated him. His successor, Andrew III (1290-1301), tried to be a good king and did what he could to save the kingdom from catastrophe; but it was too late. By the end of the thirteenth century Hungary disintegrated into several parts in which wealthy magnates reigned as independent little kings. Among these nobles was Matus Cak (Mahtoosh Tchak) of Trencin, "the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," who become the ruler of a large part of Slovakia at the end of the thirteenth century. Ca:k was not a Slovak by birth, but his ancestors had acquired large tracts of land in Slovakia. When he became the highest official of the royalty during the reign of Andrew III, he took advantage of his position and added new lands and castles to his family's holdings. Matus Cak seized the lands of many nobles, forced others to recognize his sovereignty, appropriated many royal citadels and in his ruthlessness did not even hesitate taking ecclesiastical properties. In 1299 he captured Trencin Castle which became the main stronghold of the mighty lord of the Vah and the Tatras. Ca.k's power extended from the Morava river to Spis and from the Danube to the Tatras, so that all of western Slovakia, except Bratislava and vicinity, and a large part of central Slovakia were under his rule. Beyond the Danube the mighty Vy s e h r a d Castle guarded the borders of Ca.k's country. In his Trencin citadel Matus Cak organized his entire court in regal splendor, and numerous courtiers did his bidding. As an independent ruler, he had his own army, coined his own money in Nitra 78 SLOVAKIA and established relations with neighboring rulers. Cak of Trencin built up his great power on the wealth which flowed to him from his extensive holdings. But the most reliable support of his power was the devotion and loyalty of his land administrators and his people. In Ca.k's army divisions of Slovak warriors also fought; they distinguished themselves by their courage, devotion and heroism. Ca.k's military glory, therefore, was in a large measure the merit of his Slovak subjects. At that time the Amadei Clan ruled over eastern Slovakia, including Kosice. It did not recognize the sovereignty of the Hungarian king. In 1301, when the death of King Andrew ill brought the Arpad dynasty to an end and several rulers sought the Hungarian throne, Slovakia was for all practical purposes an independent state under Matus Cak of Trencin. SLOVAKIA UNDER THE ANJOUS After Andrew ill's death, a part of the Hungarian nobility headed by Matus Cak called a son of King Wenceslaus of Bohemia to the throne, who already then was in possession of the Polish Crown. But the twelve-year-old Crown Prince Wenceslaus, crowned in Stolny Belehrad, was op.p osed by another group which sided with Pope Boniface VIII and chose Charles Robert of the French house of Anjou, who ruled in Naples. Relying on his power, Matus Cak of Trencin opposed Charles Robert and defended the interests of the Bohemian Wenceslaus. He resisted the An jous even after Wenceslaus renounced the Hungarian Crown and died shortly after in 1306 as the last male descendant of the Premysl dynasty. Soon after his accession to the throne, the Hungarian king attempted to break the power of the magnates and unite Hungary under his own rule. Matus Cak of Trencin continued to oppose the rule of Charles Robert. With his army he attacked the royal castle at Budin and fought the magnates and bishops who supported Charles Robert. In 1311, after he succeeded in gaining the support of the majority of the nobility, Charles Robert prepared for a showdown with Matus Cak. But the latter allied himself with SLOVAKIA 79 the Amadei clan who opposed the king in eastern Slovakia. The combined armies of Matus Cak and the Amadei defended themselves successfully at Saris Castle and forced the king to retreat. The royal army withdrew to Spis to rally the support of the German colonists there. With these new allies Charles again set out after Matus Cak. In the decisive battle, which took place June 15, 1312, at Rozhanovce, not far from Kosice, the king was victorious. The Amadei clan was completely routed, lost all its citadels and properties and was forced to flee to Poland, where it found refuge at the court of Ladislaus Lokietek, whom it had aided a short time before against the Czechs. The Amadei never returned to Hungary, but remained in Poland, and Charles Robert became master of eastern Slovakia. Matus Ca.k's setback at Rozhanovce did not break him completely. He continued to act independently in western Slovakia. Indeed, his power and prestige were still so great that the German King Frederick the Handsome, sought his aid in 1315 against Louis, the Bavarian, and against John of Luxemburg. Even though Charles Robert captured Vysehrad and Komarno in 1317 and dangerously threatened the sovereignty of Matus Cak of Trencin, nevertheless, the lord of the Vah and the 'flatras continued to rule independently to the end of his life. It was only after Matus Cak died in the Trencin castle in 1321, that Charles Robert was able to extend his rule over the western half of Slovakia. The following year Charles Robert also seized Bratislava. which had been in the hands of the Austrian dukes since tht beginning of the fourteenth century. Slovakia, after a brief period of independence, again became a part of the kingdom of Hungary which, under the rule of the Anjou dynasty, enjoyed a period of great political, economic and cultural growth. As soon as Charles Robert reunited the Hungarian kingdom, his first care was to put the economic affairs of Hungary into order. He founded many new cities, supported the development of mining, established a sound financial system, and encouraged commerce with neighboring states. It was during this period that a large number of new cities were founded also in Slovakia ·a nd the older ones were granted new privileges. 80 SLOVAKIA Bratislava, Trnava, Levoca, and Kosice became important centers of international commerce. The king- ipaid special attention to the Slovak mining towns, because their wealth swelled the royal coffers appreciably. Mining commissions supervised all mining projects and regulated the sale of all precious metals. A Count of the Chamber headed the mining commission; he concluded the rental agreement with the ruler and guaranteed the king revenues from the mines. The territory of Slovakia, rich in metallic ores, was divided into two mining chambers: the western half of Slovakia belonged under the management of the mining chamber of Kremnica, while the eastern half was managed by the chamber of Smolnica, which later moved its headquarters to Kosice. Zupan Done, who managed a large part of central Slovakia as the administrator of Zvolen, was a loyal adherent and faithful aide of Robert. At that time the Zvolen region was an extensive area, out of which later were gradually formed the independent districts of Turiec, Orava and Liptov, besides that of Zvolen. Administrator Done founded Liptovsky Hradok, built many churches, endowed monasteries, and served at the pa!pal court in Avignon as a rei[)resentative of Charles Robert. Slovakia played a significant role even in the international relations of the Hungarian kingdom. Already in 1327, Charles Robert and the Bohemian king, met in Trnava, where they formed an alliance against the Habsburgs. Slovakia became the territory on which the interests of the Hungarian, Bohemian and Polish kingdoms were settled. In 1335 the legates of John of Bohemia, Casimir the Great of Po-land and Charles Robert assembled at Trenein to determine the conditions of a friendly alliance. At this meeting an agreement was reached which enabled the meeting of the three kings in Vysehrad Castle and thus contributed largely to safeguard peace in central Europe. Louis the Great (1342-1382), son and successor of Charles Robert, tried to extend the limits of the Hungarian kingdom. He waged frequent wars on the southern borders of Hungary and conquered the northern part of the Balkan peninsula and the territory of present-day Rumania. (To be continued)  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 (8/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 9, No. 4 (29), March 1959 pp. 72-80 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 March 1959 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/260">Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), pp. 69-80</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/285">Vol. 9, No. 5 (30), pp. 75-80</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/3517a517ce57bab4b876f2fdea21c860.pdf c08cf7a50d76a857a2102c20249c84b1 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 7 WAST. G. MASARYK OF SLOVAK ORIGIN? P. A. Hrobak Many volumes have been written about Thomas Garrigue Masaryk, hi'S life, his concepts of r~lig,ion, history, philosophy, morals, etc. I1t is significant, however, that little has been written, even by Czechs themselves. about Masa,,ryk's ethnic origin. To be sure, tihe Czechs claim him as one of their greatest men. Accor<ling to what has been written about T. G. Masaryk, even by himself, he was, we are supposed to believe, aJt one and the same time, a Czech, a Slovak, and a "Czechoslovak." Then there is the story t!hat he wais of Jewish origin. The Slovak people did not regard Masaryk as their political or spiritual leader; he simply was not one of their kind. He did not believe in what tihe Sloviak people, as a who'le, believed in. That is why they did not !trust him. And when Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact of May 30, 1918, whlch he himse•l f drafted and Sligned - an agreement that was supposed to guarantee "states' rights" to Slovakia - rtihey were through wi!th him. When the Slovaks criticized Masaryk, most severely and harshly on occasions, leading Cze~hs and the several Slovaks m their pay would rebuke them for doing so to one of their own countrymen, Masaryk, who was, they said, born a Sloviak. Nevertheless, this did not make Masaryk •a Slovak, not even a renegade Slovak, as far as the Slovaks were concerned. What then was the ethnic origin of Thomas Ga11rigue MaJSaryk? Strange as it might seem, the truth is that Masaryk himself never cleared up the question. Lecturing in Geneva, July 6, 1915, with Professor Ernest Denis, T. G. Masaryk said: "Our struggle ,i s being waged in t!he spirit of our Hussite forefathers and has not ,o nly political but also mora1 justification" (1). Toi his book "Svetova Revoluce" (the English translation of which was titled "The Making of a State"), we find 1Jhe following statements rel,a ting to Masaryk's ethnic origin: '"11he Slovaks a,nd Czechs knew that J moisel!f always had been ifor Slovakia; by origin and lby tra,d~tions a Slovak, I feel �8 SLOVAKIA S~ova!k a,n d I ai1ways not on]iy feLt a wa[lffith for SlolWl'ki:a, but woriked for it ... . I know Sloivaikia and the people dn Sl-0vadcia quite welil" (2). "Prapa,ganda, as everywtb.ere, so in America, iwas aimed to .acqua1nrt AIIIlerica with our politica,l and oul-turail tb.is't:or:y; rpeople knew a,bouit the Czechs -and the former Czech kingdoon, bwt we h,a,d· t•rouible wiith 1Jhe Slovaks; they were unilmOWU'll and Americans found iit diffiouH to understand that they forun a part of our nat,ion"(3). "From childhood I d'e~t my Czech nature concretely in the und'er•s tandinig of 'the character, the vdews and ,Hfe of my COl\lllllt,e ymen i,n S!Jovacko (Slovalk ian Moravia and hn, Slovakia)) aind wi1h 1Jhe coUTse of time in Moravia and Bohemia. . . . I feel my Czech and Slovak nature, I would saiy, l'IUsbroailly, dia•l ectically; phi'liosQll)hicailliy I feel with Hus, Chelcicky, Zifilc•a, etc., UJP to Ha·vlicek"(4). But the same Masaryk also salid: "Our policy must be above all else Czech, in truth Czech, then it wiU be in truth a world policy and therefore also Slovanic" (5). And despite his many •a ssurances to the Slovaks during World WaJr I lthat he was a Slovak by birth ('he needed them to establish the Czecho.,Slovak State), T. G. Masaryk nevertheless declared at the Baris Peace Conference: "The Slovaks are Czechs and their language is but a dialect of the Czech language!" Dr. E·dward Benes supported Masa,ryk'is statement. Accoroing to the Czec.fu newspaper "Narod" (6), Masaryk had this to say about his mother rund father: "Mly father was a native of ~opcany ... my mother was from Hostopec, a Geriman coomnunity. . . . I think that I am a1C1C-0rd ing to blood a pure Slovak, withowt admi<lctu'l'es of Maigy,ar or German, even, though j_n my youth my matJher cO'U!ld SDeark better in Ger,marn than in Czech ... we pr~ed ,in German." 0 Professor Hans Kohn, generally regarded as a reliable historian, tells us that T.he greatest statesman of latter-<fa~ Aiustria, ·t he Czech ptb.ilosopher ThOm"as G. Masany{k, h-adi a foHowin,g of onJy a, .few int~lilectual's amo'lllg his own !PeQll)le. Born at the Czecho•S'llovak _b order, he tried to lbud·l d -a ,b ridge ifroon the progressive Czechs, who made foH use of the OIPIJOrtunHrl.es of free dev,elopprrnenlt in Austri'a, to the backward Slovaks to whom, under Malgy,air d-omlina,ti-on, n-0 such opportwni1ti,es were given"(7). "Thomas G. MasaJrY'k, a Moravian Slovak" ... "the s•o n of a Slovak terumster on an ,ilmperiial estate in Eastern Slovakia, Masa,cyk was born (11850)"(8) ... "The Czechs were able to build 1Jheir existence, UJruder the leadership of Paladky's diroiipl,e, Masacy,k, the liberaitor of the Czech nation, on these principles .... �SLOVAKIA AH of Ma,sacyk's wr1tmgs atbou,t the Czech proiblean, his 9 CESKA O'I'A2KA, and his bookls on Hus and on Karel Ha!V'licek are indebted to Plal!acky's conception of Czech histoey (9). Professor S. Harrison Thomson of Colorado University, whose book "Czechoslovakia in European History" (10) won him 1Jhe Czecho-Slovak State prize for li,tJerature in 1944 - ait a ti'me when that State did not faduaHy exist also had some difficulty in esta:blishing Masaryk's ethnic idenltity: ''Thomas Garr.itgue Masaicyk was ibor:n in t850 in Moravia, the son of a Slovak .futher and a Moravian mother"(lll). . . " By b1ood and tem'Perament Masaryk was as much Slovak as Czech'~(12) ... "To Masaryk, himself perhaps more Slovak than Czech, ,s uch a united effort (of Slova'1~s and Ozechs) .had been a self-evident neeessi-ty from the begiJming of the war"{13). Otto's Encyclopedia(14), pulblished eighteen years before Czecho-Slovalda was created, finds nothing Sfovak or "Czechoslovak" a'b out T. G. Masaryk, stating simply that he was :a "Czech philosopher." Robert J. Kerner, of Czech origin and a 'Sather Professor of Hrstory ,ait the Ull!iversli.ty of California, remarked that "Masaryk, himself of Slovak parentage, inspired Slovak youth a't the (Prague) University" (15). And on one ocoasion, Masaryk told Capek bluntly: "For us Czechs, Catholicism is ,a n impossible doctrine" ( 16). Dr. Joseph S. Roucek, professor at the Univwsity of Bridgeport, however, had a bit more to say: 1 "Mlasary{k, Tho1mas Garr.rilgiue (1~19371), Czechoslovak philosopher and statesmain, born on March 7. 1850, in tHodonliln on the Miorarvian-Slovakian border, of a Slovak father and a Czech mother'' . . . ''Afread,y as a stmd!ent e~pressed Ms strong Czec•h patriotism and h1is 01PPosition to soone of the db~s of the Oatholic Church into which he ,was born" . . . "The next yea.r (i:8'19, he) •beicame Pr,ivat-d!ozerut at the University of Vrienna and professor of philo'sophy at the Czech uruiversit:y Olf Prague (1882)" ... ''Turned to the great poiritilool and sooiJa,l problems of his da,y and became the naitionail ediuciat·OT Olf the Young Czech intelli!gents~ai" ... 'IHi:s cru&ad-e for truth led him to oppose the Czech romaintic nationaliSllll".. . ''Increased hi:s unpoipulacicy when he took uip the defense of mlsner, a Jew ,aiccused, of 'ritual murder', aigain!lt the emotiona•l anti-semitism of the Czech masses (11900)"~17). After the death of Masaryk, in September 1937, the Bratislava newspaper "Slovak" noted: "Masacyk was born in Hodonin, Moravia, March 7, 1850. !Es fuJtfuer, Joseph Masaryk, was a coach-<lriver on one of the Habsburg estates. Theresa Kropacek was his mother." �10 SLOVAKIA When Dr. Alice G. Masaryk, T. G. M.'s daughter, came ito Amerfoa in 1939 - her first visit here in twenltyeight years - she declined to describe herself as an ex,He, declaring "I am a Czech and Prague is my home" (18). Dr. W. Preston Warren, professor of phi1osophy rut Furman University in South Carolina, published his book "Masaryk's Democracy" in 1941 (19). Wit!h it he established himself as one of the foremost eulogists of Masaryk and his "Czechoslovakian" concept. That is understandable to informed people, because Dr. Warren is a charter member of the Masaryk Institute of America which, we are told, was founded "to promote cultural interchange between the Czechoslovak Republic and the United States." The fact remains, however, t!h at the Masaryk Institute promoted and still promotes the fiction of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation and the personal philosophy and pa:rt'icu1ar in!terests of Thomas Ga:ririgue Masaryk and Dr. Edwaro Benes and their socialistic political entourage. 1 T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Warren teHs us, was "Born, 1850, in Hodonin, Moravia" (p. 3) .... "His father was a coachman with the background of a serf; his mother was a former Austrian household servant" (p. 4). That is alt Emil Ludwig published his book "Spirit and Time" (Oonvemations with Masaryk) in 1935, the 270-page book being read and approved before publication by Masaryk himself. In the book Ludwig tells us that Masaryk descends from Czechs and Slovaks and was born "in southern Moravia, near the border of both tribes." To Ludwig, Masaryk's character appears to be "typically Slovak" (p.14) and Masaryk himself told 1hirm: "Already as a child I was l>Hingual. My father was Slovak, my mother spoke German, but also Czech. Her parents were from Hana. I prayed in German, because my mother used to pray in Germ1a n from her German prayerbook" (p. 105). On the oocasion of -t he twen'bie!th anniversary of the death of T. G. Masaryk (Sept. 14, 1957) the Austri1an journals "Furche" and "Oberosterreichische" had this to say about the ethnic origin of Masaryk: �SLOVAKIA 11 "A nahve of Hana, Moravia, Masaryk's mother worked for sev,e ra·l years in Vienna before she became -a cook for a wea,l thy family in Hodonin. At fiirst she knew p,r,a~tiicaili!Jy nothing LI!; Czech and spoke with her chi1dren in the beginning only in Gerunan. Masaryk was recorded as a Geruna.n, in his ourrio1.11l'lllIIl v-itae orf ,1 875, which he hiim1selif wr.ote before attaindn•g his doctorate od' philosop'h'y at the University olf Vienna. '"Ilwo foicts are usua1.Jiy omdtted in the biographies of the president, and these he hlmselif, in his conversation with Oharles Capek, fails to menition: where his mother worked! as a cook in Hodonin., and, secondly, on w.hat day she was married dn 1849. It is easy to ascertain Wh\Y these facts are not mentioned, since the Hodonin Register shows !!hat she was imar-ried on Augiust 15, 18419, and that Mas.aryftc ,wa,g born on March 7', 18'50: between t:he marriage of the pa,re'I1its and the birth of yowng 'I1hiomas there are not even seven months. The mention of the,se dates coruld ea,sitly prolil/Pt the bhowght that the ,p res,i dent w,as born out of wedilock. ' 1On the other .hand a,ga,in, it is easy to ascertain just why the faimi)Jy for whom -Masaryk's mother ,coolked is never mentioned: The fact is that Masaryik's mother worked as a cook for a certa·Ll'a wealthy meflchant of Hodonin who owned ihl,s own miU and quite a ,piece of land. This merchant was the graindfabher of the world •r enowned Austrian historian and politician Joseph :Riedl1ich, F1niance Minister in the Emperor's last government. Tihis merclhant of Hodonin was a11legedily the natura•l father of T. G. MasaJ.'IY(k, later the President of Ozeicho-Slovakia. '"l1he RedJicll fami!Jy was ,expelled duTinig the time of Maniie Theresa, as ,were a11 the J ,ewis'h families of Hodonin. Many of the ex,pelees went to Hungary, wlhile some settled in Moraivilan towns . The departure ,o f "the Jewish famiihes ca,used the little town of Hodonin serious economic daimaige and, therefore, .the •Elmiperor allow,e d thi.rteen J,ewish d'amrlies to return J•n 1783. Among the returnees was also one Lazar Redilich, to whom a son, Nathan, was born in I803, who a'lso ;became a merclh-an't. "Was the ,grandifather of Joseph Redlich also the niatura,l father of Thomas Garriigue Masaryk? T.he story is very pla,us~ble and explains why Thcxllllas G. Masaryk excelled over the rest orf the members of ihis family, ipart-iculady his brofoers. It was Redi.i,ch money that ,gave hilill the opportunity to an education; and it exip]:lllins why Masaryik fav,ored the cause o.f the Jews. If t he grandfather of Joseph Red'1ioh was a1liso the ,grandfather orf Miaisacyk',s child.ren, b'hen it is understandable why Jian Masaeyk, the president's son, pa-rtioul>ady his daiugMer, Alke Masal"yik, have definite Jewish facial characteristics." This story of Masaryk being of Jewish origin I had heard many years .ago from Czechs themselves, 1!he last time from the Czech paJtriot, the Rt. Rev. Monsignor V. F. Mikolasek, a short time before he died. It is significant that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was very favorably received and generously supported by leadling Jewish per- �12 SLOVAKIA sonalities and organizations, the Jewish press, as well as other institutions which were influenced or dominated by them, wherever ihe travelled during World War I to gain suppott for his proposed Czecho-Slovak State. In return, Masaryk and Benes placed many Jews in the vianious departmenits of tJhe Czecho-Slovak Government as a token of their appreciation for services rendered. In fact the Jews were always more fuvored than the SiJ.ovaks. As late as 1949, at a special press conference ca:lled at the CzechoSlovak Embassy by Dr. Francis Weisskopf, Minister Counsellor of the Embassy, and Ernest Polak, alternate executive director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for Czecho-Slovakia, Poland, Yugoslawa and Finland, they denied reports that Jews were subject,ed to growing pressures in Czecho-Sfovakia. They stat.ed that they themselves and many leading members of their government were Jews. Mr. Polak added th'at "today there are many, many Jews in the highest positions in Czechoslovakia, not only in politics but in economics and the professions." (20). Significant, too, is the item on Jan Masaryk, the son of President Thomas G. Masairyk, when he visarted the United States in 1939, as reported by TIME magazine: "Last week Jan Masaryk was in the U. S .... to work not for the Czechs ... but for Democracy and persecuted Jews in particular. ... He shed no t.ears for his lost land . ... The Jan Masaryks are now divorced(21). And no less significant is tJhe item whicih appeared in the CHICAGO AMERICAN (22) under the heading of "Deaths Elsewhere" and read: "Antonin Masaryk, nephew of the late first president of Czechosllovakia and export manager of a brewery in Israel, aboard the vessel Egyptian Prince, Dec. 16 enroute from Britain to Israel." Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was not a fool. He was a brilliant man. Masaryk knew what he was and what he wanted. He came among the Slovaks in America, in 1918, because he needed them for his Czecho-Slovak propaganda. After that he ignored them completley. So did his son Jan and his daughter Alice. 'I'he Slovaks wm never be- �SLOVAKIA 13 lieve that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was a Slovak. And the sooner the Czechs give up their crazy game of trying to make a "Czechoslovak" nation by the simple formula Slovak = Czechoslovak," the better for all con"Czech cerned. + REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. H. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 1'9. 20. 21. 22. T. G. Masaryk: SVETOVA REVOLUCE, Or,bis, Prague, 1925; p. 75. Jlbidlem, p . 263. ]bidem, p. 320. Jlbidem, p. 395. ]bidem, p. 51'l.3. NMtOD, Aug. 7, 1953; Chicago, Ill. CE1NT'R.6.L-E ASTERN EUROPE (Crucible of World Wars), by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., and Associates; !Pren1;,roe-,Hal!l, Inc., 19416; .p p. !13-54. N>idem, p. 83. CZECHOSLOVAKIA, ed!ited by 'ROlbert J. Kerner; Unwversi-ty of California Press, Beiikcley and Los Angeles, 194!9; p. 105. Pdnceton University Press, 1944. p . .191. p. 231. p. 252. OTTUV SLOVNIK N AUCNY, Praigue, 1900; VoJ. 16, p. 934. CZECHOSLOVAKIA (vd. albove); p. 4'9. Charles Caipek: MASARYK TELLS HIS STORY, Ahlen and UI11Wiin, Ltd., London, 1934; p. 209. SLAVONIC ENCYCLOPIEDIA, edited by J'OSeph s. !Roucek, PhJD., Universi-ty of Bridigeport; BhHosopll'ica'l Libracy, New Yoiik, li9419; p. 7'45. THE NEW YORK TIME'S, June 9, 1939. The Uniiversity .o,f N,ort.h Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1941. THE NEW YORK TIMES, March 5, 1949. Jan. 25, 19'J9. Dec. 27, 1957. 1 1 • • • 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 Zenk!, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47). � SLOVAKIA 7 WAST. G. MASARYK OF SLOVAK ORIGIN? P. A. Hrobak Many volumes have been written about Thomas Garrigue Masaryk, hi'S life, his concepts of r~lig,ion, history, philosophy, morals, etc. I1t is significant, however, that little has been written, even by Czechs themselves. about Masa,,ryk's ethnic origin. To be sure, tihe Czechs claim him as one of their greatest men. Accor<ling to what has been written about T. G. Masaryk, even by himself, he was, we are supposed to believe, aJt one and the same time, a Czech, a Slovak, and a "Czechoslovak." Then there is the story t!hat he wais of Jewish origin. The Slovak people did not regard Masaryk as their political or spiritual leader; he simply was not one of their kind. He did not believe in what tihe Sloviak people, as a who'le, believed in. That is why they did not !trust him. And when Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact of May 30, 1918, whlch he himse•l f drafted and Sligned - an agreement that was supposed to guarantee "states' rights" to Slovakia - rtihey were through wi!th him. When the Slovaks criticized Masaryk, most severely and harshly on occasions, leading Cze~hs and the several Slovaks m their pay would rebuke them for doing so to one of their own countrymen, Masaryk, who was, they said, born a Sloviak. Nevertheless, this did not make Masaryk •a Slovak, not even a renegade Slovak, as far as the Slovaks were concerned. What then was the ethnic origin of Thomas Ga11rigue MaJSaryk? Strange as it might seem, the truth is that Masaryk himself never cleared up the question. Lecturing in Geneva, July 6, 1915, with Professor Ernest Denis, T. G. Masaryk said: "Our struggle ,i s being waged in t!he spirit of our Hussite forefathers and has not ,o nly political but also mora1 justification" (1). Toi his book "Svetova Revoluce" (the English translation of which was titled "The Making of a State"), we find 1Jhe following statements rel,a ting to Masaryk's ethnic origin: '"11he Slovaks a,nd Czechs knew that J moisel!f always had been ifor Slovakia; by origin and lby tra,d~tions a Slovak, I feel �8 SLOVAKIA S~ova!k a,n d I ai1ways not on]iy feLt a wa[lffith for SlolWl'ki:a, but woriked for it ... . I know Sloivaikia and the people dn Sl-0vadcia quite welil" (2). "Prapa,ganda, as everywtb.ere, so in America, iwas aimed to .acqua1nrt AIIIlerica with our politica,l and oul-turail tb.is't:or:y; rpeople knew a,bouit the Czechs -and the former Czech kingdoon, bwt we h,a,d· t•rouible wiith 1Jhe Slovaks; they were unilmOWU'll and Americans found iit diffiouH to understand that they forun a part of our nat,ion"(3). "From childhood I d'e~t my Czech nature concretely in the und'er•s tandinig of 'the character, the vdews and ,Hfe of my COl\lllllt,e ymen i,n S!Jovacko (Slovalk ian Moravia and hn, Slovakia)) aind wi1h 1Jhe coUTse of time in Moravia and Bohemia. . . . I feel my Czech and Slovak nature, I would saiy, l'IUsbroailly, dia•l ectically; phi'liosQll)hicailliy I feel with Hus, Chelcicky, Zifilc•a, etc., UJP to Ha·vlicek"(4). But the same Masaryk also salid: "Our policy must be above all else Czech, in truth Czech, then it wiU be in truth a world policy and therefore also Slovanic" (5). And despite his many •a ssurances to the Slovaks during World WaJr I lthat he was a Slovak by birth ('he needed them to establish the Czecho.,Slovak State), T. G. Masaryk nevertheless declared at the Baris Peace Conference: "The Slovaks are Czechs and their language is but a dialect of the Czech language!" Dr. E·dward Benes supported Masa,ryk'is statement. Accoroing to the Czec.fu newspaper "Narod" (6), Masaryk had this to say about his mother rund father: "Mly father was a native of ~opcany ... my mother was from Hostopec, a Geriman coomnunity. . . . I think that I am a1C1C-0rd ing to blood a pure Slovak, withowt admi<lctu'l'es of Maigy,ar or German, even, though j_n my youth my matJher cO'U!ld SDeark better in Ger,marn than in Czech ... we pr~ed ,in German." 0 Professor Hans Kohn, generally regarded as a reliable historian, tells us that T.he greatest statesman of latter-<fa~ Aiustria, ·t he Czech ptb.ilosopher ThOm"as G. Masany{k, h-adi a foHowin,g of onJy a, .few int~lilectual's amo'lllg his own !PeQll)le. Born at the Czecho•S'llovak _b order, he tried to lbud·l d -a ,b ridge ifroon the progressive Czechs, who made foH use of the OIPIJOrtunHrl.es of free dev,elopprrnenlt in Austri'a, to the backward Slovaks to whom, under Malgy,air d-omlina,ti-on, n-0 such opportwni1ti,es were given"(7). "Thomas G. MasaJrY'k, a Moravian Slovak" ... "the s•o n of a Slovak terumster on an ,ilmperiial estate in Eastern Slovakia, Masa,cyk was born (11850)"(8) ... "The Czechs were able to build 1Jheir existence, UJruder the leadership of Paladky's diroiipl,e, Masacy,k, the liberaitor of the Czech nation, on these principles .... �SLOVAKIA AH of Ma,sacyk's wr1tmgs atbou,t the Czech proiblean, his 9 CESKA O'I'A2KA, and his bookls on Hus and on Karel Ha!V'licek are indebted to Plal!acky's conception of Czech histoey (9). Professor S. Harrison Thomson of Colorado University, whose book "Czechoslovakia in European History" (10) won him 1Jhe Czecho-Slovak State prize for li,tJerature in 1944 - ait a ti'me when that State did not faduaHy exist also had some difficulty in esta:blishing Masaryk's ethnic idenltity: ''Thomas Garr.itgue Masaicyk was ibor:n in t850 in Moravia, the son of a Slovak .futher and a Moravian mother"(lll). . . " By b1ood and tem'Perament Masaryk was as much Slovak as Czech'~(12) ... "To Masaryk, himself perhaps more Slovak than Czech, ,s uch a united effort (of Slova'1~s and Ozechs) .had been a self-evident neeessi-ty from the begiJming of the war"{13). Otto's Encyclopedia(14), pulblished eighteen years before Czecho-Slovalda was created, finds nothing Sfovak or "Czechoslovak" a'b out T. G. Masaryk, stating simply that he was :a "Czech philosopher." Robert J. Kerner, of Czech origin and a 'Sather Professor of Hrstory ,ait the Ull!iversli.ty of California, remarked that "Masaryk, himself of Slovak parentage, inspired Slovak youth a't the (Prague) University" (15). And on one ocoasion, Masaryk told Capek bluntly: "For us Czechs, Catholicism is ,a n impossible doctrine" ( 16). Dr. Joseph S. Roucek, professor at the Univwsity of Bridgeport, however, had a bit more to say: 1 "Mlasary{k, Tho1mas Garr.rilgiue (1~19371), Czechoslovak philosopher and statesmain, born on March 7. 1850, in tHodonliln on the Miorarvian-Slovakian border, of a Slovak father and a Czech mother'' . . . ''Afread,y as a stmd!ent e~pressed Ms strong Czec•h patriotism and h1is 01PPosition to soone of the db~s of the Oatholic Church into which he ,was born" . . . "The next yea.r (i:8'19, he) •beicame Pr,ivat-d!ozerut at the University of Vrienna and professor of philo'sophy at the Czech uruiversit:y Olf Prague (1882)" ... ''Turned to the great poiritilool and sooiJa,l problems of his da,y and became the naitionail ediuciat·OT Olf the Young Czech intelli!gents~ai" ... 'IHi:s cru&ad-e for truth led him to oppose the Czech romaintic nationaliSllll".. . ''Increased hi:s unpoipulacicy when he took uip the defense of mlsner, a Jew ,aiccused, of 'ritual murder', aigain!lt the emotiona•l anti-semitism of the Czech masses (11900)"~17). After the death of Masaryk, in September 1937, the Bratislava newspaper "Slovak" noted: "Masacyk was born in Hodonin, Moravia, March 7, 1850. !Es fuJtfuer, Joseph Masaryk, was a coach-<lriver on one of the Habsburg estates. Theresa Kropacek was his mother." �10 SLOVAKIA When Dr. Alice G. Masaryk, T. G. M.'s daughter, came ito Amerfoa in 1939 - her first visit here in twenltyeight years - she declined to describe herself as an ex,He, declaring "I am a Czech and Prague is my home" (18). Dr. W. Preston Warren, professor of phi1osophy rut Furman University in South Carolina, published his book "Masaryk's Democracy" in 1941 (19). Wit!h it he established himself as one of the foremost eulogists of Masaryk and his "Czechoslovakian" concept. That is understandable to informed people, because Dr. Warren is a charter member of the Masaryk Institute of America which, we are told, was founded "to promote cultural interchange between the Czechoslovak Republic and the United States." The fact remains, however, t!h at the Masaryk Institute promoted and still promotes the fiction of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation and the personal philosophy and pa:rt'icu1ar in!terests of Thomas Ga:ririgue Masaryk and Dr. Edwaro Benes and their socialistic political entourage. 1 T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Warren teHs us, was "Born, 1850, in Hodonin, Moravia" (p. 3) .... "His father was a coachman with the background of a serf; his mother was a former Austrian household servant" (p. 4). That is alt Emil Ludwig published his book "Spirit and Time" (Oonvemations with Masaryk) in 1935, the 270-page book being read and approved before publication by Masaryk himself. In the book Ludwig tells us that Masaryk descends from Czechs and Slovaks and was born "in southern Moravia, near the border of both tribes." To Ludwig, Masaryk's character appears to be "typically Slovak" (p.14) and Masaryk himself told 1hirm: "Already as a child I was l>Hingual. My father was Slovak, my mother spoke German, but also Czech. Her parents were from Hana. I prayed in German, because my mother used to pray in Germ1a n from her German prayerbook" (p. 105). On the oocasion of -t he twen'bie!th anniversary of the death of T. G. Masaryk (Sept. 14, 1957) the Austri1an journals "Furche" and "Oberosterreichische" had this to say about the ethnic origin of Masaryk: �SLOVAKIA 11 "A nahve of Hana, Moravia, Masaryk's mother worked for sev,e ra·l years in Vienna before she became -a cook for a wea,l thy family in Hodonin. At fiirst she knew p,r,a~tiicaili!Jy nothing LI!; Czech and spoke with her chi1dren in the beginning only in Gerunan. Masaryk was recorded as a Geruna.n, in his ourrio1.11l'lllIIl v-itae orf ,1 875, which he hiim1selif wr.ote before attaindn•g his doctorate od' philosop'h'y at the University olf Vienna. '"Ilwo foicts are usua1.Jiy omdtted in the biographies of the president, and these he hlmselif, in his conversation with Oharles Capek, fails to menition: where his mother worked! as a cook in Hodonin., and, secondly, on w.hat day she was married dn 1849. It is easy to ascertain Wh\Y these facts are not mentioned, since the Hodonin Register shows !!hat she was imar-ried on Augiust 15, 18419, and that Mas.aryftc ,wa,g born on March 7', 18'50: between t:he marriage of the pa,re'I1its and the birth of yowng 'I1hiomas there are not even seven months. The mention of the,se dates coruld ea,sitly prolil/Pt the bhowght that the ,p res,i dent w,as born out of wedilock. ' 1On the other .hand a,ga,in, it is easy to ascertain just why the faimi)Jy for whom -Masaryk's mother ,coolked is never mentioned: The fact is that Masaryik's mother worked as a cook for a certa·Ll'a wealthy meflchant of Hodonin who owned ihl,s own miU and quite a ,piece of land. This merchant was the graindfabher of the world •r enowned Austrian historian and politician Joseph :Riedl1ich, F1niance Minister in the Emperor's last government. Tihis merclhant of Hodonin was a11legedily the natura•l father of T. G. MasaJ.'IY(k, later the President of Ozeicho-Slovakia. '"l1he RedJicll fami!Jy was ,expelled duTinig the time of Maniie Theresa, as ,were a11 the J ,ewis'h families of Hodonin. Many of the ex,pelees went to Hungary, wlhile some settled in Moraivilan towns . The departure ,o f "the Jewish famiihes ca,used the little town of Hodonin serious economic daimaige and, therefore, .the •Elmiperor allow,e d thi.rteen J,ewish d'amrlies to return J•n 1783. Among the returnees was also one Lazar Redilich, to whom a son, Nathan, was born in I803, who a'lso ;became a merclh-an't. "Was the ,grandifather of Joseph Redlich also the niatura,l father of Thomas Garriigue Masaryk? T.he story is very pla,us~ble and explains why Thcxllllas G. Masaryk excelled over the rest orf the members of ihis family, ipart-iculady his brofoers. It was Redi.i,ch money that ,gave hilill the opportunity to an education; and it exip]:lllins why Masaryik fav,ored the cause o.f the Jews. If t he grandfather of Joseph Red'1ioh was a1liso the ,grandfather orf Miaisacyk',s child.ren, b'hen it is understandable why Jian Masaeyk, the president's son, pa-rtioul>ady his daiugMer, Alke Masal"yik, have definite Jewish facial characteristics." This story of Masaryk being of Jewish origin I had heard many years .ago from Czechs themselves, 1!he last time from the Czech paJtriot, the Rt. Rev. Monsignor V. F. Mikolasek, a short time before he died. It is significant that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was very favorably received and generously supported by leadling Jewish per- �12 SLOVAKIA sonalities and organizations, the Jewish press, as well as other institutions which were influenced or dominated by them, wherever ihe travelled during World War I to gain suppott for his proposed Czecho-Slovak State. In return, Masaryk and Benes placed many Jews in the vianious departmenits of tJhe Czecho-Slovak Government as a token of their appreciation for services rendered. In fact the Jews were always more fuvored than the SiJ.ovaks. As late as 1949, at a special press conference ca:lled at the CzechoSlovak Embassy by Dr. Francis Weisskopf, Minister Counsellor of the Embassy, and Ernest Polak, alternate executive director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for Czecho-Slovakia, Poland, Yugoslawa and Finland, they denied reports that Jews were subject,ed to growing pressures in Czecho-Sfovakia. They stat.ed that they themselves and many leading members of their government were Jews. Mr. Polak added th'at "today there are many, many Jews in the highest positions in Czechoslovakia, not only in politics but in economics and the professions." (20). Significant, too, is the item on Jan Masaryk, the son of President Thomas G. Masairyk, when he visarted the United States in 1939, as reported by TIME magazine: "Last week Jan Masaryk was in the U. S .... to work not for the Czechs ... but for Democracy and persecuted Jews in particular. ... He shed no t.ears for his lost land . ... The Jan Masaryks are now divorced(21). And no less significant is tJhe item whicih appeared in the CHICAGO AMERICAN (22) under the heading of "Deaths Elsewhere" and read: "Antonin Masaryk, nephew of the late first president of Czechosllovakia and export manager of a brewery in Israel, aboard the vessel Egyptian Prince, Dec. 16 enroute from Britain to Israel." Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was not a fool. He was a brilliant man. Masaryk knew what he was and what he wanted. He came among the Slovaks in America, in 1918, because he needed them for his Czecho-Slovak propaganda. After that he ignored them completley. So did his son Jan and his daughter Alice. 'I'he Slovaks wm never be- �SLOVAKIA 13 lieve that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was a Slovak. And the sooner the Czechs give up their crazy game of trying to make a "Czechoslovak" nation by the simple formula Slovak = Czechoslovak," the better for all con"Czech cerned. + REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. H. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 1'9. 20. 21. 22. T. G. Masaryk: SVETOVA REVOLUCE, Or,bis, Prague, 1925; p. 75. Jlbidlem, p . 263. ]bidem, p. 320. Jlbidem, p. 395. ]bidem, p. 51'l.3. NMtOD, Aug. 7, 1953; Chicago, Ill. CE1NT'R.6.L-E ASTERN EUROPE (Crucible of World Wars), by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., and Associates; !Pren1;,roe-,Hal!l, Inc., 19416; .p p. !13-54. N>idem, p. 83. CZECHOSLOVAKIA, ed!ited by 'ROlbert J. Kerner; Unwversi-ty of California Press, Beiikcley and Los Angeles, 194!9; p. 105. Pdnceton University Press, 1944. p . .191. p. 231. p. 252. OTTUV SLOVNIK N AUCNY, Praigue, 1900; VoJ. 16, p. 934. CZECHOSLOVAKIA (vd. albove); p. 4'9. Charles Caipek: MASARYK TELLS HIS STORY, Ahlen and UI11Wiin, Ltd., London, 1934; p. 209. SLAVONIC ENCYCLOPIEDIA, edited by J'OSeph s. !Roucek, PhJD., Universi-ty of Bridigeport; BhHosopll'ica'l Libracy, New Yoiik, li9419; p. 7'45. THE NEW YORK TIME'S, June 9, 1939. The Uniiversity .o,f N,ort.h Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1941. THE NEW YORK TIMES, March 5, 1949. Jan. 25, 19'J9. Dec. 27, 1957. 1 1 • • • 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 Zenk!, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47). � 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 1960, Vol. 10 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 6 [sic] (No. 31), March-June 1960.</li> <li>Issue 7 [sic] (No. 32), September-December 1960.</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 1960 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 7 WAST. G. MASARYK OF SLOVAK ORIGIN? P. A. Hrobak Many volumes have been written about Thomas Garrigue Masaryk, hi'S life, his concepts of r~lig,ion, history, philosophy, morals, etc. I1t is significant, however, that little has been written, even by Czechs themselves. about Masa,,ryk's ethnic origin. To be sure, tihe Czechs claim him as one of their greatest men. Accor<ling to what has been written about T. G. Masaryk, even by himself, he was, we are supposed to believe, aJt one and the same time, a Czech, a Slovak, and a "Czechoslovak." Then there is the story t!hat he wais of Jewish origin. The Slovak people did not regard Masaryk as their political or spiritual leader; he simply was not one of their kind. He did not believe in what tihe Sloviak people, as a who'le, believed in. That is why they did not !trust him. And when Masaryk repudiated the Pittsburgh Pact of May 30, 1918, whlch he himse•l f drafted and Sligned - an agreement that was supposed to guarantee "states' rights" to Slovakia - rtihey were through wi!th him. When the Slovaks criticized Masaryk, most severely and harshly on occasions, leading Cze~hs and the several Slovaks m their pay would rebuke them for doing so to one of their own countrymen, Masaryk, who was, they said, born a Sloviak. Nevertheless, this did not make Masaryk •a Slovak, not even a renegade Slovak, as far as the Slovaks were concerned. What then was the ethnic origin of Thomas Ga11rigue MaJSaryk? Strange as it might seem, the truth is that Masaryk himself never cleared up the question. Lecturing in Geneva, July 6, 1915, with Professor Ernest Denis, T. G. Masaryk said: "Our struggle ,i s being waged in t!he spirit of our Hussite forefathers and has not ,o nly political but also mora1 justification" (1). Toi his book "Svetova Revoluce" (the English translation of which was titled "The Making of a State"), we find 1Jhe following statements rel,a ting to Masaryk's ethnic origin: '"11he Slovaks a,nd Czechs knew that J moisel!f always had been ifor Slovakia; by origin and lby tra,d~tions a Slovak, I feel 8 SLOVAKIA S~ova!k a,n d I ai1ways not on]iy feLt a wa[lffith for SlolWl'ki:a, but woriked for it ... . I know Sloivaikia and the people dn Sl-0vadcia quite welil" (2). "Prapa,ganda, as everywtb.ere, so in America, iwas aimed to .acqua1nrt AIIIlerica with our politica,l and oul-turail tb.is't:or:y; rpeople knew a,bouit the Czechs -and the former Czech kingdoon, bwt we h,a,d· t•rouible wiith 1Jhe Slovaks; they were unilmOWU'll and Americans found iit diffiouH to understand that they forun a part of our nat,ion"(3). "From childhood I d'e~t my Czech nature concretely in the und'er•s tandinig of 'the character, the vdews and ,Hfe of my COl\lllllt,e ymen i,n S!Jovacko (Slovalk ian Moravia and hn, Slovakia)) aind wi1h 1Jhe coUTse of time in Moravia and Bohemia. . . . I feel my Czech and Slovak nature, I would saiy, l'IUsbroailly, dia•l ectically; phi'liosQll)hicailliy I feel with Hus, Chelcicky, Zifilc•a, etc., UJP to Ha·vlicek"(4). But the same Masaryk also salid: "Our policy must be above all else Czech, in truth Czech, then it wiU be in truth a world policy and therefore also Slovanic" (5). And despite his many •a ssurances to the Slovaks during World WaJr I lthat he was a Slovak by birth ('he needed them to establish the Czecho.,Slovak State), T. G. Masaryk nevertheless declared at the Baris Peace Conference: "The Slovaks are Czechs and their language is but a dialect of the Czech language!" Dr. E·dward Benes supported Masa,ryk'is statement. Accoroing to the Czec.fu newspaper "Narod" (6), Masaryk had this to say about his mother rund father: "Mly father was a native of ~opcany ... my mother was from Hostopec, a Geriman coomnunity. . . . I think that I am a1C1C-0rd ing to blood a pure Slovak, withowt admi<lctu'l'es of Maigy,ar or German, even, though j_n my youth my matJher cO'U!ld SDeark better in Ger,marn than in Czech ... we pr~ed ,in German." 0 Professor Hans Kohn, generally regarded as a reliable historian, tells us that T.he greatest statesman of latter-<fa~ Aiustria, ·t he Czech ptb.ilosopher ThOm"as G. Masany{k, h-adi a foHowin,g of onJy a, .few int~lilectual's amo'lllg his own !PeQll)le. Born at the Czecho•S'llovak _b order, he tried to lbud·l d -a ,b ridge ifroon the progressive Czechs, who made foH use of the OIPIJOrtunHrl.es of free dev,elopprrnenlt in Austri'a, to the backward Slovaks to whom, under Malgy,air d-omlina,ti-on, n-0 such opportwni1ti,es were given"(7). "Thomas G. MasaJrY'k, a Moravian Slovak" ... "the s•o n of a Slovak terumster on an ,ilmperiial estate in Eastern Slovakia, Masa,cyk was born (11850)"(8) ... "The Czechs were able to build 1Jheir existence, UJruder the leadership of Paladky's diroiipl,e, Masacy,k, the liberaitor of the Czech nation, on these principles .... SLOVAKIA AH of Ma,sacyk's wr1tmgs atbou,t the Czech proiblean, his 9 CESKA O'I'A2KA, and his bookls on Hus and on Karel Ha!V'licek are indebted to Plal!acky's conception of Czech histoey (9). Professor S. Harrison Thomson of Colorado University, whose book "Czechoslovakia in European History" (10) won him 1Jhe Czecho-Slovak State prize for li,tJerature in 1944 - ait a ti'me when that State did not faduaHy exist also had some difficulty in esta:blishing Masaryk's ethnic idenltity: ''Thomas Garr.itgue Masaicyk was ibor:n in t850 in Moravia, the son of a Slovak .futher and a Moravian mother"(lll). . . " By b1ood and tem'Perament Masaryk was as much Slovak as Czech'~(12) ... "To Masaryk, himself perhaps more Slovak than Czech, ,s uch a united effort (of Slova'1~s and Ozechs) .had been a self-evident neeessi-ty from the begiJming of the war"{13). Otto's Encyclopedia(14), pulblished eighteen years before Czecho-Slovalda was created, finds nothing Sfovak or "Czechoslovak" a'b out T. G. Masaryk, stating simply that he was :a "Czech philosopher." Robert J. Kerner, of Czech origin and a 'Sather Professor of Hrstory ,ait the Ull!iversli.ty of California, remarked that "Masaryk, himself of Slovak parentage, inspired Slovak youth a't the (Prague) University" (15). And on one ocoasion, Masaryk told Capek bluntly: "For us Czechs, Catholicism is ,a n impossible doctrine" ( 16). Dr. Joseph S. Roucek, professor at the Univwsity of Bridgeport, however, had a bit more to say: 1 "Mlasary{k, Tho1mas Garr.rilgiue (1~19371), Czechoslovak philosopher and statesmain, born on March 7. 1850, in tHodonliln on the Miorarvian-Slovakian border, of a Slovak father and a Czech mother'' . . . ''Afread,y as a stmd!ent e~pressed Ms strong Czec•h patriotism and h1is 01PPosition to soone of the db~s of the Oatholic Church into which he ,was born" . . . "The next yea.r (i:8'19, he) •beicame Pr,ivat-d!ozerut at the University of Vrienna and professor of philo'sophy at the Czech uruiversit:y Olf Prague (1882)" ... ''Turned to the great poiritilool and sooiJa,l problems of his da,y and became the naitionail ediuciat·OT Olf the Young Czech intelli!gents~ai" ... 'IHi:s cru&ad-e for truth led him to oppose the Czech romaintic nationaliSllll".. . ''Increased hi:s unpoipulacicy when he took uip the defense of mlsner, a Jew ,aiccused, of 'ritual murder', aigain!lt the emotiona•l anti-semitism of the Czech masses (11900)"~17). After the death of Masaryk, in September 1937, the Bratislava newspaper "Slovak" noted: "Masacyk was born in Hodonin, Moravia, March 7, 1850. !Es fuJtfuer, Joseph Masaryk, was a coach-<lriver on one of the Habsburg estates. Theresa Kropacek was his mother." 10 SLOVAKIA When Dr. Alice G. Masaryk, T. G. M.'s daughter, came ito Amerfoa in 1939 - her first visit here in twenltyeight years - she declined to describe herself as an ex,He, declaring "I am a Czech and Prague is my home" (18). Dr. W. Preston Warren, professor of phi1osophy rut Furman University in South Carolina, published his book "Masaryk's Democracy" in 1941 (19). Wit!h it he established himself as one of the foremost eulogists of Masaryk and his "Czechoslovakian" concept. That is understandable to informed people, because Dr. Warren is a charter member of the Masaryk Institute of America which, we are told, was founded "to promote cultural interchange between the Czechoslovak Republic and the United States." The fact remains, however, t!h at the Masaryk Institute promoted and still promotes the fiction of an ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation and the personal philosophy and pa:rt'icu1ar in!terests of Thomas Ga:ririgue Masaryk and Dr. Edwaro Benes and their socialistic political entourage. 1 T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Warren teHs us, was "Born, 1850, in Hodonin, Moravia" (p. 3) .... "His father was a coachman with the background of a serf; his mother was a former Austrian household servant" (p. 4). That is alt Emil Ludwig published his book "Spirit and Time" (Oonvemations with Masaryk) in 1935, the 270-page book being read and approved before publication by Masaryk himself. In the book Ludwig tells us that Masaryk descends from Czechs and Slovaks and was born "in southern Moravia, near the border of both tribes." To Ludwig, Masaryk's character appears to be "typically Slovak" (p.14) and Masaryk himself told 1hirm: "Already as a child I was l>Hingual. My father was Slovak, my mother spoke German, but also Czech. Her parents were from Hana. I prayed in German, because my mother used to pray in Germ1a n from her German prayerbook" (p. 105). On the oocasion of -t he twen'bie!th anniversary of the death of T. G. Masaryk (Sept. 14, 1957) the Austri1an journals "Furche" and "Oberosterreichische" had this to say about the ethnic origin of Masaryk: SLOVAKIA 11 "A nahve of Hana, Moravia, Masaryk's mother worked for sev,e ra·l years in Vienna before she became -a cook for a wea,l thy family in Hodonin. At fiirst she knew p,r,a~tiicaili!Jy nothing LI!; Czech and spoke with her chi1dren in the beginning only in Gerunan. Masaryk was recorded as a Geruna.n, in his ourrio1.11l'lllIIl v-itae orf ,1 875, which he hiim1selif wr.ote before attaindn•g his doctorate od' philosop'h'y at the University olf Vienna. '"Ilwo foicts are usua1.Jiy omdtted in the biographies of the president, and these he hlmselif, in his conversation with Oharles Capek, fails to menition: where his mother worked! as a cook in Hodonin., and, secondly, on w.hat day she was married dn 1849. It is easy to ascertain Wh\Y these facts are not mentioned, since the Hodonin Register shows !!hat she was imar-ried on Augiust 15, 18419, and that Mas.aryftc ,wa,g born on March 7', 18'50: between t:he marriage of the pa,re'I1its and the birth of yowng 'I1hiomas there are not even seven months. The mention of the,se dates coruld ea,sitly prolil/Pt the bhowght that the ,p res,i dent w,as born out of wedilock. ' 1On the other .hand a,ga,in, it is easy to ascertain just why the faimi)Jy for whom -Masaryk's mother ,coolked is never mentioned: The fact is that Masaryik's mother worked as a cook for a certa·Ll'a wealthy meflchant of Hodonin who owned ihl,s own miU and quite a ,piece of land. This merchant was the graindfabher of the world •r enowned Austrian historian and politician Joseph :Riedl1ich, F1niance Minister in the Emperor's last government. Tihis merclhant of Hodonin was a11legedily the natura•l father of T. G. MasaJ.'IY(k, later the President of Ozeicho-Slovakia. '"l1he RedJicll fami!Jy was ,expelled duTinig the time of Maniie Theresa, as ,were a11 the J ,ewis'h families of Hodonin. Many of the ex,pelees went to Hungary, wlhile some settled in Moraivilan towns . The departure ,o f "the Jewish famiihes ca,used the little town of Hodonin serious economic daimaige and, therefore, .the •Elmiperor allow,e d thi.rteen J,ewish d'amrlies to return J•n 1783. Among the returnees was also one Lazar Redilich, to whom a son, Nathan, was born in I803, who a'lso ;became a merclh-an't. "Was the ,grandifather of Joseph Redlich also the niatura,l father of Thomas Garriigue Masaryk? T.he story is very pla,us~ble and explains why Thcxllllas G. Masaryk excelled over the rest orf the members of ihis family, ipart-iculady his brofoers. It was Redi.i,ch money that ,gave hilill the opportunity to an education; and it exip]:lllins why Masaryik fav,ored the cause o.f the Jews. If t he grandfather of Joseph Red'1ioh was a1liso the ,grandfather orf Miaisacyk',s child.ren, b'hen it is understandable why Jian Masaeyk, the president's son, pa-rtioul>ady his daiugMer, Alke Masal"yik, have definite Jewish facial characteristics." This story of Masaryk being of Jewish origin I had heard many years .ago from Czechs themselves, 1!he last time from the Czech paJtriot, the Rt. Rev. Monsignor V. F. Mikolasek, a short time before he died. It is significant that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was very favorably received and generously supported by leadling Jewish per- 12 SLOVAKIA sonalities and organizations, the Jewish press, as well as other institutions which were influenced or dominated by them, wherever ihe travelled during World War I to gain suppott for his proposed Czecho-Slovak State. In return, Masaryk and Benes placed many Jews in the vianious departmenits of tJhe Czecho-Slovak Government as a token of their appreciation for services rendered. In fact the Jews were always more fuvored than the SiJ.ovaks. As late as 1949, at a special press conference ca:lled at the CzechoSlovak Embassy by Dr. Francis Weisskopf, Minister Counsellor of the Embassy, and Ernest Polak, alternate executive director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for Czecho-Slovakia, Poland, Yugoslawa and Finland, they denied reports that Jews were subject,ed to growing pressures in Czecho-Sfovakia. They stat.ed that they themselves and many leading members of their government were Jews. Mr. Polak added th'at "today there are many, many Jews in the highest positions in Czechoslovakia, not only in politics but in economics and the professions." (20). Significant, too, is the item on Jan Masaryk, the son of President Thomas G. Masairyk, when he visarted the United States in 1939, as reported by TIME magazine: "Last week Jan Masaryk was in the U. S .... to work not for the Czechs ... but for Democracy and persecuted Jews in particular. ... He shed no t.ears for his lost land . ... The Jan Masaryks are now divorced(21). And no less significant is tJhe item whicih appeared in the CHICAGO AMERICAN (22) under the heading of "Deaths Elsewhere" and read: "Antonin Masaryk, nephew of the late first president of Czechosllovakia and export manager of a brewery in Israel, aboard the vessel Egyptian Prince, Dec. 16 enroute from Britain to Israel." Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was not a fool. He was a brilliant man. Masaryk knew what he was and what he wanted. He came among the Slovaks in America, in 1918, because he needed them for his Czecho-Slovak propaganda. After that he ignored them completley. So did his son Jan and his daughter Alice. 'I'he Slovaks wm never be- SLOVAKIA 13 lieve that Thomas Garrigue Masaryk was a Slovak. And the sooner the Czechs give up their crazy game of trying to make a "Czechoslovak" nation by the simple formula Slovak = Czechoslovak," the better for all con"Czech cerned. + REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. H. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 1'9. 20. 21. 22. T. G. Masaryk: SVETOVA REVOLUCE, Or,bis, Prague, 1925; p. 75. Jlbidlem, p . 263. ]bidem, p. 320. Jlbidem, p. 395. ]bidem, p. 51'l.3. NMtOD, Aug. 7, 1953; Chicago, Ill. CE1NT'R.6.L-E ASTERN EUROPE (Crucible of World Wars), by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., and Associates; !Pren1;,roe-,Hal!l, Inc., 19416; .p p. !13-54. N>idem, p. 83. CZECHOSLOVAKIA, ed!ited by 'ROlbert J. Kerner; Unwversi-ty of California Press, Beiikcley and Los Angeles, 194!9; p. 105. Pdnceton University Press, 1944. p . .191. p. 231. p. 252. OTTUV SLOVNIK N AUCNY, Praigue, 1900; VoJ. 16, p. 934. CZECHOSLOVAKIA (vd. albove); p. 4'9. Charles Caipek: MASARYK TELLS HIS STORY, Ahlen and UI11Wiin, Ltd., London, 1934; p. 209. SLAVONIC ENCYCLOPIEDIA, edited by J'OSeph s. !Roucek, PhJD., Universi-ty of Bridigeport; BhHosopll'ica'l Libracy, New Yoiik, li9419; p. 7'45. THE NEW YORK TIME'S, June 9, 1939. The Uniiversity .o,f N,ort.h Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1941. THE NEW YORK TIMES, March 5, 1949. Jan. 25, 19'J9. Dec. 27, 1957. 1 1 • • • 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 Zenk!, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47).  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 Was T. G. Masaryk of Slovak Origin? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 7 (32), September-December 1960 pp. 7-13 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 September-December 1960 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/0464996abeca82de4c8feeb05af912a5.pdf 4995937ff4152d7aa386146fa0962741 PDF Text Text 36 SLOVAKIA officials aip,pear to have been equally uncertain about this question at the time, for the Foreign, Office did not reply until November 13, 191'8, and even then did not take a clear stand. See, Foreign Relations, 1919. The Paris Peace Conference, 13 vols. (Washington, 19~1947), H, 3716°377. (3) "(Peace) cannot be pieced together out of individual understandings between p01Werful states. All the parties to this war must join in the settlemenit of every issue -anyiwhere invo'1ved in it .. . an"d every item oo it must be submi•tted to the cOOl111Tlon judgment .. ." Wilson's address. February '111, 19118, see Ray S. Baker and William E. Dodd (eds.); The Public Papers of Woodrow Wilson, War and Peace, 2 vols. (N~w York, 1927), L, 180. (4) !Before the recognition of the Czechoslovak National Council Wilson met Masaryk only once, on Jun,e 19, 19118, several weeks aifter he had first decided upon an antiJAUSltrian policy (see this author's article "The United States and the Dissolution oo AustriaJHunigary," Journal of Cent.ral European Affairs, X (Octolber, 1950), pp. 256-270, and two mon-ths before he suddenly considered recognition Olf the Czechoslovaks. The question was not broached in their correspondence . • • • WAS CZECH THE VEIDCLE OF SLOVAK LITERATURE? P.A. Hrobak Since the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, a concerted, deliberate attempt on the part of certain Czechs and pro-Czechs is being made to prove the antiquity of the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation. The propaganda apparatus of the political state formed by the Slovaks and the Czechs has been constantly used, even at the expense of the Slovaks, to prove that there really is no Slovak nation, that the Slovaks are but a branch of the Czech nation and the Slovak language is but a dialect of the Czech language. In the memorandum which T. G. Masaryk sent to the U. S. State Department (Lansing), on August 31, 1918, he said: "Slovakia, the southern part of the nation, was occupied by the Magyars and separated early from Bohemia and Moravia; at times, even later, the Slovaks were independent." After over forty years of the Pan-Czech propaganda, we find that the Slovaks are still around and are more determined than ever to preserve and enhance their ethnic individuality. They have successfully resisted all attempts to be made over into Czechs, as prior to 1918 they successfuHy resisted all attempts to be made into Magyars. �SLOVAKIA 37 Over the years several "authorities" and "eminent" scholars and journalists have repeated the distortions, false claims, and deliberate untruths of the propagandists, perhaps harboring the thought that time will eventually transform them into truths. Citing the works of such "experts" another genera:tion of scholars and journalists and researchers will arise, quoting these highly questionable "eminent" historians. Thus are errors, distortions, halftruths, and outright falsehoods propagated, while their authors blatantly proclaim that "truth prevails" (pravda vitezi). According to Jaroslav Vlcek, accepted authority on Slovak and Czech literature, the Czech language was the medium of Slova:k literature for over 300 years. The claim is made in his "Dejiny Literatury Slovenskej" (History of Slovak literature) which was published by the Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) of Turciansky Svaty Martin in 1923. Vlcek came from a Czech family that had settled in Slova:kia. He was a follower of T. G. Masaryk and his socatlled Hlasists, the men associated with the periodical "Hlas" (Voice) which promoted the Czech fiction of a united ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation. This claim, which cannot stand up under historical criticism because it has no basis in historical fact, is a favorite of Prague regimes and Czech propagandists. Vlcek himself refutes the claim in his work, but this fact has strangely escaped the notice of practically all English writers of Czecho-Slovak or Czech-Slovak history. In Vlcek's "Dejiny" we read: ''The Hussites brought to u s not onty the din of savage battle, but also a new faith, a new communal language. . . . The Czech language made itsellf at home amo:rJJg the Slorvaks as their literary language ... The exclusive reign of the Czech language lasts for three hundred years from the first Hussite colonization" Cl). "From the fifteenth to the eighteenth cent ury, Hussitism and Pl'otestantism connect Slovak literary creations formaHy with Czech literature. It is not until the end of the eighteerrth century that Bernola!k, and in the middle of the nineteenth cent ury Stur, Hiodza, and Hurlban lay the origins and foundat ions of an independent Slovak literature" (2). "Material, which would clari£y the position of the Czech langua,ge in our midst in the fifteent h century, is thus far for �38 SLOVAKIA the most part laying in the dust of arohives. But even fr.om that bit that has been brought to light, it is safe to say that the Czech language from the second half of the fifteenth cenury is the Ian• guage of the autonomous Slovak authorities and later even the language of the counties and castles" (3). The "Dejiny" even proclaim Czech as the national language in Slovakia : "From the beginning of the sixteenth century to the beginning of the eighteenth century the national language in Slovakia flows in a threefold current: 1. Printed works, for the most part religious books, and here again for the most part Evangelical (Lutheran), hold to the language of the Kralice Bible; 2. Documents, records, municipal and private books, therefore the written word, more or less including native (Slovak) words and forms in place of the literary Czech forms; 3. The common uneducated people ait home, in the field and in their family circles, converse by means of the inherited, live language of their forefathers - in Slovak" ( 4). Now then, the first current of the "national language in Slovakia" - according to Vlcek's "Dejiny" - is the language of the Kra1ice Bible, i.e., pure Czech and nothing else; the second current is Czech again, interspersed with Slovak words and phrases; and only the third current of this national language is made up of the "live" language of the common people. Informed persons, Slovaks in particular, know that such statements and claims tend to serve especially the political interests of those who claim there is no Slovak nation and, consequently, no Slovak language. We know that they served the interests of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, where they claimed that the Slovak nation was the invention of the Magyars and the Slovaks and the Czechs were the same. Vlcek, an authority on Slovak and Czech literature, was also a follower of Masaryk and his '" Hlasists." After the estaiblishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Vlcek was named director of the Matica Slovenska. It was under his directorship that an attempt was made to remake the Slovak language into Czech. When he died, the Czech Anton Stefanek, Minister of Education, wrote these significant words about Vlcek: �SLOVAKIA 39 "Very few people knO!W, particularly fNlllll the young gener.ation, that along,side Ma-sacytk it wa,s he (Week) who was the spirit of the 'Hla,s' (the or,g,a n of the Slovak Pan-Czechists, 1008·1004. - ed. note) and molded, so to 51Peak, the young 'Hlasists' .... J . Vlcek is not an ordinary historiain, who mechanically collects scientific matertial to compile new 'boak,s. Into e·v ery one of his works he inserts a certain tendency to seriv,e his nation (the Czech nation - ed.). Along,side his strict s!Cien•tific dbjectiv1ty and his serious respect for Slovaik sentiments he al,ways knew h-OIW to include in his boo~ and h1s articles the eDfort to unite a'Ild not to further divide the Slovaks and Czechs" (5). Let us now research the period of 300 years during which the Czech language reigned exclusively in Slovakia. History teMs us that the Hussites came to Slovakia the first time in 1421; up to 1440 their visits were predatory excursions. They did not come to Slovakia to settle down. The power of the Hussites was broken with their defeat near Lipjariy in 1434. They remained in Slovakia a longer time when Jiskra came to power. On a mandate from Queen Elizarbeth, in the defense of Ladislaus the Posthumous, Jiskra ruled the greater pa:rt of Slovakia from the end of 1439 to the death of Ladislaus in 1457. Mathias, newly elected King of Hungary, began to wage war against Jiskra in 1458, defeating him in 1461. Jiskra was in power in Slovakia from 1440. Let us, then, begin our research of Vlcek's "three hundred years." Vlcek tells us in his "Dejiny" that "with the death of Matthew Cak of Trencin, called Dominus Vagi et Tatrae, at the begi,n ning of the fourteerrtJh century, falls even this monument of Slavalk independence. The g11ant priruc1pa-lity of Nitra (Matyas foldje") bl-end·s into a close po!Hical union with the kingdom ·of Hungary, and our natiorral life loses itself in the common diplomatic ton1gue, the organ of the Ghureh and state, literature ~md society .... "(6). It is generaHy known that Latin was the official language of the Church and state, literature and society, not only during Matthew Ca.k's time, not only during the 300 years of the imagined "exclusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia," but even many years after those 300, when German and Magyar finally replaced it in the Bohemian and Hungarian kingdoms respectively. Joseph Dobrovsky, the "father of modern Czech literature," wrote his main work in Latin in 1822. In Trnava, Slovakia, records were kept in Latin up to 1848 (7). �40 SLOVAKIA According to Vlcek, it was not only in official and church circles that Czech took hold in S4ovakia, but even in popular literature of the fifteenth century: "In popular literature Czech is perhaps forcing its way with the same success, even though there exist no positive examples of this." But what kind of "exclusive reign of the Czech language" can that be when it "perhaps" was forcing its way in popular literature for which there exist "no positive examples"? The activities of the Hussites and the influence of Jiskra in Slovakia may have prompted Vlcek to say what he did. Then, however, we would have to assume that Vlcek was not very well informed on the Hussites. We know, as Vlcek must have known, that Jiskra's army, including only the "remnanits" of Hussites, was made up of for the most part of adventurers of many nationalities (8). Furthe:vmore, the Hussite expeditions into Slovakia could not have any influence on the literary language of the Slovaks because of their very nature. There were long intervals between expeditions and the Hussites held Trnava and Skalica only two years (9). The Hussites came to rob, and rob they did, leaving with their plunder. The Czech author Kulhanek adds that Jiskra's plunderers were a despicable lot which, six wears after Lipany, was composed of "those depredatory bands" which had plundered the Czech lands. Vlcek refutes his own statement about the "exclusive reign of Czech" when he tells us that "the sixteenth century extended the field of the Czech language still more. There came the Lutheran Reformation, the national churches and schools" (10). If the Czech language was the exclusive vehicle of Slovak literature in the fifteenth century, how could it possibly spread even more in the sixteenth? Vlcek would want us to believe that Czech even invaded the "national churches and schools" with Luther's Reformation and yet, on the same page, he tells us that these schools were "Latin-Slovak!" The fact is that they were not even Slovak, because, excepting religion, everything else was taught in Latin. Vlcek himself gives evidence of this (11). The Reformation of the sixteenth century did not help the "national churches and schools" in Bohemia and Slovakia. V. Flajshans, noted Czech author and professor of �SLOVAKIA 41 Czech literature at the Prague Charles University, deplored Luther's Reformation for the very fact that everywhere it took hold in Bohemia, the German language did too (12). At the beginning of the sixteenth century not Czech but German came to Slovakia; it took hold almost exclusively on~y in the German towns and only in the second half of the sixteenth century did it begin to spread to Slovak settlements. Vlcek himself names many authors who wrote in Latin in the seventeenth century, saying that Protestantism was "shattering the shackles of Latin" (13). Moreover, the end of the eighteenth century, he tells us, "brings to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition" (14). Since, according to Vlcek, Latin, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, had become the linguistic medium of "the Church and state, literature and society in Hungary," and then that "the end of the eighteeDlth century brought to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition," we must conclude that his statement in regard to the "e~clusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia for 300 years" is irresponsible if not an outright fabrication. After the disastrous Battle of White Mountain (1620), the Czech language was dying in its own homeland, as stated by Vlcek(15). On the other hand, according to Skultety, Latin was dulling the Slovaks nationally from the sixteenth century for almost 200 years (16). "The Hussites brought us (the Slovaks) a new communal language," which became domesticated or was quickly adopted by the Silovaks as their literary medium, according to Vlcek. But the very fact that the Czech language was a "new" language, it must have been foreign to the .Slovaks and, hence, could not have become domesticated in the land of the Slovaks. H. Marczali tells us, for example, that very few land barons (magnates) could read and write at that time: "Of the Hungarian magnates only the Primate of Hungary, Thomas Bakac, knew how to sign his name to the Bratislava Peace Agreement (Nov. 7, 1491) with Maximilian, the German Emperor; Stephen Bathori, Ladisllaus Guthi, Ladislaus Rozgoni - all members of the higher nobility - could not write" (17). History tells us that Hun- �42 SLOVAKIA gary was in a chaotic, rebellious ferment during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries - a condition which could not possibly favor the progress of literature and culture of the nationaJlities of Hungary. The fact is that there was no Slovak literature, and, under the circumstances, could not be during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Rebellions and wars usually disrupt literary activity and cultural life. Vlcek could not have reported the fact that at that time only priests and monks did any writing and even then only when they hadl no sword in hand. The fact that he did not leads us to the conclusion that Vlcek was interested in promoting the fable about "the exclusive reign of Czech as the literary medium of the Slovaks for 300 years." Chauvinistic Czechs and pro-Czech historians and journalists still propagate Vlcek's fable to "prove" that the Slovaks and Czechs at one time were ethnically one nation. In his "Dejiny" the author devotes the first 18 lines to record superficially the general history of the fifteenth century, and then a total of 27 lines to the entire literary activity of that period. This in itself ought to be sufficient for us to form an idea of the veracity of Vlcek's statement in regard to the "exdusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia.'' The Prague University, founded by Charles IV in 1348, is credited by Vlcek for the "refreshening of Slovak spiritual life" (18). It had practically no effect on the spiritual or national life of the Czechs themselves, hence it is highly questionable that the university had any great influence on Slovak national life of the fourteenth century. The nationality concept at that time was entirely foreign, unknown(19). National consciousness is usually intimately connected with the fate of a language, and the fate of the Czech language in the fourteent h and previous centuries was indeed very; sad(20). History tells us that the last Premyslide rulers (1253i 1306) unified the Bohemian kingdom, but these very kings cared the least for the Czech language and for Czech na.1 tional consciousness (21). German dominated at the court of Otokar II (1253-1278); the nobility and towns, following �SLOVAKIA 43 Otokar's example, also used the German language. An old saying has it tha,t Otokar warned the Czechs: "one shall not be able to see a single Czech on the Prague bridge." In the sixteenth century this warning made the rounds in this form: "A Czech on the Prague bridge will be as rare as a deer with golden antlers"! Otokar, it is recorded, threatened the Czechs in this manner as he took off to fight Rudolph in 1278 (22). Wenceslaus II (1278-1305), son of Otokar II, of all things, became a German poet. Brought up in Germany, Wenceslaus followed in the footsteps of his father, Otokar II, and his grandfather Wenceslaus I, both of whom had forced Czechs out of several towns in favor of the Germans. He could not write "in the langua,ge of the despised men, the (Czech) language in which no one wrote up to that time" (23). Such was the condition of the Czech language up to of Hus. The Czechs, we know, indulge extravaadvent the gantly in the glory of Charles IV, "the father of our country" and the founder of the Prague University. The fact is that Charles IV was a German educated in France. When he was called to occupy the throne of Bohemia he did not know a single word of Czech (24). The teaching medium of the Prague University was Latin. If the University was founded in the Czech interest, the Czech language undoubtedly would have found its way into science before 1499, i.e., 120 years after Charles !V's death. There would then be no need for Hus to fight for the equality of the Czech language in the fifteenth century. Charles was succeeded by his son, Wenceslaus IV (1378-1419), who favored Latin and German. In 1394 the Union of Nobles had him arrested and forced him to issue documents also in Czech. Hus himself, until 1413, wrote in Latin (25). Under Charles IV, the Germans controlled the University. In the heat of the Hussite battle his son and successor, Wences'laus IV, sanctioned the reorganization of the University (Decree of Kutna Hora, Jan. 18, 1409), to give the Czechs "a ruling voice in their own university" (26). The result was disastrous for the University. Losing their influence, the Germans left the University of Prague, May 16, 1409, to found their own �44 SLOVAKIA university at Leipzig. With the exodus of the Germans the university lost its European significance and the Hussite era practically ruined it, reducing everything in the Czechsettled lands in Bohemia and a great part of Moravia to dust and ashes (27). As a result no examinations were held by the university from 1420 to 1428, a situation that happened frequently until 1526, so that Czech students had to continue their studies elsewhere. Flajshans tells us that as late as 1554 all twelve professors of the Prague University did not have together the salary of one professor of the University of Paris (28). The same author begins the chapter on the overglorified "Hussite Century" (15th) with these words: "All the higher schools are Latin; all offi~ cial records and public documents were written in Latin; and Latin united all scholars of the whole world" (29). Concluding the same chapter, Flajshans says: "The cry of Viktorin cal!ling for diligent work in the field of the Czech language remained for a long time the voice of one crying in the wilderness" (30). Viktorin, who in 1495 was opposed to Czech in the law books of Prague, died in 1520. The historical truth is that Czech Hussitism was above all else a religious movement which had practically nothing in common with the "national spirit" of the Czechs. Hussitism was not supported by the Prague University, but rather persecuted. That is why the adherents of Hus' teachings turned their hatred in the first instance against the univesity which they pillaged more than once, beating and throwing out the professors and bringing ruin upon it. The Czechs, the very people who should have nurtured and elevated the "Czech national and religious spirit," turned against the university ( 31) . They developed a new "national spirit" and strived to force it on their people. If the Prague University had practically no influence on the national life of the Czechs at that time, what influence could it possibly have on Slovak national life? The historical fact is that there is not a trace of Hussite literature in Slovakia from the fifteenth century(32). Like Jaroslav Vlcek, later historians, including S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, Robert J. Ker- �SLOVAKIA ner of the University of California, Joseph R. Roucek, of Hofstra College (1946), had the opportunity of writing objectively in regard to the matter at hand by seeking out available historical facts instead of relying on chauvinistic Czech propaganda. Professor S. Harrison Thomson, perhaps unable to see the forest for the trees, said this about the SloV'aks and Czechs and their respective languages: "The two peoples were originally so closely related as to be indistiruguishlalble, but geo,g,rap'lry and distance could easily have induced a separate political existence. The Magyar conquest made any such natural development illl!possible"(i33). ''The Slovaks therefore had no opporfonity to develop their own culture, written language, political institutions or social concepts in any independent way. Their relationship with the Ozechs, their brothers to the west, had, for all practical purposes, ceased to be a reality for them. This situation lasted nine centuries" (34). ''The great similarity of the vernacular lan.guages furnished an additional bond between the peoples of Bohemia and Slovakia" (35). "Political and military prestige combined with purely linguistic flexibility to make Czech rather than Slovak the lingua franca of a considera1b le region outside Bohemia. Written, Czec·h ,b ecame the language of the educated Slovaks, particularly if they had studied at Prague, and .remained such until the end of the 18th century(36). "It would be difficult to exaggerate the influence of this wide acceptance of Czech as the written langua-ge of the Slovaks during a period when Bohemia was free and Slovakia was ruled by Mag,y,ars. Tihe dialectical peculiarities that appear here and ther-e in Slovak document's did not alter the fundamental fact that Czech was accepted as the basic tongue of the tw;,. peoples(37). "The end result of the sojourn of the Hussite armies was not very considerable. In the first place their stay in Slovakia was relatively short, and in the second place we have incontrovertible evidence that the organization and powe1' of the Catholic Church in Slovakia was not noticeably disturbed at any time in the fifteenth century" (138). In his foreword, Professor Thomson warns the reader that the term "Czechoslovakia" has no political significance in his book; "it is used generally to designate the geographical entity lately known by that name." The professor may be coy and naive, but he is no fool. He knew what he was doing. Whether he likes it or not, the fact is that term, with or without the hyphen, is the name of a political entity. He warns the reader further that the �46 SLOVAKIA term "Bohemia" is also geographical "and in no wise an ethnic term." Nevertheless throughout his book he generally substitutes the term "CZECH kingdom"! What justification can there be for denying, ignoring, suppressing, or falsifying established historical facts? By the way, Thomson's "Czechoslovakia in European History" was awarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize" in December 1944, at a time when that state did not factually exist, the provisional (illegal) government of Dr. Edward Benes thus showing its appreciation to the professor. Indeed, the same professor who said in another "historical gem" edited by R. J. Kerner of the University of California: "But to Premysl Otokar I (]19741230) must be assigned the responsibility for inviting the Gerlll!an immigration. En,couraged by the court, many Czech nobles had married German women ; some of the best positionis of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; German minnesingers were in high favor t-0 the royal court and at the courts of the richer nobles"(39). Gerald Druce, "authority on Czech science," belongs in Thomson's category. In Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" he had this to say in regard to the matter at hand: "The University of Prague, the oldest in Central Europe, had been founded in 1348 by Charles IV and had been placed upon a secure footing by his successor, Vaclav IV, by the Kutna Hora decrees in 1409. During the Middle Ages the study of the natural sciences flourished in Bo'hemia, as is shown by the number of herbals and contemporary mineralogical and alchemical wol'ks in the Czech langua•ge. Indeed, toward the close of the sixteenth centry Prague was recogn,ized as an important center of learning"(40). The tendency is quite obvious. Significant it is, too, that Druce, like all other pro-Czech propagandists, finds it very convenient to offer no proof for his "historical" statements. Professor Joseph R. Roucek, being a Czech, could allow himself a bit more rope by raising the Czech banner "Pravda vitezi." Writing about the Slovaks and Czechs and their languages, he adds to the confusion ( emphasis here as elsewhere being mine. - P.A.H): "CZECH refers to the principal people or language found in Bohemia and Moravia. SL-OVAK is the name given to the eas• ternmost division of the Czech-speaking people. Protestant leaders and philologists have claimed that Slovak is merely Old �SLOVAKIA 47 Czech and have urged the use of Czech as the sole written Ian• guage"{ 41 ). "The difficulty of intercourse with the Czechs has produced a divergence in what was originally a common language. The Slovak and Czech :forms of the language dilffer in certain minor points to the present day, like two dialects of the same tongue spoken locally"(412). 'IH is eertain, at any rate, that toward the end of the Premyslid era (1'305) the Czech language was already being adQ1Pted by scholars, that it moved from the villages, towns, and castles into books, and that it even began to replace both Latin and German"(43) "The German language (in the time of Hus - the latter part of the 14th century and first quarter of lsth) was predominant both in pwblic offices and in the churches and schools throughout the country"(44). But - as a result oif the Hussrte movement - "the Czech language and literature began to predominate"(45). Nevertheless "The Slovaks remained a separate and distinct people, even though cut off from intercourse with other Slav peoples. They remained mainly Catholic and developed their language as a dialect of the Czech language"(46). Joseph Lettrich, author of a "History of Modern Slovakia," belongs in a category by himself. As a Slovak he is opposed to Slovak freedom and independence. The Slovaks, according to Lettrich, could not exist without the Czechs. Having collaborated with Benes and the Communists, Lettrich is now on vacation from politics in the United States, still serving the interests of the Czechs as a prominent member of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" - the organization of former members of the Communistdominated National Front Government of Czecho-Slovakia (1945-1948). Blinded by his prejudices and ignorant of history, Lettrich had this to say about his own people and their language "When a university was founded in Pra•g ue by King Charle,s N in 11314!8, numerous Slovaks werut to study there, and several became prdfessors at that un,iversity. In this manner the cultural relations between Slovak'S and Czechs, which had been forcibly interrupted, were re-established. They were to play a vital role in the spiritual development of the tJwo peoples. The most powerful influence that united them was the written Czechoslovak language which continued to be common to both. In, the first half of the fi,fteenth century the armies o'f the Czech Hussite warriors penetrated into Slovakia .... The Hussite forces ... introduced a new spirit of independence from Rome. Above all, they once again strengthened the ties of a common language and culture between Czechs and Slovaks"(47). �48 SLOVAKIA Lettrich, like other Slovak renegades and pro-Czech scribes, tried to remake history in the image of "Masaryk's interpretation" of Czech history. The ancient Czechs had the motto: "The truth of God prevails" (pravda Bozi vitezi). Masaryk, following the example of the radical Hussites, threw out God and made the motto read "Truth prevai'ls." Waving Masaryk's banner high, his followers continue in his "interpretation" of the national spirit and the history of the Czechs, misrepresenting and distorting historical facts. Having abandoned Divinely imposed mandates of the moral law, they now seek refuge and justification in the counterfeit doctrine of unbridled liberalism. Whatever might be said to the contrary, the truth is that "Such phrases as 'Czechoslovak language' might be used for the benefit of the outside world and in constitutional and other state documents, but the fact remains that to the vast majority of both peoples (Czechs and Slovaks), the idea remained a pure fiction, and the languages, like the peoples, were, in solid fact, two and not one" (4'8). REFERENCES 1. Jaroslav Vlcek: DEJmY SLOVElNISKJEJ LITElRATURY, 192'3, 1pp. 5,6. 2. Vlcek - p. 2. 3. Vlcek - p. 6. 4. Vlcek - p. 25. 5. SLOVENSKY DENNiK, 1922, No. 17. 6. Vlcek - pp. 4-5 7. Jozef Skultety: O &LOV AKOOH, p. 59. 8. !Kulhanek: KRONIKA CESKOSILOVElNSiKA, pp. 001~62. 9. M. Misik: HUSITI NA SLOVL0NS~U, p. 37. 10. Vlcek - p . 8. t:111. Vlcek - p. 8. 1'2. V. Flajsha11s: NAS JAZYK MA'DERSKY, p. 283. '113. Vlcek - p. 1.2. 14. Vlcek - p,24 . .115. Vlcek - p. 23. 1'6. Jozef Skultety: NElHAN'DE L'UD MOJ! p. 82. 17. Henry Ma1.1czali: MAGYAIROR!SZAG TORTENIETE, Vol. l, p. 367. 18. Vlcek - pp. 5-6. 19. Skultety: 0 SLOVAKO OH, p. '170. 20. Karol Tri\.ovski: K RECOVIEJ OTAZKE SLOVArfroV, ;1.937, p. 23. 21. Flajshans, - i;>. ·1163. 22. IFlajshans - PJl,69. 23. IFlajshans - p. 170. '24. IFla,jshans - p. 209. '25. Flajshans - p. 220. '26. S. Harrison Thomson: CZEOHOSL0 VAKIA IN EUIRO!PEIA!N HliSTORY, 1M4; p. 116. 1 �SLOVAKIA 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 4Jl. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. iFlajshans - p. 259. ,F la,j shans - p. 260. [Flajshans - p. 217. Flajshans - p. 265. Flajshans - p. 259. Tri\.ovski - p. 47. Thomson p. 199. Thomson - p. 200. Thomson - p. 206. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 208. CZEJOHOSLOV.Ax;1iA, edited by Robert J. Kerner, 1'949; 02lEJOHOSLOVAK1iA, Kerner - p. 316. Joseph R. Roucek: CEJN'l1RAlrEAlSTEJRN EUROIPE, 1946; Roucek - p. 63. IRoucek - p. 64. IRoucek - p. 66. iRoucek - p. 69. Roucek - p. 81. Jozef Lettrich: HISTORY OF MOIDERN SLOVA!KIA, pp. 21,22. C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY ANiD HIE)R SUOOESSORS, 49 p . 13. p. 61. 11955; 11937 ; p. 1·26. • • • WHO SAID IT? ''However close the original bonds between the Slovaks and the Czechs) imay have been, the ten, centuries dw:ing which the Slovaks formed a part of the kingdom of Hun:gary, w:hile the Czechs were subjected to German and Austrian influences, naturally brought about a marked dififerentation between the two peoples. Even the physical stocks cannot be so closely related today as they were a thousand years ago, for the Czeohs aTe todlay inextricalbly mingled with German elements, while the Slovak mountaineers have retained their racial purity to a larger degree .... There is, h01Wever, a noti.t:ealb le doifference both in physical appearance and in character between, the dour, efificient, but somewhiat ungainly Czech, and the airy, talkative, hwppy-go-lucky Slovak." - C. A. Macartney: HUNGAIRY AND HER SUOCEJSSORIS, London, L937) . • • • ' Iif a single dynasty had united both peoples ~Czechs and Slovaks) in a permanent, or at least an enduring union, a Czechoslovak nationality would assuredly have been formed and with a Czecho•slovak language - any minor dialectal diff.erences which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen; and while the Slavs of Bohemia developed the ,Czech nationality and language, to which the intermed,i ate dialects of Moravila gravitated, the Slovaks under Hungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the Czechs, but were not even able to form a single literary language with them." - CC. A. Macartney: HUNGA!RY ANlD HiElR SUCOESSORS, London, 1937). � 36 SLOVAKIA officials aip,pear to have been equally uncertain about this question at the time, for the Foreign, Office did not reply until November 13, 191'8, and even then did not take a clear stand. See, Foreign Relations, 1919. The Paris Peace Conference, 13 vols. (Washington, 19~1947), H, 3716°377. (3) "(Peace) cannot be pieced together out of individual understandings between p01Werful states. All the parties to this war must join in the settlemenit of every issue -anyiwhere invo'1ved in it .. . an"d every item oo it must be submi•tted to the cOOl111Tlon judgment .. ." Wilson's address. February '111, 19118, see Ray S. Baker and William E. Dodd (eds.); The Public Papers of Woodrow Wilson, War and Peace, 2 vols. (N~w York, 1927), L, 180. (4) !Before the recognition of the Czechoslovak National Council Wilson met Masaryk only once, on Jun,e 19, 19118, several weeks aifter he had first decided upon an antiJAUSltrian policy (see this author's article "The United States and the Dissolution oo AustriaJHunigary," Journal of Cent.ral European Affairs, X (Octolber, 1950), pp. 256-270, and two mon-ths before he suddenly considered recognition Olf the Czechoslovaks. The question was not broached in their correspondence . • • • WAS CZECH THE VEIDCLE OF SLOVAK LITERATURE? P.A. Hrobak Since the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, a concerted, deliberate attempt on the part of certain Czechs and pro-Czechs is being made to prove the antiquity of the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation. The propaganda apparatus of the political state formed by the Slovaks and the Czechs has been constantly used, even at the expense of the Slovaks, to prove that there really is no Slovak nation, that the Slovaks are but a branch of the Czech nation and the Slovak language is but a dialect of the Czech language. In the memorandum which T. G. Masaryk sent to the U. S. State Department (Lansing), on August 31, 1918, he said: "Slovakia, the southern part of the nation, was occupied by the Magyars and separated early from Bohemia and Moravia; at times, even later, the Slovaks were independent." After over forty years of the Pan-Czech propaganda, we find that the Slovaks are still around and are more determined than ever to preserve and enhance their ethnic individuality. They have successfully resisted all attempts to be made over into Czechs, as prior to 1918 they successfuHy resisted all attempts to be made into Magyars. �SLOVAKIA 37 Over the years several "authorities" and "eminent" scholars and journalists have repeated the distortions, false claims, and deliberate untruths of the propagandists, perhaps harboring the thought that time will eventually transform them into truths. Citing the works of such "experts" another genera:tion of scholars and journalists and researchers will arise, quoting these highly questionable "eminent" historians. Thus are errors, distortions, halftruths, and outright falsehoods propagated, while their authors blatantly proclaim that "truth prevails" (pravda vitezi). According to Jaroslav Vlcek, accepted authority on Slovak and Czech literature, the Czech language was the medium of Slova:k literature for over 300 years. The claim is made in his "Dejiny Literatury Slovenskej" (History of Slovak literature) which was published by the Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) of Turciansky Svaty Martin in 1923. Vlcek came from a Czech family that had settled in Slova:kia. He was a follower of T. G. Masaryk and his socatlled Hlasists, the men associated with the periodical "Hlas" (Voice) which promoted the Czech fiction of a united ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation. This claim, which cannot stand up under historical criticism because it has no basis in historical fact, is a favorite of Prague regimes and Czech propagandists. Vlcek himself refutes the claim in his work, but this fact has strangely escaped the notice of practically all English writers of Czecho-Slovak or Czech-Slovak history. In Vlcek's "Dejiny" we read: ''The Hussites brought to u s not onty the din of savage battle, but also a new faith, a new communal language. . . . The Czech language made itsellf at home amo:rJJg the Slorvaks as their literary language ... The exclusive reign of the Czech language lasts for three hundred years from the first Hussite colonization" Cl). "From the fifteenth to the eighteenth cent ury, Hussitism and Pl'otestantism connect Slovak literary creations formaHy with Czech literature. It is not until the end of the eighteerrth century that Bernola!k, and in the middle of the nineteenth cent ury Stur, Hiodza, and Hurlban lay the origins and foundat ions of an independent Slovak literature" (2). "Material, which would clari£y the position of the Czech langua,ge in our midst in the fifteent h century, is thus far for �38 SLOVAKIA the most part laying in the dust of arohives. But even fr.om that bit that has been brought to light, it is safe to say that the Czech language from the second half of the fifteenth cenury is the Ian• guage of the autonomous Slovak authorities and later even the language of the counties and castles" (3). The "Dejiny" even proclaim Czech as the national language in Slovakia : "From the beginning of the sixteenth century to the beginning of the eighteenth century the national language in Slovakia flows in a threefold current: 1. Printed works, for the most part religious books, and here again for the most part Evangelical (Lutheran), hold to the language of the Kralice Bible; 2. Documents, records, municipal and private books, therefore the written word, more or less including native (Slovak) words and forms in place of the literary Czech forms; 3. The common uneducated people ait home, in the field and in their family circles, converse by means of the inherited, live language of their forefathers - in Slovak" ( 4). Now then, the first current of the "national language in Slovakia" - according to Vlcek's "Dejiny" - is the language of the Kra1ice Bible, i.e., pure Czech and nothing else; the second current is Czech again, interspersed with Slovak words and phrases; and only the third current of this national language is made up of the "live" language of the common people. Informed persons, Slovaks in particular, know that such statements and claims tend to serve especially the political interests of those who claim there is no Slovak nation and, consequently, no Slovak language. We know that they served the interests of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, where they claimed that the Slovak nation was the invention of the Magyars and the Slovaks and the Czechs were the same. Vlcek, an authority on Slovak and Czech literature, was also a follower of Masaryk and his '" Hlasists." After the estaiblishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Vlcek was named director of the Matica Slovenska. It was under his directorship that an attempt was made to remake the Slovak language into Czech. When he died, the Czech Anton Stefanek, Minister of Education, wrote these significant words about Vlcek: �SLOVAKIA 39 "Very few people knO!W, particularly fNlllll the young gener.ation, that along,side Ma-sacytk it wa,s he (Week) who was the spirit of the 'Hla,s' (the or,g,a n of the Slovak Pan-Czechists, 1008·1004. - ed. note) and molded, so to 51Peak, the young 'Hlasists' .... J . Vlcek is not an ordinary historiain, who mechanically collects scientific matertial to compile new 'boak,s. Into e·v ery one of his works he inserts a certain tendency to seriv,e his nation (the Czech nation - ed.). Along,side his strict s!Cien•tific dbjectiv1ty and his serious respect for Slovaik sentiments he al,ways knew h-OIW to include in his boo~ and h1s articles the eDfort to unite a'Ild not to further divide the Slovaks and Czechs" (5). Let us now research the period of 300 years during which the Czech language reigned exclusively in Slovakia. History teMs us that the Hussites came to Slovakia the first time in 1421; up to 1440 their visits were predatory excursions. They did not come to Slovakia to settle down. The power of the Hussites was broken with their defeat near Lipjariy in 1434. They remained in Slovakia a longer time when Jiskra came to power. On a mandate from Queen Elizarbeth, in the defense of Ladislaus the Posthumous, Jiskra ruled the greater pa:rt of Slovakia from the end of 1439 to the death of Ladislaus in 1457. Mathias, newly elected King of Hungary, began to wage war against Jiskra in 1458, defeating him in 1461. Jiskra was in power in Slovakia from 1440. Let us, then, begin our research of Vlcek's "three hundred years." Vlcek tells us in his "Dejiny" that "with the death of Matthew Cak of Trencin, called Dominus Vagi et Tatrae, at the begi,n ning of the fourteerrtJh century, falls even this monument of Slavalk independence. The g11ant priruc1pa-lity of Nitra (Matyas foldje") bl-end·s into a close po!Hical union with the kingdom ·of Hungary, and our natiorral life loses itself in the common diplomatic ton1gue, the organ of the Ghureh and state, literature ~md society .... "(6). It is generaHy known that Latin was the official language of the Church and state, literature and society, not only during Matthew Ca.k's time, not only during the 300 years of the imagined "exclusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia," but even many years after those 300, when German and Magyar finally replaced it in the Bohemian and Hungarian kingdoms respectively. Joseph Dobrovsky, the "father of modern Czech literature," wrote his main work in Latin in 1822. In Trnava, Slovakia, records were kept in Latin up to 1848 (7). �40 SLOVAKIA According to Vlcek, it was not only in official and church circles that Czech took hold in S4ovakia, but even in popular literature of the fifteenth century: "In popular literature Czech is perhaps forcing its way with the same success, even though there exist no positive examples of this." But what kind of "exclusive reign of the Czech language" can that be when it "perhaps" was forcing its way in popular literature for which there exist "no positive examples"? The activities of the Hussites and the influence of Jiskra in Slovakia may have prompted Vlcek to say what he did. Then, however, we would have to assume that Vlcek was not very well informed on the Hussites. We know, as Vlcek must have known, that Jiskra's army, including only the "remnanits" of Hussites, was made up of for the most part of adventurers of many nationalities (8). Furthe:vmore, the Hussite expeditions into Slovakia could not have any influence on the literary language of the Slovaks because of their very nature. There were long intervals between expeditions and the Hussites held Trnava and Skalica only two years (9). The Hussites came to rob, and rob they did, leaving with their plunder. The Czech author Kulhanek adds that Jiskra's plunderers were a despicable lot which, six wears after Lipany, was composed of "those depredatory bands" which had plundered the Czech lands. Vlcek refutes his own statement about the "exclusive reign of Czech" when he tells us that "the sixteenth century extended the field of the Czech language still more. There came the Lutheran Reformation, the national churches and schools" (10). If the Czech language was the exclusive vehicle of Slovak literature in the fifteenth century, how could it possibly spread even more in the sixteenth? Vlcek would want us to believe that Czech even invaded the "national churches and schools" with Luther's Reformation and yet, on the same page, he tells us that these schools were "Latin-Slovak!" The fact is that they were not even Slovak, because, excepting religion, everything else was taught in Latin. Vlcek himself gives evidence of this (11). The Reformation of the sixteenth century did not help the "national churches and schools" in Bohemia and Slovakia. V. Flajshans, noted Czech author and professor of �SLOVAKIA 41 Czech literature at the Prague Charles University, deplored Luther's Reformation for the very fact that everywhere it took hold in Bohemia, the German language did too (12). At the beginning of the sixteenth century not Czech but German came to Slovakia; it took hold almost exclusively on~y in the German towns and only in the second half of the sixteenth century did it begin to spread to Slovak settlements. Vlcek himself names many authors who wrote in Latin in the seventeenth century, saying that Protestantism was "shattering the shackles of Latin" (13). Moreover, the end of the eighteenth century, he tells us, "brings to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition" (14). Since, according to Vlcek, Latin, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, had become the linguistic medium of "the Church and state, literature and society in Hungary," and then that "the end of the eighteeDlth century brought to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition," we must conclude that his statement in regard to the "e~clusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia for 300 years" is irresponsible if not an outright fabrication. After the disastrous Battle of White Mountain (1620), the Czech language was dying in its own homeland, as stated by Vlcek(15). On the other hand, according to Skultety, Latin was dulling the Slovaks nationally from the sixteenth century for almost 200 years (16). "The Hussites brought us (the Slovaks) a new communal language," which became domesticated or was quickly adopted by the Silovaks as their literary medium, according to Vlcek. But the very fact that the Czech language was a "new" language, it must have been foreign to the .Slovaks and, hence, could not have become domesticated in the land of the Slovaks. H. Marczali tells us, for example, that very few land barons (magnates) could read and write at that time: "Of the Hungarian magnates only the Primate of Hungary, Thomas Bakac, knew how to sign his name to the Bratislava Peace Agreement (Nov. 7, 1491) with Maximilian, the German Emperor; Stephen Bathori, Ladisllaus Guthi, Ladislaus Rozgoni - all members of the higher nobility - could not write" (17). History tells us that Hun- �42 SLOVAKIA gary was in a chaotic, rebellious ferment during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries - a condition which could not possibly favor the progress of literature and culture of the nationaJlities of Hungary. The fact is that there was no Slovak literature, and, under the circumstances, could not be during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Rebellions and wars usually disrupt literary activity and cultural life. Vlcek could not have reported the fact that at that time only priests and monks did any writing and even then only when they hadl no sword in hand. The fact that he did not leads us to the conclusion that Vlcek was interested in promoting the fable about "the exclusive reign of Czech as the literary medium of the Slovaks for 300 years." Chauvinistic Czechs and pro-Czech historians and journalists still propagate Vlcek's fable to "prove" that the Slovaks and Czechs at one time were ethnically one nation. In his "Dejiny" the author devotes the first 18 lines to record superficially the general history of the fifteenth century, and then a total of 27 lines to the entire literary activity of that period. This in itself ought to be sufficient for us to form an idea of the veracity of Vlcek's statement in regard to the "exdusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia.'' The Prague University, founded by Charles IV in 1348, is credited by Vlcek for the "refreshening of Slovak spiritual life" (18). It had practically no effect on the spiritual or national life of the Czechs themselves, hence it is highly questionable that the university had any great influence on Slovak national life of the fourteenth century. The nationality concept at that time was entirely foreign, unknown(19). National consciousness is usually intimately connected with the fate of a language, and the fate of the Czech language in the fourteent h and previous centuries was indeed very; sad(20). History tells us that the last Premyslide rulers (1253i 1306) unified the Bohemian kingdom, but these very kings cared the least for the Czech language and for Czech na.1 tional consciousness (21). German dominated at the court of Otokar II (1253-1278); the nobility and towns, following �SLOVAKIA 43 Otokar's example, also used the German language. An old saying has it tha,t Otokar warned the Czechs: "one shall not be able to see a single Czech on the Prague bridge." In the sixteenth century this warning made the rounds in this form: "A Czech on the Prague bridge will be as rare as a deer with golden antlers"! Otokar, it is recorded, threatened the Czechs in this manner as he took off to fight Rudolph in 1278 (22). Wenceslaus II (1278-1305), son of Otokar II, of all things, became a German poet. Brought up in Germany, Wenceslaus followed in the footsteps of his father, Otokar II, and his grandfather Wenceslaus I, both of whom had forced Czechs out of several towns in favor of the Germans. He could not write "in the langua,ge of the despised men, the (Czech) language in which no one wrote up to that time" (23). Such was the condition of the Czech language up to of Hus. The Czechs, we know, indulge extravaadvent the gantly in the glory of Charles IV, "the father of our country" and the founder of the Prague University. The fact is that Charles IV was a German educated in France. When he was called to occupy the throne of Bohemia he did not know a single word of Czech (24). The teaching medium of the Prague University was Latin. If the University was founded in the Czech interest, the Czech language undoubtedly would have found its way into science before 1499, i.e., 120 years after Charles !V's death. There would then be no need for Hus to fight for the equality of the Czech language in the fifteenth century. Charles was succeeded by his son, Wenceslaus IV (1378-1419), who favored Latin and German. In 1394 the Union of Nobles had him arrested and forced him to issue documents also in Czech. Hus himself, until 1413, wrote in Latin (25). Under Charles IV, the Germans controlled the University. In the heat of the Hussite battle his son and successor, Wences'laus IV, sanctioned the reorganization of the University (Decree of Kutna Hora, Jan. 18, 1409), to give the Czechs "a ruling voice in their own university" (26). The result was disastrous for the University. Losing their influence, the Germans left the University of Prague, May 16, 1409, to found their own �44 SLOVAKIA university at Leipzig. With the exodus of the Germans the university lost its European significance and the Hussite era practically ruined it, reducing everything in the Czechsettled lands in Bohemia and a great part of Moravia to dust and ashes (27). As a result no examinations were held by the university from 1420 to 1428, a situation that happened frequently until 1526, so that Czech students had to continue their studies elsewhere. Flajshans tells us that as late as 1554 all twelve professors of the Prague University did not have together the salary of one professor of the University of Paris (28). The same author begins the chapter on the overglorified "Hussite Century" (15th) with these words: "All the higher schools are Latin; all offi~ cial records and public documents were written in Latin; and Latin united all scholars of the whole world" (29). Concluding the same chapter, Flajshans says: "The cry of Viktorin cal!ling for diligent work in the field of the Czech language remained for a long time the voice of one crying in the wilderness" (30). Viktorin, who in 1495 was opposed to Czech in the law books of Prague, died in 1520. The historical truth is that Czech Hussitism was above all else a religious movement which had practically nothing in common with the "national spirit" of the Czechs. Hussitism was not supported by the Prague University, but rather persecuted. That is why the adherents of Hus' teachings turned their hatred in the first instance against the univesity which they pillaged more than once, beating and throwing out the professors and bringing ruin upon it. The Czechs, the very people who should have nurtured and elevated the "Czech national and religious spirit," turned against the university ( 31) . They developed a new "national spirit" and strived to force it on their people. If the Prague University had practically no influence on the national life of the Czechs at that time, what influence could it possibly have on Slovak national life? The historical fact is that there is not a trace of Hussite literature in Slovakia from the fifteenth century(32). Like Jaroslav Vlcek, later historians, including S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, Robert J. Ker- �SLOVAKIA ner of the University of California, Joseph R. Roucek, of Hofstra College (1946), had the opportunity of writing objectively in regard to the matter at hand by seeking out available historical facts instead of relying on chauvinistic Czech propaganda. Professor S. Harrison Thomson, perhaps unable to see the forest for the trees, said this about the SloV'aks and Czechs and their respective languages: "The two peoples were originally so closely related as to be indistiruguishlalble, but geo,g,rap'lry and distance could easily have induced a separate political existence. The Magyar conquest made any such natural development illl!possible"(i33). ''The Slovaks therefore had no opporfonity to develop their own culture, written language, political institutions or social concepts in any independent way. Their relationship with the Ozechs, their brothers to the west, had, for all practical purposes, ceased to be a reality for them. This situation lasted nine centuries" (34). ''The great similarity of the vernacular lan.guages furnished an additional bond between the peoples of Bohemia and Slovakia" (35). "Political and military prestige combined with purely linguistic flexibility to make Czech rather than Slovak the lingua franca of a considera1b le region outside Bohemia. Written, Czec·h ,b ecame the language of the educated Slovaks, particularly if they had studied at Prague, and .remained such until the end of the 18th century(36). "It would be difficult to exaggerate the influence of this wide acceptance of Czech as the written langua-ge of the Slovaks during a period when Bohemia was free and Slovakia was ruled by Mag,y,ars. Tihe dialectical peculiarities that appear here and ther-e in Slovak document's did not alter the fundamental fact that Czech was accepted as the basic tongue of the tw;,. peoples(37). "The end result of the sojourn of the Hussite armies was not very considerable. In the first place their stay in Slovakia was relatively short, and in the second place we have incontrovertible evidence that the organization and powe1' of the Catholic Church in Slovakia was not noticeably disturbed at any time in the fifteenth century" (138). In his foreword, Professor Thomson warns the reader that the term "Czechoslovakia" has no political significance in his book; "it is used generally to designate the geographical entity lately known by that name." The professor may be coy and naive, but he is no fool. He knew what he was doing. Whether he likes it or not, the fact is that term, with or without the hyphen, is the name of a political entity. He warns the reader further that the �46 SLOVAKIA term "Bohemia" is also geographical "and in no wise an ethnic term." Nevertheless throughout his book he generally substitutes the term "CZECH kingdom"! What justification can there be for denying, ignoring, suppressing, or falsifying established historical facts? By the way, Thomson's "Czechoslovakia in European History" was awarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize" in December 1944, at a time when that state did not factually exist, the provisional (illegal) government of Dr. Edward Benes thus showing its appreciation to the professor. Indeed, the same professor who said in another "historical gem" edited by R. J. Kerner of the University of California: "But to Premysl Otokar I (]19741230) must be assigned the responsibility for inviting the Gerlll!an immigration. En,couraged by the court, many Czech nobles had married German women ; some of the best positionis of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; German minnesingers were in high favor t-0 the royal court and at the courts of the richer nobles"(39). Gerald Druce, "authority on Czech science," belongs in Thomson's category. In Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" he had this to say in regard to the matter at hand: "The University of Prague, the oldest in Central Europe, had been founded in 1348 by Charles IV and had been placed upon a secure footing by his successor, Vaclav IV, by the Kutna Hora decrees in 1409. During the Middle Ages the study of the natural sciences flourished in Bo'hemia, as is shown by the number of herbals and contemporary mineralogical and alchemical wol'ks in the Czech langua•ge. Indeed, toward the close of the sixteenth centry Prague was recogn,ized as an important center of learning"(40). The tendency is quite obvious. Significant it is, too, that Druce, like all other pro-Czech propagandists, finds it very convenient to offer no proof for his "historical" statements. Professor Joseph R. Roucek, being a Czech, could allow himself a bit more rope by raising the Czech banner "Pravda vitezi." Writing about the Slovaks and Czechs and their languages, he adds to the confusion ( emphasis here as elsewhere being mine. - P.A.H): "CZECH refers to the principal people or language found in Bohemia and Moravia. SL-OVAK is the name given to the eas• ternmost division of the Czech-speaking people. Protestant leaders and philologists have claimed that Slovak is merely Old �SLOVAKIA 47 Czech and have urged the use of Czech as the sole written Ian• guage"{ 41 ). "The difficulty of intercourse with the Czechs has produced a divergence in what was originally a common language. The Slovak and Czech :forms of the language dilffer in certain minor points to the present day, like two dialects of the same tongue spoken locally"(412). 'IH is eertain, at any rate, that toward the end of the Premyslid era (1'305) the Czech language was already being adQ1Pted by scholars, that it moved from the villages, towns, and castles into books, and that it even began to replace both Latin and German"(43) "The German language (in the time of Hus - the latter part of the 14th century and first quarter of lsth) was predominant both in pwblic offices and in the churches and schools throughout the country"(44). But - as a result oif the Hussrte movement - "the Czech language and literature began to predominate"(45). Nevertheless "The Slovaks remained a separate and distinct people, even though cut off from intercourse with other Slav peoples. They remained mainly Catholic and developed their language as a dialect of the Czech language"(46). Joseph Lettrich, author of a "History of Modern Slovakia," belongs in a category by himself. As a Slovak he is opposed to Slovak freedom and independence. The Slovaks, according to Lettrich, could not exist without the Czechs. Having collaborated with Benes and the Communists, Lettrich is now on vacation from politics in the United States, still serving the interests of the Czechs as a prominent member of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" - the organization of former members of the Communistdominated National Front Government of Czecho-Slovakia (1945-1948). Blinded by his prejudices and ignorant of history, Lettrich had this to say about his own people and their language "When a university was founded in Pra•g ue by King Charle,s N in 11314!8, numerous Slovaks werut to study there, and several became prdfessors at that un,iversity. In this manner the cultural relations between Slovak'S and Czechs, which had been forcibly interrupted, were re-established. They were to play a vital role in the spiritual development of the tJwo peoples. The most powerful influence that united them was the written Czechoslovak language which continued to be common to both. In, the first half of the fi,fteenth century the armies o'f the Czech Hussite warriors penetrated into Slovakia .... The Hussite forces ... introduced a new spirit of independence from Rome. Above all, they once again strengthened the ties of a common language and culture between Czechs and Slovaks"(47). �48 SLOVAKIA Lettrich, like other Slovak renegades and pro-Czech scribes, tried to remake history in the image of "Masaryk's interpretation" of Czech history. The ancient Czechs had the motto: "The truth of God prevails" (pravda Bozi vitezi). Masaryk, following the example of the radical Hussites, threw out God and made the motto read "Truth prevai'ls." Waving Masaryk's banner high, his followers continue in his "interpretation" of the national spirit and the history of the Czechs, misrepresenting and distorting historical facts. Having abandoned Divinely imposed mandates of the moral law, they now seek refuge and justification in the counterfeit doctrine of unbridled liberalism. Whatever might be said to the contrary, the truth is that "Such phrases as 'Czechoslovak language' might be used for the benefit of the outside world and in constitutional and other state documents, but the fact remains that to the vast majority of both peoples (Czechs and Slovaks), the idea remained a pure fiction, and the languages, like the peoples, were, in solid fact, two and not one" (4'8). REFERENCES 1. Jaroslav Vlcek: DEJmY SLOVElNISKJEJ LITElRATURY, 192'3, 1pp. 5,6. 2. Vlcek - p. 2. 3. Vlcek - p. 6. 4. Vlcek - p. 25. 5. SLOVENSKY DENNiK, 1922, No. 17. 6. Vlcek - pp. 4-5 7. Jozef Skultety: O &LOV AKOOH, p. 59. 8. !Kulhanek: KRONIKA CESKOSILOVElNSiKA, pp. 001~62. 9. M. Misik: HUSITI NA SLOVL0NS~U, p. 37. 10. Vlcek - p . 8. t:111. Vlcek - p. 8. 1'2. V. Flajsha11s: NAS JAZYK MA'DERSKY, p. 283. '113. Vlcek - p. 1.2. 14. Vlcek - p,24 . .115. Vlcek - p. 23. 1'6. Jozef Skultety: NElHAN'DE L'UD MOJ! p. 82. 17. Henry Ma1.1czali: MAGYAIROR!SZAG TORTENIETE, Vol. l, p. 367. 18. Vlcek - pp. 5-6. 19. Skultety: 0 SLOVAKO OH, p. '170. 20. Karol Tri\.ovski: K RECOVIEJ OTAZKE SLOVArfroV, ;1.937, p. 23. 21. Flajshans, - i;>. ·1163. 22. IFlajshans - PJl,69. 23. IFlajshans - p. 170. '24. IFla,jshans - p. 209. '25. Flajshans - p. 220. '26. S. Harrison Thomson: CZEOHOSL0 VAKIA IN EUIRO!PEIA!N HliSTORY, 1M4; p. 116. 1 �SLOVAKIA 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 4Jl. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. iFlajshans - p. 259. ,F la,j shans - p. 260. [Flajshans - p. 217. Flajshans - p. 265. Flajshans - p. 259. Tri\.ovski - p. 47. Thomson p. 199. Thomson - p. 200. Thomson - p. 206. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 208. CZEJOHOSLOV.Ax;1iA, edited by Robert J. Kerner, 1'949; 02lEJOHOSLOVAK1iA, Kerner - p. 316. Joseph R. Roucek: CEJN'l1RAlrEAlSTEJRN EUROIPE, 1946; Roucek - p. 63. IRoucek - p. 64. IRoucek - p. 66. iRoucek - p. 69. Roucek - p. 81. Jozef Lettrich: HISTORY OF MOIDERN SLOVA!KIA, pp. 21,22. C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY ANiD HIE)R SUOOESSORS, 49 p . 13. p. 61. 11955; 11937 ; p. 1·26. • • • WHO SAID IT? ''However close the original bonds between the Slovaks and the Czechs) imay have been, the ten, centuries dw:ing which the Slovaks formed a part of the kingdom of Hun:gary, w:hile the Czechs were subjected to German and Austrian influences, naturally brought about a marked dififerentation between the two peoples. Even the physical stocks cannot be so closely related today as they were a thousand years ago, for the Czeohs aTe todlay inextricalbly mingled with German elements, while the Slovak mountaineers have retained their racial purity to a larger degree .... There is, h01Wever, a noti.t:ealb le doifference both in physical appearance and in character between, the dour, efificient, but somewhiat ungainly Czech, and the airy, talkative, hwppy-go-lucky Slovak." - C. A. Macartney: HUNGAIRY AND HER SUOCEJSSORIS, London, L937) . • • • ' Iif a single dynasty had united both peoples ~Czechs and Slovaks) in a permanent, or at least an enduring union, a Czechoslovak nationality would assuredly have been formed and with a Czecho•slovak language - any minor dialectal diff.erences which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen; and while the Slavs of Bohemia developed the ,Czech nationality and language, to which the intermed,i ate dialects of Moravila gravitated, the Slovaks under Hungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the Czechs, but were not even able to form a single literary language with them." - CC. A. Macartney: HUNGA!RY ANlD HiElR SUCOESSORS, London, 1937). � 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 1960, Vol. 10 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 6 [sic] (No. 31), March-June 1960.</li> <li>Issue 7 [sic] (No. 32), September-December 1960.</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 1960 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 36 SLOVAKIA officials aip,pear to have been equally uncertain about this question at the time, for the Foreign, Office did not reply until November 13, 191'8, and even then did not take a clear stand. See, Foreign Relations, 1919. The Paris Peace Conference, 13 vols. (Washington, 19~1947), H, 3716°377. (3) "(Peace) cannot be pieced together out of individual understandings between p01Werful states. All the parties to this war must join in the settlemenit of every issue -anyiwhere invo'1ved in it .. . an"d every item oo it must be submi•tted to the cOOl111Tlon judgment .. ." Wilson's address. February '111, 19118, see Ray S. Baker and William E. Dodd (eds.); The Public Papers of Woodrow Wilson, War and Peace, 2 vols. (N~w York, 1927), L, 180. (4) !Before the recognition of the Czechoslovak National Council Wilson met Masaryk only once, on Jun,e 19, 19118, several weeks aifter he had first decided upon an antiJAUSltrian policy (see this author's article "The United States and the Dissolution oo AustriaJHunigary," Journal of Cent.ral European Affairs, X (Octolber, 1950), pp. 256-270, and two mon-ths before he suddenly considered recognition Olf the Czechoslovaks. The question was not broached in their correspondence . • • • WAS CZECH THE VEIDCLE OF SLOVAK LITERATURE? P.A. Hrobak Since the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in 1918, a concerted, deliberate attempt on the part of certain Czechs and pro-Czechs is being made to prove the antiquity of the fiction of a united "Czechoslovak" nation. The propaganda apparatus of the political state formed by the Slovaks and the Czechs has been constantly used, even at the expense of the Slovaks, to prove that there really is no Slovak nation, that the Slovaks are but a branch of the Czech nation and the Slovak language is but a dialect of the Czech language. In the memorandum which T. G. Masaryk sent to the U. S. State Department (Lansing), on August 31, 1918, he said: "Slovakia, the southern part of the nation, was occupied by the Magyars and separated early from Bohemia and Moravia; at times, even later, the Slovaks were independent." After over forty years of the Pan-Czech propaganda, we find that the Slovaks are still around and are more determined than ever to preserve and enhance their ethnic individuality. They have successfully resisted all attempts to be made over into Czechs, as prior to 1918 they successfuHy resisted all attempts to be made into Magyars. SLOVAKIA 37 Over the years several "authorities" and "eminent" scholars and journalists have repeated the distortions, false claims, and deliberate untruths of the propagandists, perhaps harboring the thought that time will eventually transform them into truths. Citing the works of such "experts" another genera:tion of scholars and journalists and researchers will arise, quoting these highly questionable "eminent" historians. Thus are errors, distortions, halftruths, and outright falsehoods propagated, while their authors blatantly proclaim that "truth prevails" (pravda vitezi). According to Jaroslav Vlcek, accepted authority on Slovak and Czech literature, the Czech language was the medium of Slova:k literature for over 300 years. The claim is made in his "Dejiny Literatury Slovenskej" (History of Slovak literature) which was published by the Matica Slovenska (Slovak Institute) of Turciansky Svaty Martin in 1923. Vlcek came from a Czech family that had settled in Slova:kia. He was a follower of T. G. Masaryk and his socatlled Hlasists, the men associated with the periodical "Hlas" (Voice) which promoted the Czech fiction of a united ethnic "Czechoslovak" nation. This claim, which cannot stand up under historical criticism because it has no basis in historical fact, is a favorite of Prague regimes and Czech propagandists. Vlcek himself refutes the claim in his work, but this fact has strangely escaped the notice of practically all English writers of Czecho-Slovak or Czech-Slovak history. In Vlcek's "Dejiny" we read: ''The Hussites brought to u s not onty the din of savage battle, but also a new faith, a new communal language. . . . The Czech language made itsellf at home amo:rJJg the Slorvaks as their literary language ... The exclusive reign of the Czech language lasts for three hundred years from the first Hussite colonization" Cl). "From the fifteenth to the eighteenth cent ury, Hussitism and Pl'otestantism connect Slovak literary creations formaHy with Czech literature. It is not until the end of the eighteerrth century that Bernola!k, and in the middle of the nineteenth cent ury Stur, Hiodza, and Hurlban lay the origins and foundat ions of an independent Slovak literature" (2). "Material, which would clari£y the position of the Czech langua,ge in our midst in the fifteent h century, is thus far for 38 SLOVAKIA the most part laying in the dust of arohives. But even fr.om that bit that has been brought to light, it is safe to say that the Czech language from the second half of the fifteenth cenury is the Ian• guage of the autonomous Slovak authorities and later even the language of the counties and castles" (3). The "Dejiny" even proclaim Czech as the national language in Slovakia : "From the beginning of the sixteenth century to the beginning of the eighteenth century the national language in Slovakia flows in a threefold current: 1. Printed works, for the most part religious books, and here again for the most part Evangelical (Lutheran), hold to the language of the Kralice Bible; 2. Documents, records, municipal and private books, therefore the written word, more or less including native (Slovak) words and forms in place of the literary Czech forms; 3. The common uneducated people ait home, in the field and in their family circles, converse by means of the inherited, live language of their forefathers - in Slovak" ( 4). Now then, the first current of the "national language in Slovakia" - according to Vlcek's "Dejiny" - is the language of the Kra1ice Bible, i.e., pure Czech and nothing else; the second current is Czech again, interspersed with Slovak words and phrases; and only the third current of this national language is made up of the "live" language of the common people. Informed persons, Slovaks in particular, know that such statements and claims tend to serve especially the political interests of those who claim there is no Slovak nation and, consequently, no Slovak language. We know that they served the interests of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, where they claimed that the Slovak nation was the invention of the Magyars and the Slovaks and the Czechs were the same. Vlcek, an authority on Slovak and Czech literature, was also a follower of Masaryk and his '" Hlasists." After the estaiblishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Vlcek was named director of the Matica Slovenska. It was under his directorship that an attempt was made to remake the Slovak language into Czech. When he died, the Czech Anton Stefanek, Minister of Education, wrote these significant words about Vlcek: SLOVAKIA 39 "Very few people knO!W, particularly fNlllll the young gener.ation, that along,side Ma-sacytk it wa,s he (Week) who was the spirit of the 'Hla,s' (the or,g,a n of the Slovak Pan-Czechists, 1008·1004. - ed. note) and molded, so to 51Peak, the young 'Hlasists' .... J . Vlcek is not an ordinary historiain, who mechanically collects scientific matertial to compile new 'boak,s. Into e·v ery one of his works he inserts a certain tendency to seriv,e his nation (the Czech nation - ed.). Along,side his strict s!Cien•tific dbjectiv1ty and his serious respect for Slovaik sentiments he al,ways knew h-OIW to include in his boo~ and h1s articles the eDfort to unite a'Ild not to further divide the Slovaks and Czechs" (5). Let us now research the period of 300 years during which the Czech language reigned exclusively in Slovakia. History teMs us that the Hussites came to Slovakia the first time in 1421; up to 1440 their visits were predatory excursions. They did not come to Slovakia to settle down. The power of the Hussites was broken with their defeat near Lipjariy in 1434. They remained in Slovakia a longer time when Jiskra came to power. On a mandate from Queen Elizarbeth, in the defense of Ladislaus the Posthumous, Jiskra ruled the greater pa:rt of Slovakia from the end of 1439 to the death of Ladislaus in 1457. Mathias, newly elected King of Hungary, began to wage war against Jiskra in 1458, defeating him in 1461. Jiskra was in power in Slovakia from 1440. Let us, then, begin our research of Vlcek's "three hundred years." Vlcek tells us in his "Dejiny" that "with the death of Matthew Cak of Trencin, called Dominus Vagi et Tatrae, at the begi,n ning of the fourteerrtJh century, falls even this monument of Slavalk independence. The g11ant priruc1pa-lity of Nitra (Matyas foldje") bl-end·s into a close po!Hical union with the kingdom ·of Hungary, and our natiorral life loses itself in the common diplomatic ton1gue, the organ of the Ghureh and state, literature ~md society .... "(6). It is generaHy known that Latin was the official language of the Church and state, literature and society, not only during Matthew Ca.k's time, not only during the 300 years of the imagined "exclusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia," but even many years after those 300, when German and Magyar finally replaced it in the Bohemian and Hungarian kingdoms respectively. Joseph Dobrovsky, the "father of modern Czech literature," wrote his main work in Latin in 1822. In Trnava, Slovakia, records were kept in Latin up to 1848 (7). 40 SLOVAKIA According to Vlcek, it was not only in official and church circles that Czech took hold in S4ovakia, but even in popular literature of the fifteenth century: "In popular literature Czech is perhaps forcing its way with the same success, even though there exist no positive examples of this." But what kind of "exclusive reign of the Czech language" can that be when it "perhaps" was forcing its way in popular literature for which there exist "no positive examples"? The activities of the Hussites and the influence of Jiskra in Slovakia may have prompted Vlcek to say what he did. Then, however, we would have to assume that Vlcek was not very well informed on the Hussites. We know, as Vlcek must have known, that Jiskra's army, including only the "remnanits" of Hussites, was made up of for the most part of adventurers of many nationalities (8). Furthe:vmore, the Hussite expeditions into Slovakia could not have any influence on the literary language of the Slovaks because of their very nature. There were long intervals between expeditions and the Hussites held Trnava and Skalica only two years (9). The Hussites came to rob, and rob they did, leaving with their plunder. The Czech author Kulhanek adds that Jiskra's plunderers were a despicable lot which, six wears after Lipany, was composed of "those depredatory bands" which had plundered the Czech lands. Vlcek refutes his own statement about the "exclusive reign of Czech" when he tells us that "the sixteenth century extended the field of the Czech language still more. There came the Lutheran Reformation, the national churches and schools" (10). If the Czech language was the exclusive vehicle of Slovak literature in the fifteenth century, how could it possibly spread even more in the sixteenth? Vlcek would want us to believe that Czech even invaded the "national churches and schools" with Luther's Reformation and yet, on the same page, he tells us that these schools were "Latin-Slovak!" The fact is that they were not even Slovak, because, excepting religion, everything else was taught in Latin. Vlcek himself gives evidence of this (11). The Reformation of the sixteenth century did not help the "national churches and schools" in Bohemia and Slovakia. V. Flajshans, noted Czech author and professor of SLOVAKIA 41 Czech literature at the Prague Charles University, deplored Luther's Reformation for the very fact that everywhere it took hold in Bohemia, the German language did too (12). At the beginning of the sixteenth century not Czech but German came to Slovakia; it took hold almost exclusively on~y in the German towns and only in the second half of the sixteenth century did it begin to spread to Slovak settlements. Vlcek himself names many authors who wrote in Latin in the seventeenth century, saying that Protestantism was "shattering the shackles of Latin" (13). Moreover, the end of the eighteenth century, he tells us, "brings to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition" (14). Since, according to Vlcek, Latin, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, had become the linguistic medium of "the Church and state, literature and society in Hungary," and then that "the end of the eighteeDlth century brought to a close the era of religious intolerance and Latin erudition," we must conclude that his statement in regard to the "e~clusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia for 300 years" is irresponsible if not an outright fabrication. After the disastrous Battle of White Mountain (1620), the Czech language was dying in its own homeland, as stated by Vlcek(15). On the other hand, according to Skultety, Latin was dulling the Slovaks nationally from the sixteenth century for almost 200 years (16). "The Hussites brought us (the Slovaks) a new communal language," which became domesticated or was quickly adopted by the Silovaks as their literary medium, according to Vlcek. But the very fact that the Czech language was a "new" language, it must have been foreign to the .Slovaks and, hence, could not have become domesticated in the land of the Slovaks. H. Marczali tells us, for example, that very few land barons (magnates) could read and write at that time: "Of the Hungarian magnates only the Primate of Hungary, Thomas Bakac, knew how to sign his name to the Bratislava Peace Agreement (Nov. 7, 1491) with Maximilian, the German Emperor; Stephen Bathori, Ladisllaus Guthi, Ladislaus Rozgoni - all members of the higher nobility - could not write" (17). History tells us that Hun- 42 SLOVAKIA gary was in a chaotic, rebellious ferment during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries - a condition which could not possibly favor the progress of literature and culture of the nationaJlities of Hungary. The fact is that there was no Slovak literature, and, under the circumstances, could not be during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Rebellions and wars usually disrupt literary activity and cultural life. Vlcek could not have reported the fact that at that time only priests and monks did any writing and even then only when they hadl no sword in hand. The fact that he did not leads us to the conclusion that Vlcek was interested in promoting the fable about "the exclusive reign of Czech as the literary medium of the Slovaks for 300 years." Chauvinistic Czechs and pro-Czech historians and journalists still propagate Vlcek's fable to "prove" that the Slovaks and Czechs at one time were ethnically one nation. In his "Dejiny" the author devotes the first 18 lines to record superficially the general history of the fifteenth century, and then a total of 27 lines to the entire literary activity of that period. This in itself ought to be sufficient for us to form an idea of the veracity of Vlcek's statement in regard to the "exdusive reign of the Czech language in Slovakia.'' The Prague University, founded by Charles IV in 1348, is credited by Vlcek for the "refreshening of Slovak spiritual life" (18). It had practically no effect on the spiritual or national life of the Czechs themselves, hence it is highly questionable that the university had any great influence on Slovak national life of the fourteenth century. The nationality concept at that time was entirely foreign, unknown(19). National consciousness is usually intimately connected with the fate of a language, and the fate of the Czech language in the fourteent h and previous centuries was indeed very; sad(20). History tells us that the last Premyslide rulers (1253i 1306) unified the Bohemian kingdom, but these very kings cared the least for the Czech language and for Czech na.1 tional consciousness (21). German dominated at the court of Otokar II (1253-1278); the nobility and towns, following SLOVAKIA 43 Otokar's example, also used the German language. An old saying has it tha,t Otokar warned the Czechs: "one shall not be able to see a single Czech on the Prague bridge." In the sixteenth century this warning made the rounds in this form: "A Czech on the Prague bridge will be as rare as a deer with golden antlers"! Otokar, it is recorded, threatened the Czechs in this manner as he took off to fight Rudolph in 1278 (22). Wenceslaus II (1278-1305), son of Otokar II, of all things, became a German poet. Brought up in Germany, Wenceslaus followed in the footsteps of his father, Otokar II, and his grandfather Wenceslaus I, both of whom had forced Czechs out of several towns in favor of the Germans. He could not write "in the langua,ge of the despised men, the (Czech) language in which no one wrote up to that time" (23). Such was the condition of the Czech language up to of Hus. The Czechs, we know, indulge extravaadvent the gantly in the glory of Charles IV, "the father of our country" and the founder of the Prague University. The fact is that Charles IV was a German educated in France. When he was called to occupy the throne of Bohemia he did not know a single word of Czech (24). The teaching medium of the Prague University was Latin. If the University was founded in the Czech interest, the Czech language undoubtedly would have found its way into science before 1499, i.e., 120 years after Charles !V's death. There would then be no need for Hus to fight for the equality of the Czech language in the fifteenth century. Charles was succeeded by his son, Wenceslaus IV (1378-1419), who favored Latin and German. In 1394 the Union of Nobles had him arrested and forced him to issue documents also in Czech. Hus himself, until 1413, wrote in Latin (25). Under Charles IV, the Germans controlled the University. In the heat of the Hussite battle his son and successor, Wences'laus IV, sanctioned the reorganization of the University (Decree of Kutna Hora, Jan. 18, 1409), to give the Czechs "a ruling voice in their own university" (26). The result was disastrous for the University. Losing their influence, the Germans left the University of Prague, May 16, 1409, to found their own 44 SLOVAKIA university at Leipzig. With the exodus of the Germans the university lost its European significance and the Hussite era practically ruined it, reducing everything in the Czechsettled lands in Bohemia and a great part of Moravia to dust and ashes (27). As a result no examinations were held by the university from 1420 to 1428, a situation that happened frequently until 1526, so that Czech students had to continue their studies elsewhere. Flajshans tells us that as late as 1554 all twelve professors of the Prague University did not have together the salary of one professor of the University of Paris (28). The same author begins the chapter on the overglorified "Hussite Century" (15th) with these words: "All the higher schools are Latin; all offi~ cial records and public documents were written in Latin; and Latin united all scholars of the whole world" (29). Concluding the same chapter, Flajshans says: "The cry of Viktorin cal!ling for diligent work in the field of the Czech language remained for a long time the voice of one crying in the wilderness" (30). Viktorin, who in 1495 was opposed to Czech in the law books of Prague, died in 1520. The historical truth is that Czech Hussitism was above all else a religious movement which had practically nothing in common with the "national spirit" of the Czechs. Hussitism was not supported by the Prague University, but rather persecuted. That is why the adherents of Hus' teachings turned their hatred in the first instance against the univesity which they pillaged more than once, beating and throwing out the professors and bringing ruin upon it. The Czechs, the very people who should have nurtured and elevated the "Czech national and religious spirit," turned against the university ( 31) . They developed a new "national spirit" and strived to force it on their people. If the Prague University had practically no influence on the national life of the Czechs at that time, what influence could it possibly have on Slovak national life? The historical fact is that there is not a trace of Hussite literature in Slovakia from the fifteenth century(32). Like Jaroslav Vlcek, later historians, including S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, Robert J. Ker- SLOVAKIA ner of the University of California, Joseph R. Roucek, of Hofstra College (1946), had the opportunity of writing objectively in regard to the matter at hand by seeking out available historical facts instead of relying on chauvinistic Czech propaganda. Professor S. Harrison Thomson, perhaps unable to see the forest for the trees, said this about the SloV'aks and Czechs and their respective languages: "The two peoples were originally so closely related as to be indistiruguishlalble, but geo,g,rap'lry and distance could easily have induced a separate political existence. The Magyar conquest made any such natural development illl!possible"(i33). ''The Slovaks therefore had no opporfonity to develop their own culture, written language, political institutions or social concepts in any independent way. Their relationship with the Ozechs, their brothers to the west, had, for all practical purposes, ceased to be a reality for them. This situation lasted nine centuries" (34). ''The great similarity of the vernacular lan.guages furnished an additional bond between the peoples of Bohemia and Slovakia" (35). "Political and military prestige combined with purely linguistic flexibility to make Czech rather than Slovak the lingua franca of a considera1b le region outside Bohemia. Written, Czec·h ,b ecame the language of the educated Slovaks, particularly if they had studied at Prague, and .remained such until the end of the 18th century(36). "It would be difficult to exaggerate the influence of this wide acceptance of Czech as the written langua-ge of the Slovaks during a period when Bohemia was free and Slovakia was ruled by Mag,y,ars. Tihe dialectical peculiarities that appear here and ther-e in Slovak document's did not alter the fundamental fact that Czech was accepted as the basic tongue of the tw;,. peoples(37). "The end result of the sojourn of the Hussite armies was not very considerable. In the first place their stay in Slovakia was relatively short, and in the second place we have incontrovertible evidence that the organization and powe1' of the Catholic Church in Slovakia was not noticeably disturbed at any time in the fifteenth century" (138). In his foreword, Professor Thomson warns the reader that the term "Czechoslovakia" has no political significance in his book; "it is used generally to designate the geographical entity lately known by that name." The professor may be coy and naive, but he is no fool. He knew what he was doing. Whether he likes it or not, the fact is that term, with or without the hyphen, is the name of a political entity. He warns the reader further that the 46 SLOVAKIA term "Bohemia" is also geographical "and in no wise an ethnic term." Nevertheless throughout his book he generally substitutes the term "CZECH kingdom"! What justification can there be for denying, ignoring, suppressing, or falsifying established historical facts? By the way, Thomson's "Czechoslovakia in European History" was awarded the "Czechoslovak State Prize" in December 1944, at a time when that state did not factually exist, the provisional (illegal) government of Dr. Edward Benes thus showing its appreciation to the professor. Indeed, the same professor who said in another "historical gem" edited by R. J. Kerner of the University of California: "But to Premysl Otokar I (]19741230) must be assigned the responsibility for inviting the Gerlll!an immigration. En,couraged by the court, many Czech nobles had married German women ; some of the best positionis of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by German clerics; German minnesingers were in high favor t-0 the royal court and at the courts of the richer nobles"(39). Gerald Druce, "authority on Czech science," belongs in Thomson's category. In Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" he had this to say in regard to the matter at hand: "The University of Prague, the oldest in Central Europe, had been founded in 1348 by Charles IV and had been placed upon a secure footing by his successor, Vaclav IV, by the Kutna Hora decrees in 1409. During the Middle Ages the study of the natural sciences flourished in Bo'hemia, as is shown by the number of herbals and contemporary mineralogical and alchemical wol'ks in the Czech langua•ge. Indeed, toward the close of the sixteenth centry Prague was recogn,ized as an important center of learning"(40). The tendency is quite obvious. Significant it is, too, that Druce, like all other pro-Czech propagandists, finds it very convenient to offer no proof for his "historical" statements. Professor Joseph R. Roucek, being a Czech, could allow himself a bit more rope by raising the Czech banner "Pravda vitezi." Writing about the Slovaks and Czechs and their languages, he adds to the confusion ( emphasis here as elsewhere being mine. - P.A.H): "CZECH refers to the principal people or language found in Bohemia and Moravia. SL-OVAK is the name given to the eas• ternmost division of the Czech-speaking people. Protestant leaders and philologists have claimed that Slovak is merely Old SLOVAKIA 47 Czech and have urged the use of Czech as the sole written Ian• guage"{ 41 ). "The difficulty of intercourse with the Czechs has produced a divergence in what was originally a common language. The Slovak and Czech :forms of the language dilffer in certain minor points to the present day, like two dialects of the same tongue spoken locally"(412). 'IH is eertain, at any rate, that toward the end of the Premyslid era (1'305) the Czech language was already being adQ1Pted by scholars, that it moved from the villages, towns, and castles into books, and that it even began to replace both Latin and German"(43) "The German language (in the time of Hus - the latter part of the 14th century and first quarter of lsth) was predominant both in pwblic offices and in the churches and schools throughout the country"(44). But - as a result oif the Hussrte movement - "the Czech language and literature began to predominate"(45). Nevertheless "The Slovaks remained a separate and distinct people, even though cut off from intercourse with other Slav peoples. They remained mainly Catholic and developed their language as a dialect of the Czech language"(46). Joseph Lettrich, author of a "History of Modern Slovakia," belongs in a category by himself. As a Slovak he is opposed to Slovak freedom and independence. The Slovaks, according to Lettrich, could not exist without the Czechs. Having collaborated with Benes and the Communists, Lettrich is now on vacation from politics in the United States, still serving the interests of the Czechs as a prominent member of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia" - the organization of former members of the Communistdominated National Front Government of Czecho-Slovakia (1945-1948). Blinded by his prejudices and ignorant of history, Lettrich had this to say about his own people and their language "When a university was founded in Pra•g ue by King Charle,s N in 11314!8, numerous Slovaks werut to study there, and several became prdfessors at that un,iversity. In this manner the cultural relations between Slovak'S and Czechs, which had been forcibly interrupted, were re-established. They were to play a vital role in the spiritual development of the tJwo peoples. The most powerful influence that united them was the written Czechoslovak language which continued to be common to both. In, the first half of the fi,fteenth century the armies o'f the Czech Hussite warriors penetrated into Slovakia .... The Hussite forces ... introduced a new spirit of independence from Rome. Above all, they once again strengthened the ties of a common language and culture between Czechs and Slovaks"(47). 48 SLOVAKIA Lettrich, like other Slovak renegades and pro-Czech scribes, tried to remake history in the image of "Masaryk's interpretation" of Czech history. The ancient Czechs had the motto: "The truth of God prevails" (pravda Bozi vitezi). Masaryk, following the example of the radical Hussites, threw out God and made the motto read "Truth prevai'ls." Waving Masaryk's banner high, his followers continue in his "interpretation" of the national spirit and the history of the Czechs, misrepresenting and distorting historical facts. Having abandoned Divinely imposed mandates of the moral law, they now seek refuge and justification in the counterfeit doctrine of unbridled liberalism. Whatever might be said to the contrary, the truth is that "Such phrases as 'Czechoslovak language' might be used for the benefit of the outside world and in constitutional and other state documents, but the fact remains that to the vast majority of both peoples (Czechs and Slovaks), the idea remained a pure fiction, and the languages, like the peoples, were, in solid fact, two and not one" (4'8). REFERENCES 1. Jaroslav Vlcek: DEJmY SLOVElNISKJEJ LITElRATURY, 192'3, 1pp. 5,6. 2. Vlcek - p. 2. 3. Vlcek - p. 6. 4. Vlcek - p. 25. 5. SLOVENSKY DENNiK, 1922, No. 17. 6. Vlcek - pp. 4-5 7. Jozef Skultety: O &LOV AKOOH, p. 59. 8. !Kulhanek: KRONIKA CESKOSILOVElNSiKA, pp. 001~62. 9. M. Misik: HUSITI NA SLOVL0NS~U, p. 37. 10. Vlcek - p . 8. t:111. Vlcek - p. 8. 1'2. V. Flajsha11s: NAS JAZYK MA'DERSKY, p. 283. '113. Vlcek - p. 1.2. 14. Vlcek - p,24 . .115. Vlcek - p. 23. 1'6. Jozef Skultety: NElHAN'DE L'UD MOJ! p. 82. 17. Henry Ma1.1czali: MAGYAIROR!SZAG TORTENIETE, Vol. l, p. 367. 18. Vlcek - pp. 5-6. 19. Skultety: 0 SLOVAKO OH, p. '170. 20. Karol Tri\.ovski: K RECOVIEJ OTAZKE SLOVArfroV, ;1.937, p. 23. 21. Flajshans, - i;>. ·1163. 22. IFlajshans - PJl,69. 23. IFlajshans - p. 170. '24. IFla,jshans - p. 209. '25. Flajshans - p. 220. '26. S. Harrison Thomson: CZEOHOSL0 VAKIA IN EUIRO!PEIA!N HliSTORY, 1M4; p. 116. 1 SLOVAKIA 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 4Jl. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. iFlajshans - p. 259. ,F la,j shans - p. 260. [Flajshans - p. 217. Flajshans - p. 265. Flajshans - p. 259. Tri\.ovski - p. 47. Thomson p. 199. Thomson - p. 200. Thomson - p. 206. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 207. Thomson - p. 208. CZEJOHOSLOV.Ax;1iA, edited by Robert J. Kerner, 1'949; 02lEJOHOSLOVAK1iA, Kerner - p. 316. Joseph R. Roucek: CEJN'l1RAlrEAlSTEJRN EUROIPE, 1946; Roucek - p. 63. IRoucek - p. 64. IRoucek - p. 66. iRoucek - p. 69. Roucek - p. 81. Jozef Lettrich: HISTORY OF MOIDERN SLOVA!KIA, pp. 21,22. C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY ANiD HIE)R SUOOESSORS, 49 p . 13. p. 61. 11955; 11937 ; p. 1·26. • • • WHO SAID IT? ''However close the original bonds between the Slovaks and the Czechs) imay have been, the ten, centuries dw:ing which the Slovaks formed a part of the kingdom of Hun:gary, w:hile the Czechs were subjected to German and Austrian influences, naturally brought about a marked dififerentation between the two peoples. Even the physical stocks cannot be so closely related today as they were a thousand years ago, for the Czeohs aTe todlay inextricalbly mingled with German elements, while the Slovak mountaineers have retained their racial purity to a larger degree .... There is, h01Wever, a noti.t:ealb le doifference both in physical appearance and in character between, the dour, efificient, but somewhiat ungainly Czech, and the airy, talkative, hwppy-go-lucky Slovak." - C. A. Macartney: HUNGAIRY AND HER SUOCEJSSORIS, London, L937) . • • • ' Iif a single dynasty had united both peoples ~Czechs and Slovaks) in a permanent, or at least an enduring union, a Czechoslovak nationality would assuredly have been formed and with a Czecho•slovak language - any minor dialectal diff.erences which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen; and while the Slavs of Bohemia developed the ,Czech nationality and language, to which the intermed,i ate dialects of Moravila gravitated, the Slovaks under Hungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the Czechs, but were not even able to form a single literary language with them." - CC. A. Macartney: HUNGA!RY ANlD HiElR SUCOESSORS, London, 1937).  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 Was Czech the Vehicle of Slovak Literature? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 6 (31), March-June 1960 pp. 36-49 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-June 1960 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/10e68fbdd8ce87e96ba2f99b53a79fbd.pdf 3d17297cd173f1813d92dbf10fef63f3 PDF Text Text 52 SLOVAKIA SELF-DETERMINATION FOR ALL (Address of P. A. Hrobak in Cologne, Germany, on the occasion of Su• deten German Day, May 20, 1961. The Charles IV Award was given Mr. Hrobak in 1961 by the Sudeten German Council of West Germany.) I feel highly honored, privileged and extremely happy to be with you here today for this "'Sudeten German Day" to voice together with you our rededication to the fundamental principles which are the foundation of every genuine democracy, the principles of justice and liberty. At the very outset, from the bottom of my heart, I thank the Sudeten German Council for the honor of bestowing on me the Award of Charles IV, particularly Herr Minister HansChristoph Seebohm and Herr Dr. Walter Becher. In the name of the Slovak League of America, the outstanding and most representative civic and cultural organization of American of Slovak descent, I greet you sincerely and pray that God hastens the day of your return to your ancestral homeland where you shall be able to fully enjoy the exercise of your God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We commend you wholeheartedly for your patience and, particularly, for the great courage displayed throughout the years under most trydng circumstances to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determina'tion, the right of nations to freely govern themselves as they best see fit. The Slovaks of America are grateful to the West German Government and to the German people for offering asylum to Slovaks who fled the terror and violence which enveloped their homeland in 1945. By the practical application of the Go'lden Rule (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), you have earned the admiration and respect of the entire free world. The hristory of the Sudetenland is very much like the history of Slovakia. The people of both territories were faced with a "fait accompli" in 1918, with their demand to exercise the right of self-determinaiton completely ignored. This happened after a war which was fought for the rights of nationality and of national self-determina- �SLOVAKIA 53 tion and "a territorial settlement ... ibased on the right of self-determination or the consent of the governed" was one of three fundamental conditions of a permanent peace. With the creation of Czecho-Slovakia under the leadership of T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes both the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks were exploited and treated like second-class citizens. The Sudeten Germans, like the Slovaks, wanted nothing that belonged to the Czech people; they did not seek Czech territory, nor the spiritual or material wealth of the Czechs. And they did not want special treatment, but only that they, too, be able to exercise the prerogative of self-determination. Because this right of self-determination was denied the Sudetenland Germans and the Slovaks, amd others, a grave injustice was done them. The vio1ation of the principle of self-determination at that time led to the crisis of democracy in Central Europe and eventually to the horrible holocaust of World War Two. There was and still is nothing wrong with the great democratic principle of self-determination. Objective observers, I am sure, will agree that the disintegration of large political and economic units following the First World War and the creation of incoherent smaller units at a time when strategic and economic fa:ctors demanded more integration was the result of applying the principle of self-determination avbitrarily. At that time, the notion to build national states in East Central Europe, where many nationalities or ethnic groups had lived intermingled for many centuries had gained the favor of the peacemakers. Unfortunately, experienced and able statesmen and political experts allowed themselves to be persuaded by politically inexperienced, shortsighted and morally unbalanced men, particularly by T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes, to accept the idea of creating political units which had no basis in the history of the peoples concerned. Tearing asunder large multi-national political units to esta:blish smaller multi-national units under the guise of the great democratic principle of self-determination could only result in political monstrosities. And that, in my con- �54 SLOVAKIA sidered opm1on, is exactly what, for example, Czecho-Slovakia was - and still is. This violation of the Wilsonian principle presaged only more trouble not only for Central Europe but also for the whole world. The attempt to build a national state in traditionally ,a nd historically multi-national areas failed - and failed miserably. It is a matter of historical record that the violation of the great democratic principle of self-determination led first to discontent and prevented wholesome and peaceful cooperation. As the years rolled by it engendered and fomented hatred of those who ruled high and mighty, utterly disregarding the Creator-endowed rights of the other nations within the state, particularly, in the case of Czecho~Slovakia, the rights of millions of Sudeten Germans and Slovaks. The arbitrary and unjust reorganization of East Central Europe between the wars, characterized as it was by chauvinism, contributed largely to the outbreak of the most horrible slaughter in the history of mankind, and, by a strange and distorted logic, resulted in vengeance and retri~ bution not against those who violated the principle of selfdetermination, but against the victims of chauvinism and oppression in the interwar period. Certainly it must be crystal clear today that the policy of vengeance and unlbridled retribution, depriving millions of Central Europeans of their homes without any compensation and expelling them on the grounds of "collective guilt" can never be justified in the minds of men who are truly interested in justice and the right. The charge of collective guilt, so hastily accepted by some governments against the defeated nations and their nationals in other countries, was and still is, in my humble opinion, as absurd as the label of collective innocence t:o which the victors laid claim. History shall never b'e able to reconcile and justify the brutal mass expulsions of the Sudeten Germans and others which took place after 1945. It is not my intention to resort to recriminations. I believe that peoples of the free democratic world should be more concerned with remedying the injustices of the past �SLOVAKIA 55 - and then pushing on in earnest with the task of establishing a just and lasting peace. First of all, it seems to me, restitution must be made by allowing all expellees to return to their homelands and returning to them all their possessions. Then the East Central European peoples should return to the great democratic principle of the right of self-determination and use it as a basis of a new and more just organization of the area, applying the principle to all nations without exception, with due consideration for the pressing demands of the time. I am greatly inclined to believe the claim or proposition that there is only one answer to the problem of the reorganization of East Central Europe: a federation of free peoples or free states - a United States of East Central Europe or a United States encompassing the whole of Europe proper - guaranteeing the several states composing it full states' rights so that they might freely cultivate and develop their own national traditions, their languages and cultures, not only in their own interest, but also in the highest interest of the welfare and security of the federation. With the passage of time, I am sure, a situation similar to that in the United States of America would develop, where citizens of all ethnic origins and religious persuasions are not only free, but even encouraged, to preserve and enhance the national traditions and customs of their ancestors. History has taught us this one great lesson: no nation can have, or presume to have, a monopoly on freedom; and certainly no nation or state has the right to enslave other nations or states. Freedom is the greatest of God's gifts and blessings to mankind; it is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we develop and share it, the more abundant are its fruits, and the more secure is our own freedom. History has also taught us that evil, unprincipled men cannot make good citizens and so much the less good public servants and honest advocates of lasting peace. It is impossible that a nation of infidels and idolaters should be a nation · of freemen. It is when people forget God - the ultimate Truth and Prince of Peace - that tyrants forge their �56 SLOVAKIA chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. In America "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain un:alienaJble righ'ts, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But we do not hold that life is so dear and peace so sweet that it must be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! The people of the democratic republic of the United States of America believe that all men should be free; that all nations without exception have an inherent, God-given right to establish their own political units in their ancestral homelands and to determine their form of government. If at times in the past the impression was given that this is not so, that is the fault not of the American people, but the fault of those in authority who as their representatives yielded to the force of expediency, forgetting that expedients are but of the hour - principles for the ages. The time has come, I believe, that we must do more than just pay lip service to the nolJle principles which are the foundation of genuine democracy and liberty. The time has come for all men to seek the things that unite them and not divide them; the time has come for all free nations to demand a stop to the shadow-boxing in the United Nations and more real action in support of the noble aims of its charter; the time has come to deal justly with all, not just some, crimes against humanity no matter by whom they were perpetrated: the time is here to supplement words for peace with concrete actions for a genuine and lasting peace. But how can we possibly expect a just peace and a lasting settlement, as long as the great democratic principle of self-determination is denied the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks and other nations, and as long as the right of expellees and forcibly departed ethnic groups to freely return to their ancestral homelands is not recognized and respected? Indeed, as long as some earthly power is seriously dedicated to the enslavement of mankind? We in the Slovak League of America still regard the brutal expulsion of the Germans from their centuries-old �57 SLOVAKIA homeland as immoral and criminal. The expulsion of any people from their rightful homeland cannot be justified by or reconciled with the expressed political beliefs of any civilized, genuinely democratic country. And certainly not with the political beliefs of the United States of America. In the land of my parents - the land inhabited by the Slovak people since time immemorial - the Slovaks have lived with the Germans in peace and friendship for many long years. Here is a shining example of the cohabitation of a nation with a minority. Indeed, a cohabitation much like that of many ethnic groups of America. There is nothing better I could wish for the whole of Europe, for the entire world. God bless you and all of Germany! God bless America and the rest of the free world! And may God hasten the day of liberation of my hapless Slovak people! LONG-RANGE m1i:ssile ramps are bei,n,g constructed by the Red Czechs of Prague i,n, Slova'kia. 'Dhey are locla'ted near the town, Olf Spi.s• ska Nova Vres a·nd are the first Communist intercon:tinental missile siltes located outside the bordrers of the Soviet Union. Medilum-range siites harvre been operationia1 i,n, Czecho-Slovakiia at bases near Uzhorod, Kosice, RufomlbeTok, Frydek (all in Slovaki-a) and Moravska Ostrava siruce Jruly 1959. The Czech Reds together with the Kremlin preferred to sel~ct Slovakia foc most of these sites, since they know tha't they will.I be the prdmary targets in the event of a nuclear war. The Slovaks are expendaible, accOTdi,n-g to the Czech Red bosses. lJ(l lJ(l lJ(l helart" as it is teruned by Prague R-eds, were draJWn up lin the USSR. It wiU be the largest foundry in alll. Europe and one of the ten largest works of its kind in the world. It will cost an esti• mated 10.5 binions Crow,ns. S·o viet experts are in charge Olf construction and operation. lJ(l )l{l )l{l IN C2lECiHO-S·L OVAKIA pension- ers were recalled to work in October and women were recruited to make up for ma,n,poiwer lost in the -emergency bulild-up of the armed forces, a'Ccord'ing to offiloilal Prague sources. Forty per cent of the adult women in Czecho-Sllovakiia already held jobs in the paradise of the Red Czechs. )l{l )l{l )l{l "CRUCIFIXE•S must go" - ac- ONIE OF THE MOST urgent as· cordling to tlhe Czech Reds under ,si:gnimenrt:s of the new Five-Year Plan (1001-'1965) Olf the Czech Oommunist Party's Oen'.tTal Committee is the completion ·o f the huge Ironwoiics ini K!osice, Slovakia. Blueprinrt:s for 1Jhis "second steel Anton,ini Novotny. NotMng has changed ffilllCh sin'Ce the birth of Czecho-Slovaklia. Novotny is contin udng the policy of Masaryk and Benes: in 1918, c,rucif.ixes were hauled in wagons to manure pill.es! � 52 SLOVAKIA SELF-DETERMINATION FOR ALL (Address of P. A. Hrobak in Cologne, Germany, on the occasion of Su• deten German Day, May 20, 1961. The Charles IV Award was given Mr. Hrobak in 1961 by the Sudeten German Council of West Germany.) I feel highly honored, privileged and extremely happy to be with you here today for this "'Sudeten German Day" to voice together with you our rededication to the fundamental principles which are the foundation of every genuine democracy, the principles of justice and liberty. At the very outset, from the bottom of my heart, I thank the Sudeten German Council for the honor of bestowing on me the Award of Charles IV, particularly Herr Minister HansChristoph Seebohm and Herr Dr. Walter Becher. In the name of the Slovak League of America, the outstanding and most representative civic and cultural organization of American of Slovak descent, I greet you sincerely and pray that God hastens the day of your return to your ancestral homeland where you shall be able to fully enjoy the exercise of your God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We commend you wholeheartedly for your patience and, particularly, for the great courage displayed throughout the years under most trydng circumstances to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determina'tion, the right of nations to freely govern themselves as they best see fit. The Slovaks of America are grateful to the West German Government and to the German people for offering asylum to Slovaks who fled the terror and violence which enveloped their homeland in 1945. By the practical application of the Go'lden Rule (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), you have earned the admiration and respect of the entire free world. The hristory of the Sudetenland is very much like the history of Slovakia. The people of both territories were faced with a "fait accompli" in 1918, with their demand to exercise the right of self-determinaiton completely ignored. This happened after a war which was fought for the rights of nationality and of national self-determina- �SLOVAKIA 53 tion and "a territorial settlement ... ibased on the right of self-determination or the consent of the governed" was one of three fundamental conditions of a permanent peace. With the creation of Czecho-Slovakia under the leadership of T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes both the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks were exploited and treated like second-class citizens. The Sudeten Germans, like the Slovaks, wanted nothing that belonged to the Czech people; they did not seek Czech territory, nor the spiritual or material wealth of the Czechs. And they did not want special treatment, but only that they, too, be able to exercise the prerogative of self-determination. Because this right of self-determination was denied the Sudetenland Germans and the Slovaks, amd others, a grave injustice was done them. The vio1ation of the principle of self-determination at that time led to the crisis of democracy in Central Europe and eventually to the horrible holocaust of World War Two. There was and still is nothing wrong with the great democratic principle of self-determination. Objective observers, I am sure, will agree that the disintegration of large political and economic units following the First World War and the creation of incoherent smaller units at a time when strategic and economic fa:ctors demanded more integration was the result of applying the principle of self-determination avbitrarily. At that time, the notion to build national states in East Central Europe, where many nationalities or ethnic groups had lived intermingled for many centuries had gained the favor of the peacemakers. Unfortunately, experienced and able statesmen and political experts allowed themselves to be persuaded by politically inexperienced, shortsighted and morally unbalanced men, particularly by T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes, to accept the idea of creating political units which had no basis in the history of the peoples concerned. Tearing asunder large multi-national political units to esta:blish smaller multi-national units under the guise of the great democratic principle of self-determination could only result in political monstrosities. And that, in my con- �54 SLOVAKIA sidered opm1on, is exactly what, for example, Czecho-Slovakia was - and still is. This violation of the Wilsonian principle presaged only more trouble not only for Central Europe but also for the whole world. The attempt to build a national state in traditionally ,a nd historically multi-national areas failed - and failed miserably. It is a matter of historical record that the violation of the great democratic principle of self-determination led first to discontent and prevented wholesome and peaceful cooperation. As the years rolled by it engendered and fomented hatred of those who ruled high and mighty, utterly disregarding the Creator-endowed rights of the other nations within the state, particularly, in the case of Czecho~Slovakia, the rights of millions of Sudeten Germans and Slovaks. The arbitrary and unjust reorganization of East Central Europe between the wars, characterized as it was by chauvinism, contributed largely to the outbreak of the most horrible slaughter in the history of mankind, and, by a strange and distorted logic, resulted in vengeance and retri~ bution not against those who violated the principle of selfdetermination, but against the victims of chauvinism and oppression in the interwar period. Certainly it must be crystal clear today that the policy of vengeance and unlbridled retribution, depriving millions of Central Europeans of their homes without any compensation and expelling them on the grounds of "collective guilt" can never be justified in the minds of men who are truly interested in justice and the right. The charge of collective guilt, so hastily accepted by some governments against the defeated nations and their nationals in other countries, was and still is, in my humble opinion, as absurd as the label of collective innocence t:o which the victors laid claim. History shall never b'e able to reconcile and justify the brutal mass expulsions of the Sudeten Germans and others which took place after 1945. It is not my intention to resort to recriminations. I believe that peoples of the free democratic world should be more concerned with remedying the injustices of the past �SLOVAKIA 55 - and then pushing on in earnest with the task of establishing a just and lasting peace. First of all, it seems to me, restitution must be made by allowing all expellees to return to their homelands and returning to them all their possessions. Then the East Central European peoples should return to the great democratic principle of the right of self-determination and use it as a basis of a new and more just organization of the area, applying the principle to all nations without exception, with due consideration for the pressing demands of the time. I am greatly inclined to believe the claim or proposition that there is only one answer to the problem of the reorganization of East Central Europe: a federation of free peoples or free states - a United States of East Central Europe or a United States encompassing the whole of Europe proper - guaranteeing the several states composing it full states' rights so that they might freely cultivate and develop their own national traditions, their languages and cultures, not only in their own interest, but also in the highest interest of the welfare and security of the federation. With the passage of time, I am sure, a situation similar to that in the United States of America would develop, where citizens of all ethnic origins and religious persuasions are not only free, but even encouraged, to preserve and enhance the national traditions and customs of their ancestors. History has taught us this one great lesson: no nation can have, or presume to have, a monopoly on freedom; and certainly no nation or state has the right to enslave other nations or states. Freedom is the greatest of God's gifts and blessings to mankind; it is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we develop and share it, the more abundant are its fruits, and the more secure is our own freedom. History has also taught us that evil, unprincipled men cannot make good citizens and so much the less good public servants and honest advocates of lasting peace. It is impossible that a nation of infidels and idolaters should be a nation · of freemen. It is when people forget God - the ultimate Truth and Prince of Peace - that tyrants forge their �56 SLOVAKIA chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. In America "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain un:alienaJble righ'ts, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But we do not hold that life is so dear and peace so sweet that it must be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! The people of the democratic republic of the United States of America believe that all men should be free; that all nations without exception have an inherent, God-given right to establish their own political units in their ancestral homelands and to determine their form of government. If at times in the past the impression was given that this is not so, that is the fault not of the American people, but the fault of those in authority who as their representatives yielded to the force of expediency, forgetting that expedients are but of the hour - principles for the ages. The time has come, I believe, that we must do more than just pay lip service to the nolJle principles which are the foundation of genuine democracy and liberty. The time has come for all men to seek the things that unite them and not divide them; the time has come for all free nations to demand a stop to the shadow-boxing in the United Nations and more real action in support of the noble aims of its charter; the time has come to deal justly with all, not just some, crimes against humanity no matter by whom they were perpetrated: the time is here to supplement words for peace with concrete actions for a genuine and lasting peace. But how can we possibly expect a just peace and a lasting settlement, as long as the great democratic principle of self-determination is denied the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks and other nations, and as long as the right of expellees and forcibly departed ethnic groups to freely return to their ancestral homelands is not recognized and respected? Indeed, as long as some earthly power is seriously dedicated to the enslavement of mankind? We in the Slovak League of America still regard the brutal expulsion of the Germans from their centuries-old �57 SLOVAKIA homeland as immoral and criminal. The expulsion of any people from their rightful homeland cannot be justified by or reconciled with the expressed political beliefs of any civilized, genuinely democratic country. And certainly not with the political beliefs of the United States of America. In the land of my parents - the land inhabited by the Slovak people since time immemorial - the Slovaks have lived with the Germans in peace and friendship for many long years. Here is a shining example of the cohabitation of a nation with a minority. Indeed, a cohabitation much like that of many ethnic groups of America. There is nothing better I could wish for the whole of Europe, for the entire world. God bless you and all of Germany! God bless America and the rest of the free world! And may God hasten the day of liberation of my hapless Slovak people! LONG-RANGE m1i:ssile ramps are bei,n,g constructed by the Red Czechs of Prague i,n, Slova'kia. 'Dhey are locla'ted near the town, Olf Spi.s• ska Nova Vres a·nd are the first Communist intercon:tinental missile siltes located outside the bordrers of the Soviet Union. Medilum-range siites harvre been operationia1 i,n, Czecho-Slovakiia at bases near Uzhorod, Kosice, RufomlbeTok, Frydek (all in Slovaki-a) and Moravska Ostrava siruce Jruly 1959. The Czech Reds together with the Kremlin preferred to sel~ct Slovakia foc most of these sites, since they know tha't they will.I be the prdmary targets in the event of a nuclear war. The Slovaks are expendaible, accOTdi,n-g to the Czech Red bosses. lJ(l lJ(l lJ(l helart" as it is teruned by Prague R-eds, were draJWn up lin the USSR. It wiU be the largest foundry in alll. Europe and one of the ten largest works of its kind in the world. It will cost an esti• mated 10.5 binions Crow,ns. S·o viet experts are in charge Olf construction and operation. lJ(l )l{l )l{l IN C2lECiHO-S·L OVAKIA pension- ers were recalled to work in October and women were recruited to make up for ma,n,poiwer lost in the -emergency bulild-up of the armed forces, a'Ccord'ing to offiloilal Prague sources. Forty per cent of the adult women in Czecho-Sllovakiia already held jobs in the paradise of the Red Czechs. )l{l )l{l )l{l "CRUCIFIXE•S must go" - ac- ONIE OF THE MOST urgent as· cordling to tlhe Czech Reds under ,si:gnimenrt:s of the new Five-Year Plan (1001-'1965) Olf the Czech Oommunist Party's Oen'.tTal Committee is the completion ·o f the huge Ironwoiics ini K!osice, Slovakia. Blueprinrt:s for 1Jhis "second steel Anton,ini Novotny. NotMng has changed ffilllCh sin'Ce the birth of Czecho-Slovaklia. Novotny is contin udng the policy of Masaryk and Benes: in 1918, c,rucif.ixes were hauled in wagons to manure pill.es! � 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 1961, Vol. 11 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 33), March-June 1961.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 34), September-December June 1961.</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 1961 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 SELF-DETERMINATION FOR ALL (Address of P. A. Hrobak in Cologne, Germany, on the occasion of Su• deten German Day, May 20, 1961. The Charles IV Award was given Mr. Hrobak in 1961 by the Sudeten German Council of West Germany.) I feel highly honored, privileged and extremely happy to be with you here today for this "'Sudeten German Day" to voice together with you our rededication to the fundamental principles which are the foundation of every genuine democracy, the principles of justice and liberty. At the very outset, from the bottom of my heart, I thank the Sudeten German Council for the honor of bestowing on me the Award of Charles IV, particularly Herr Minister HansChristoph Seebohm and Herr Dr. Walter Becher. In the name of the Slovak League of America, the outstanding and most representative civic and cultural organization of American of Slovak descent, I greet you sincerely and pray that God hastens the day of your return to your ancestral homeland where you shall be able to fully enjoy the exercise of your God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We commend you wholeheartedly for your patience and, particularly, for the great courage displayed throughout the years under most trydng circumstances to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determina'tion, the right of nations to freely govern themselves as they best see fit. The Slovaks of America are grateful to the West German Government and to the German people for offering asylum to Slovaks who fled the terror and violence which enveloped their homeland in 1945. By the practical application of the Go'lden Rule (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), you have earned the admiration and respect of the entire free world. The hristory of the Sudetenland is very much like the history of Slovakia. The people of both territories were faced with a "fait accompli" in 1918, with their demand to exercise the right of self-determinaiton completely ignored. This happened after a war which was fought for the rights of nationality and of national self-determina- SLOVAKIA 53 tion and "a territorial settlement ... ibased on the right of self-determination or the consent of the governed" was one of three fundamental conditions of a permanent peace. With the creation of Czecho-Slovakia under the leadership of T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes both the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks were exploited and treated like second-class citizens. The Sudeten Germans, like the Slovaks, wanted nothing that belonged to the Czech people; they did not seek Czech territory, nor the spiritual or material wealth of the Czechs. And they did not want special treatment, but only that they, too, be able to exercise the prerogative of self-determination. Because this right of self-determination was denied the Sudetenland Germans and the Slovaks, amd others, a grave injustice was done them. The vio1ation of the principle of self-determination at that time led to the crisis of democracy in Central Europe and eventually to the horrible holocaust of World War Two. There was and still is nothing wrong with the great democratic principle of self-determination. Objective observers, I am sure, will agree that the disintegration of large political and economic units following the First World War and the creation of incoherent smaller units at a time when strategic and economic fa:ctors demanded more integration was the result of applying the principle of self-determination avbitrarily. At that time, the notion to build national states in East Central Europe, where many nationalities or ethnic groups had lived intermingled for many centuries had gained the favor of the peacemakers. Unfortunately, experienced and able statesmen and political experts allowed themselves to be persuaded by politically inexperienced, shortsighted and morally unbalanced men, particularly by T. G. Masaryk and Edward Benes, to accept the idea of creating political units which had no basis in the history of the peoples concerned. Tearing asunder large multi-national political units to esta:blish smaller multi-national units under the guise of the great democratic principle of self-determination could only result in political monstrosities. And that, in my con- 54 SLOVAKIA sidered opm1on, is exactly what, for example, Czecho-Slovakia was - and still is. This violation of the Wilsonian principle presaged only more trouble not only for Central Europe but also for the whole world. The attempt to build a national state in traditionally ,a nd historically multi-national areas failed - and failed miserably. It is a matter of historical record that the violation of the great democratic principle of self-determination led first to discontent and prevented wholesome and peaceful cooperation. As the years rolled by it engendered and fomented hatred of those who ruled high and mighty, utterly disregarding the Creator-endowed rights of the other nations within the state, particularly, in the case of Czecho~Slovakia, the rights of millions of Sudeten Germans and Slovaks. The arbitrary and unjust reorganization of East Central Europe between the wars, characterized as it was by chauvinism, contributed largely to the outbreak of the most horrible slaughter in the history of mankind, and, by a strange and distorted logic, resulted in vengeance and retri~ bution not against those who violated the principle of selfdetermination, but against the victims of chauvinism and oppression in the interwar period. Certainly it must be crystal clear today that the policy of vengeance and unlbridled retribution, depriving millions of Central Europeans of their homes without any compensation and expelling them on the grounds of "collective guilt" can never be justified in the minds of men who are truly interested in justice and the right. The charge of collective guilt, so hastily accepted by some governments against the defeated nations and their nationals in other countries, was and still is, in my humble opinion, as absurd as the label of collective innocence t:o which the victors laid claim. History shall never b'e able to reconcile and justify the brutal mass expulsions of the Sudeten Germans and others which took place after 1945. It is not my intention to resort to recriminations. I believe that peoples of the free democratic world should be more concerned with remedying the injustices of the past SLOVAKIA 55 - and then pushing on in earnest with the task of establishing a just and lasting peace. First of all, it seems to me, restitution must be made by allowing all expellees to return to their homelands and returning to them all their possessions. Then the East Central European peoples should return to the great democratic principle of the right of self-determination and use it as a basis of a new and more just organization of the area, applying the principle to all nations without exception, with due consideration for the pressing demands of the time. I am greatly inclined to believe the claim or proposition that there is only one answer to the problem of the reorganization of East Central Europe: a federation of free peoples or free states - a United States of East Central Europe or a United States encompassing the whole of Europe proper - guaranteeing the several states composing it full states' rights so that they might freely cultivate and develop their own national traditions, their languages and cultures, not only in their own interest, but also in the highest interest of the welfare and security of the federation. With the passage of time, I am sure, a situation similar to that in the United States of America would develop, where citizens of all ethnic origins and religious persuasions are not only free, but even encouraged, to preserve and enhance the national traditions and customs of their ancestors. History has taught us this one great lesson: no nation can have, or presume to have, a monopoly on freedom; and certainly no nation or state has the right to enslave other nations or states. Freedom is the greatest of God's gifts and blessings to mankind; it is the universal heritage of all the ages. The more we develop and share it, the more abundant are its fruits, and the more secure is our own freedom. History has also taught us that evil, unprincipled men cannot make good citizens and so much the less good public servants and honest advocates of lasting peace. It is impossible that a nation of infidels and idolaters should be a nation · of freemen. It is when people forget God - the ultimate Truth and Prince of Peace - that tyrants forge their 56 SLOVAKIA chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. In America "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain un:alienaJble righ'ts, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But we do not hold that life is so dear and peace so sweet that it must be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! The people of the democratic republic of the United States of America believe that all men should be free; that all nations without exception have an inherent, God-given right to establish their own political units in their ancestral homelands and to determine their form of government. If at times in the past the impression was given that this is not so, that is the fault not of the American people, but the fault of those in authority who as their representatives yielded to the force of expediency, forgetting that expedients are but of the hour - principles for the ages. The time has come, I believe, that we must do more than just pay lip service to the nolJle principles which are the foundation of genuine democracy and liberty. The time has come for all men to seek the things that unite them and not divide them; the time has come for all free nations to demand a stop to the shadow-boxing in the United Nations and more real action in support of the noble aims of its charter; the time has come to deal justly with all, not just some, crimes against humanity no matter by whom they were perpetrated: the time is here to supplement words for peace with concrete actions for a genuine and lasting peace. But how can we possibly expect a just peace and a lasting settlement, as long as the great democratic principle of self-determination is denied the Sudeten Germans and the Slovaks and other nations, and as long as the right of expellees and forcibly departed ethnic groups to freely return to their ancestral homelands is not recognized and respected? Indeed, as long as some earthly power is seriously dedicated to the enslavement of mankind? We in the Slovak League of America still regard the brutal expulsion of the Germans from their centuries-old 57 SLOVAKIA homeland as immoral and criminal. The expulsion of any people from their rightful homeland cannot be justified by or reconciled with the expressed political beliefs of any civilized, genuinely democratic country. And certainly not with the political beliefs of the United States of America. In the land of my parents - the land inhabited by the Slovak people since time immemorial - the Slovaks have lived with the Germans in peace and friendship for many long years. Here is a shining example of the cohabitation of a nation with a minority. Indeed, a cohabitation much like that of many ethnic groups of America. There is nothing better I could wish for the whole of Europe, for the entire world. God bless you and all of Germany! God bless America and the rest of the free world! And may God hasten the day of liberation of my hapless Slovak people! LONG-RANGE m1i:ssile ramps are bei,n,g constructed by the Red Czechs of Prague i,n, Slova'kia. 'Dhey are locla'ted near the town, Olf Spi.s• ska Nova Vres a·nd are the first Communist intercon:tinental missile siltes located outside the bordrers of the Soviet Union. Medilum-range siites harvre been operationia1 i,n, Czecho-Slovakiia at bases near Uzhorod, Kosice, RufomlbeTok, Frydek (all in Slovaki-a) and Moravska Ostrava siruce Jruly 1959. The Czech Reds together with the Kremlin preferred to sel~ct Slovakia foc most of these sites, since they know tha't they will.I be the prdmary targets in the event of a nuclear war. The Slovaks are expendaible, accOTdi,n-g to the Czech Red bosses. lJ(l lJ(l lJ(l helart" as it is teruned by Prague R-eds, were draJWn up lin the USSR. It wiU be the largest foundry in alll. Europe and one of the ten largest works of its kind in the world. It will cost an esti• mated 10.5 binions Crow,ns. S·o viet experts are in charge Olf construction and operation. lJ(l )l{l )l{l IN C2lECiHO-S·L OVAKIA pension- ers were recalled to work in October and women were recruited to make up for ma,n,poiwer lost in the -emergency bulild-up of the armed forces, a'Ccord'ing to offiloilal Prague sources. Forty per cent of the adult women in Czecho-Sllovakiia already held jobs in the paradise of the Red Czechs. )l{l )l{l )l{l "CRUCIFIXE•S must go" - ac- ONIE OF THE MOST urgent as· cordling to tlhe Czech Reds under ,si:gnimenrt:s of the new Five-Year Plan (1001-'1965) Olf the Czech Oommunist Party's Oen'.tTal Committee is the completion ·o f the huge Ironwoiics ini K!osice, Slovakia. Blueprinrt:s for 1Jhis "second steel Anton,ini Novotny. NotMng has changed ffilllCh sin'Ce the birth of Czecho-Slovaklia. Novotny is contin udng the policy of Masaryk and Benes: in 1918, c,rucif.ixes were hauled in wagons to manure pill.es!  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 Self-Determination for All Description An account of the resource Address of P. A. Hrobak in Cologne, Germany, on the occasion of Sudeten German Day, May 20, 1961 Slovakia, Vol. 11, No. 2 (34), September-December 1961 pp. 52-57 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 September-December 1961 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/acec2c5db69f47b46d0909a1d21b118e.pdf 30516e1e999cb239056f61180e379ec0 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. XI MARCH-J,UNE, 1961 NO. 1 (33) PRAGUE: RED ESPIONAGE CENTER By Philip A. Hrobak (Among the Slwaik esoarpees snaitched by the Czech Reds in Austria, alild West Germany is one Jioserph Bla-skovic. Shortly before his aibducti-on, this Slovak pa-tr,i ot sent ain a11ticle to his friend, alil escapee from .Slovailcia ruow residing in New York. T.hiis stor,y is based on tha,t article whicll was wri1bt,e n in Slovak.) The Czecho-Slovakia the American public is acquainted with is not the real Czecho-Slovakia of Thomas Guarrigue Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes. This glorified "·isle of democracy in Europe," painted in such roseate color-s to deceive the West, particularly the United States of America, was destined to become the European beachhead for communism from its very inception. Believe it or not, the simple fact is that the Russian OGPU (Secret Police) was organized in the propaganda state of Masaryk and Benes already in 1918, after Dr. Benes had concluded a secret agreement with Moscow. The OGPU was directed by the notorious agent Skoblin, who personally bossed the group in Prague whose task it was to kidna:p White Russians and ship them to Russia. Skoblin's outfit organized the Red Cells of volunteers, which were approved by Benes and his intimates, and also made all the arrangements for political murders in Poland. Prague thus became a center of the Cominform, second only to Moscow. The Prague Cominform set up an espionage office under the name of the Central European Bureau (1Stredo-Europska Kancelaria - SEK). This office directed the organized Cells and paid off underground espionage groups in the Central European states for services rendered, which included sabotage, kidnapping, and murder. Skoblin's group also organized the West~European Bureau (Zaipado-Eu- �2 SLOVAKIA ropska Kancelaria - ZEK) in Prague to promote communist interests in the Wes't European States. To organize the communists in the Balkan States, a bureau was set up in Vienna under the supervision of the Prague Bureau. The Vienna office at that time was headed by Dimitrov, the Secretary-General of the Cominform who had gained favor in the W esit. The Prague Bureau was made up of such Red worthies as Dimitrov, Gottwald, Manuilsky, Pakosta, Florin, and Ercoli - all graduates of the Moscow School of Red Leaders. Gottwald and Pakosta, both Czechs were ordered by Moscow to work in Slovakia. Pakosta came to the Turiec province and soon got a jeib in the Tatra furniture enterprise a t Turciansky Svaty Martin. Several months later he was elected an official of the local Sick-Benefit Insurance Association; and six months later he became manager of the branch office at Trnava. Pakosta didn't do too bad for himself in Slovakia: within a year he bought himself a large tract of land in the vicinity of Trnava, even though he kept on bellowing "down with the bourgeoisie"! Gottwald was sent to Vrutky in Slovakia where he was employed by the State railway system as a caibinet-maker. After Gottwald became a "master" of his trade, he began to publish a Red periodical in Banska Bystrica. Gottwald and Pakosta had the task of selecting the "right" people for the Red School in Moscow. Among the first selectees were Stephen Hadera, Vlado Clemen'tis, and Gustav Husak. After this trio completed its schooling in Moscow, it formed a "triangle" in Slovakia. Later on Moscow made Gottwa:ld a liaison officer to relay orders of the Cominform to States that had an organized underground. Orders were sentt from Turkey to the Gibraltar and Copenhagen. Gottwald was assisted by Hlozknecht and Prochniak and, later, also by the Polish Reds of Galicia Krumlov, Berend, Doppler, and Ackermann. The Prague Central Bureau directed the Red organizations in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, and Bulgaria, where the communists engaged in -s ubversive activities as "Social Democrats." As in Czecho-Slovakia, so �SLOVAKIA 3 here too, only "reliable" communists were selected for schooling in Moscow. After graduation, the Reds returned to their respective countries as "socialists" of one shade or another to form "triangles." Whenever things would get too hot for them, they would resort to the tactic of uncovering and repor~ing ordinary laborers as "dangerous communists." It so happened that while innocent people sweated it out in jails, the real subversives, parading as Social Democrats, were free to continue in their nefarious work. In March, 1933, Moscow had prepared detailed plans for the Prague Central Bureau to initiate revolutions in C::echo-Slovakia and Austria. German intelligence, however, uncovered the plot and rushed into action, occupying Austria on March 13. The Reds were lucky to save the incriminating documents of the Vienna office. Otto Katz, alias Andrei Simone, a member of the Zionist and communist organizations, brought them to Bratislava where he personally handed them over to Sankoff-Rappaport, a Zionist, and ·::. o Kreschner, a leader of the German Reds. The latter collaborated closely with the Prague Central Bureau in preparing a revolt in Germany. You may not find it easy to believe, but the fact is that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was organized in Prague. The story was published by the Czech press of Prague in June, 1946, when Lenin's Hall in the "Peoples Home" (Lidovy dum) on Hybernska Street in Prague was ceremoniously opened to the public. It was in this hall that Vladimir Iljic Lenin presided at a meeting of the Russian Social Democratic Party, January 19-30, 1912. And it was at this meeting that J osip Visarionovich Dzhugashvili, later known as Stalin, was eleoted a member of the Central Committee of the party. At that time Lenin used the name of "Majer." The dedication ceremony in 1946 was attended by Soviet Ambassador Zarin, who thanked the government of Benes-Gottwald for honoring the memory of Lenin in such a noble fashion. �4 SLOVAKIA After Hitler came to power and ordered a general round-up of Reds in Germany, the Reds moved their office from Vienna to Paris where they operated under the title "Auslandskomite" (Foreign Committee). Dr. Benes, however, concurred secretly with Litvinov-Finkelste in that it would be more advantageous to transfer the Red German outfit to Prague, making it an adjunct of the Central European Bureau (CIDB). In Prague this group operated under the label "Komunistische Deutsche Partein (KDP). It was assigned the task of organizing Red movements, espionage, sabotage, and political murders in Silesia, central Germany, the Saar, Berlin, Brandenburg, and Bavaria. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds was charged with the responsibility of promoting communism in twothirds of Europe. Dr. Edward Benes, highly trusted and favored by the West, was well aware of this activity. He had his agents in the KDP and other ReJd groups: and he had them in England, America, and Mexico, as well. He knew that Reds operaJted from the Czecho-Slovak embassy in Washington, because he placed them there himself. Nevertheless the West regarded Benes as a non-Marxist socialist and the "greatest democrat" of Europe. The entire CzechoSlovak State propaganda apparatus was controlled by Benes and his political henchmen: the West knew Benes as Benes wanted it to know him. But the West is gradually waking up to the fact that it did not know the real Benes, Benes, the Marxist socialist, Benes, the servant of Moscow. (Edwaird B. Hiitchcook, who had the privilege of knowing Dr. Benes iruttmateI,y, wrote the only complete biography oif Benes. Nevertheless, the author teHs ,u s thalt Benes, ear]Jy in life, "d•eveloped iiruto a believer of brute materia11ilsm, anarch1is,m, socialism. He was aga.inst <religion. He was opposed to almost every estalblished order in bhe world of that day.") The Prague Central Bureau also had to care for Red refugees from Germany; together with the "Zentral Fraktionsleitung" (Central Group Leadership), the Prague Bureau had to train the most capaible Reds in espionage and underground work. The "Rote Hilfe" (Red Aid), a communist banking institution, and the organiza!Uon called "Union flir Freiheit und Recht" (Union for Freedom and Justice) were connected with the Prague Bureau of the �SLOVAKIA 5 Reds. When this motley outfit stamped one as unfit for espionage and subversive work in Germany, it would report him to the Czech police, who in turn would be ordered to surrender him to Germany as a communist. In the eyes of the world this made Dr. Benes and his intimates appear very "anti-communistic" - indeed, the cleanest of all socialists. Duplicity was the hallmark of Benes and his colleagues. Prior to February 25, 1948, when the Reds took over complete power in Czecho-Slovakia, they could not find enough words of prnise for Stalin and the Soviet Union. Then suddenly they were "expelled" from the country and became "anti-communists"! As followers of Benes, Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, Ferdinand Peroutka, and others, nevertheless, had little difficulty in being employed by Radio Free Europe to broadcast "words of truth" to those whom they had helped to betray to the Moloch of Moscow. The Prague Bureau established "Homes For Escapees" in Prague, Strasnice, Kosice, Brno, Msec, and several other cities. The Prague home was managed by a former deputy of the German Reich, one Mrs. Hana Sandtner, a confidante of Karl Schwab who was in charge of the organization called "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten" (The Alliance for the Aid of German Emigrants), the outfit that cared for Red refugees from Germany. One of the largest homes for Red escapees, the Salda Home, was situated in Msec, Bohemia; it was named after the eminent Israelite warrior who was a Red. In this home escapees were given six-month courses in Marxism, espionage, sabotage, and underground activities. The graduates were then sent out to battle for universal communism (the "International Brigades," for example, in Spain). Military training was in charge of Leon Schnittmann, whose real name was Adol,ph Lejba, one of the best the Soviet had in the business. Officers from the Czech General Staff, selected by Lejba himself, helped with the training of recruits; so dii:l French officers who spoke Russian fluently. Lejba at one time had served as military attache in Prague. After Moscow announced that it had removed Lejba :from his position, he did not return to Russia but remained in Prague, where he opened a private business office. As a �6 SLOVAKIA businessman Lejba was free to travel; and he was in constant touch with the authorities, the ministries and political personalities. It was thus that Lej1ba succeeded in building up a "Czechoslovak-Russian" army. When Schnittman-Lejba visited neighboring States, he called on cryptocommunists in the Social Democratic parties to gather information and give orders. His reports were delivered in person to the Central European Bureau in Prague. Thanks to Lejba and the collaboration of Dr. Benes, Moscow had, in 1938, over 2,000 trained spies in Prague who were dispatched to aH countries of Europe and the West. While the press, the diplomats, and the statesmen of the West referred to the republic of Masairyk and Benes as a "model democracy" and an "isle of democracy in Europe," in reality Czecho~Slovakia was a state in which the Reds ruled under the guise of socialists. Financial help for these Red spies and saboteurs also came from the United States. The president of the "Friends of Nature" (3911 Greenview Avenue, Chicago, Ill.) sent money to the Red Bureau in Prague from the account of the "Ocean Travel Bureau" (2233 N. Ashland Avenue). The money was sent to Karl Schwab of the "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten." Comrade Dr. Goldschneidt, a "persecuted" Jew, was in charge of the office in Prague (Jachymov Street, 3), which busied itself with espionage under the label of "Zentral Hilfstelle flir Deutsche Fllichtlingskinder" (Central Office to Help Children of German Escapees). With the outbreak of the civil war in Spain, spies were sent there by these Red training centers. During the first weeks of the revolution more than a thousand men were dispatched to Spain by the Prague Bureau. Karl Schwab took care of all the arrangements: with the Czech police he prepared false passes and provided for the transportation of Reds to Spain. After a time, however, Moscow ordered the leading Reds to quit Spain and return to the haven of the Reds, Benes's Czecho-S'1ovakia. After the Slovak Republic was establi,shed on March 14, 1939, by the proclaimation of independence of the autonomous parliament · of Slovakia, the Prague-trained Reds �SLOVAKIA 7 presented quite a problem. Communism and Freemasonry had been outlawed already in 1938 by autonomous Slovakia while it was still witthin the framework of Czecho-Slovalda. The Reds went underground, but most of their leaders fled from Prague and Bratislava to Moscow. To ferret out the Reds and disarm them, the Slovak Sta.te ordered Imrich (Henry) Sudsky of the State Security Police to organize a special security uni!t of 100 mem!bers. Sudsky was a brilliant police official, having served under the Masaryk-Bene s regimes. Slovak authorities, however, did not know that Sudsky was also a secret agent of the Czech Reds. Charged with the task of rounding up the Reds in Slovakia, Sudsky applied himself diligently and eventually caught up with Stephen Hadera. The latter exposed the Red movement in Slovakia under questioning and the Red "triangle" was disrupted. This was followed by mass arrests of Reds and communist activities practically ceased in Slovakia until the last year of the war. When the Red armies overran the Slovak Republic in May, 1945, and Stalin made Benes "presiden!t" of Czecho-Slovak ia again, Sudsky was immediately placed into service by the Czech Reds. In 1957 he was held res,ponsible for the abduction of several Slovak patriots from Austria. The Czecho-Slovak Republic of Masaryk and Benes which western powers regarded as the most exemplary democratic country in Europe, was in fact the beachhead of Communism in Europe, as Stojadinovich , Yugoslav Minister of the Interior, had declared to newsmen on April 24, 1936, adding that "the Yugoslav communists are financially supported by Benes's Czecho-Slovak Republic." About an hour after he made this statement, Stojadinovich was a dead man, murdered by an agent of the Reds. His assailant escaped to Czecho-Slovakia through Hungary. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds fixed him up with a new set of forged papers so that he might conltinue in his dastardly trade. In the free western world, there are thousands of agents roaming about, promoting the program of Moscow. After the great massacre of World War II, some of them were employed by Radio Free Europe in Munich. I knew them from �8 SLOVAKIA back home. There was, for example, Robert Valuch of Salzburg, an adjutant of a Brigade Commissioner during the Red putsch in Slovakia in August, 1944; then, Mi.so (Michael) Sagat, whose last known address was Etst Delast Marcheprime girange, France, who issued orders to murder people and murdered many himself; also one Joseph Micudik, a captain of the paritsans who was schooled in Moscow; and then, Joseph Antl, and so many others employed by Radio Free Europe and moving aJbout freely in the service of the Reds. In the light of the above, it is surprising indeed that responsi'ble people of western governments do not see, or pretend not to see or know what is going on in their countries to promote the scourge of communism and enslave the remaining free peoples of the earth. Thus far goes the story of the Slovak patriot, Joseph Bla,skovic, written a ,s hort time before he was abducted !from Austria and imprisoned in Prague by the Czech Reds. The people and governments of the West know that Moscow has its trained agents everywhere. But apparently they do not know thaJt Prague is second only to Mo·s oow as a Red espionage center. Governments of the West, if they do know about it, are loathe to divulge information. CzechoSlovakia and its builders, Thomas G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, are still regarded highly, and their followers are still the favored "experts" of government ,people. They still .are the "unltoucha1bles" of the political West. Blaskovic' s story is highly plausi-ble, because it is backed by events past and present. Lausman, B. Cerny, Kucera, Folta, Machacek, Ka;las, Sychrava, Haulik, Molin, Marie Dvorak, and other Czechs, posing a,s "esca,pees" and employed by Radio Free Europe, returned to Prague to broadcast to the world how "stupid" Americans were. These agents received Amer.ican "trnth dollars" for their dastardly work. Back in the days of the Office of War Information (OWI), headman Elmer Davis assured Congress that he could spot Communists by a simple rule of thumb: if he was against Polish.iBritish-French resistance to dictator- �SLOVAKIA 9 ship aggression in the days of the Stalin-Hitler , pact • and then howled for war against Germany when Russia was attacked, then he was a Commie. N :, the very time Davis was speaking, and even afterwards, the chief of the Czech division of the OWI, was a Red Czech, Adolph Hoffmeister, an agent of Dr. Edward Benes, who was not only a card carrying Communist, but later the ambassador to Paris for the first Red Czech government. During the trial of one Emil Swiertina, a Red spy caught and sentenced to 12 years by American authori!ties in Munich, the names of several politicians of Benes's socialistic entourage were mentioned. The matter was treated as hush-hush, getting practkally no publicity here. It was known that Swiertina worked wit h a Czech Colonel, Dr. Springer, a subordinate of Colonel Koenig. After his imprisonment, Swiertina's correspondence was handled by Dr. Patek. On orders .from Col. Koenig, these letters were not turned over to American authorities, because it was feared that ,they would incriminate some of Benes's followers, members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," an organization highly favored by our State Department and the Radio Free Europe people. Otto Katz (alias Andre Simone, alias Kofatko), liquidated in the 1952 Red purge trial in Prague, was an intimate of Dr. Hubert Ripka who was regarded as the righthand man of Dr. Edward Benes. Katz, a Red spy who at one time edi!:ed the Rude Pravo (Red Justice), the official organ of the Czech Communists, spent the war years in Mexico and returned to Prague in 1946. Guenther Reinhardt, author af "Crime Without Punishment," links Katz with the 1943 murder of Ca-rlo Tresca in New York. At his trial Katz declared that he once was hired to work for the Overseas News Agency (ONA) which was affiliated with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency untH 1949. Katz had contacts with Adolph Hoffmeister of the OWI; also with Dezider Benau, wartJi.me editor of the New Y orksky Dennik, a newspaper published in Slovak, and with Karel Leitner, editor of the New Yorkske Listy, published in Czech - both papers at that time being owned by one �SLOVAKIA 10 Richard Vogel who did big business with Czecho-Slovalri'a. Katz was also in touch with Dr. Erwin Munk, Otto Biheller, and T. Florin-Hrkel, Czech agents who worked out of the Czech Embassy in Washington when Dr. Juraj Slavik was Benes's ambassador there. It is signif.icant that Miss Pavlina Svoboda, testifying before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Feb. 5, 1952, was not even asked the names of the newspapers which Benau and Leitner edited. Both newspapers published many editorials by leading Communists. After his escape from the United States, Gerhard t Eisler ended up in Prague, haven of the Reds. When Communist Albert S. Stern, whose wife is the Red Martha Dodd Stern, was wanted to testify in the Jack Soble-Soviet spy case, both made off for Prague via Mexico. There they were joined by Maurice Halpern, a former Boston University teacher. In his testimony before the HUAC (released May 10, 1960), Frantisek Tisler, former Military and Air Attache of Cziecho-Slovakia at the embassy in Washington, declared that "one of the main reasons for the maintenance of a Czechoslovak Embassy in Washington, D. C., is to conduct espionage against the United Sfates." It is a matter of record tha:t most of .the politicians of Dr. Edward Benes's official family were active supporters of his pro-Sovi et poHcy. They were members of CzechoSlovakia's communist-dominated National Front government which eliminated all anti-communist elements from the political life of the country. Now, posing as "democratic" exiles and "an/ti-communist" fighters, they would have the West believe that they alway,s were on our side against the diabolic forces of communism. Incredible as it may sound, the fact is that these Red collaborators were accepted immediately by our Staite Department (under Acheson) as "democratic exiles," and their organiza:tion in America, the Council of Free Czechoslovakia, was recognized as "the supreme political body of the Czech and Slovak exile." With the _b lessing of the State Department, the fellow-1ravelers from Czecho-,Slovakia had no trouble at all in finding employment with Radio Free Europe, The Voice of America , 1 �SLOVAKIA 11 the CIC, the Library of Congress, and other agencies of U. S. Government, as well as our universities. More incredi'ble yet is the fact that some of these people are still holding their jobs. Red Prague is paying off to Red Moscow: with the help of the Czechs, who were "remade" under the regimes of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, Soviet Russia 's campaign of penetration is proceeding successfully in Africa, South America, Mexico, and Nol'lth America, in a word, everywhere! Czech and Soviet officers are instructing Castro's men in tactics and use of Czech arms at Gramma, Baracoa Beach and Managua - the three major bases of Castro's Army. A Czech officer commands the Cuban troops fighting the rebels i-n the Escambray Mountains. Anti-Castro forces in Cuba are trying to speed up the time for civil war there, because Castro, as of now, still does not have much of an air force. But he has about 1000 young Cubans in Czecho-Slovakia learning to fly jets. When they are ready, the Red Russians can create a Cuban air force in less than a day. In the new nations of Africa, you see few Russians, but plenty of Czech salesmen and diplomats. Not Russians, but Czechs are doing the groundwork for Moscow. According to U. S. News and World Report (April 3, 1961) : "Cairo is the Center of Czech operartions i-n, Africa. From Cairo, Czech goods are f11oiwin,g - art twice the 1950 level - to bobh North and West Aifrioa. A Czech airline operates from Praigu:e tlhrowgth Cairo to po'ints in West Afri~. "Am,e,ricans fo Gui•n ea h1ave notioed how fast the Czechs have moved in Wlhen French pulled out. Now, pro-Moscow Guinea is headquarters £or Czech opera,tions in au West Africa. A Czech shoe factory was shipped to Giha;na via Conakry, Gu~•nea. Czech machine to'o1s, preci£·ion instruments for Glhaina and Mali c-ame the same way. "Tirade is jus;t a part of i,t. A total of 270 Czech experts - military advisers, poUce adviisers, teachers - were counted in Cornaik,r,y at one time recently. "To date, this· Sorvi>et-Czech arran,gement has wol'ked smoothly. The Czec1hs are seUing Czech ,goods in Africa for themselves and Commundsm for Moscow." When the Slovaks, over thirty years ago, told America and the world that Benes and his Czech National Socialists were peddling Communism for Moscow, they were ignored �12 SLOVAKIA and scorned. The socialistic state created by Masaryk and Benes came into being in 1918 because of America's intervention. Now we are gradually learning the truth about the poli:tical monstrosity we not only made possible, but nurtured and enriched for over forty years. Imagine, American know-how and doUars are in a large mea·s ure responsible for the fact that Czech Prague has become a Red espion • age training center, second only to Moscow! SLOVAK PEASANT ART: a kitchen in Vinicne � SLOVAKIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. XI MARCH-J,UNE, 1961 NO. 1 (33) PRAGUE: RED ESPIONAGE CENTER By Philip A. Hrobak (Among the Slwaik esoarpees snaitched by the Czech Reds in Austria, alild West Germany is one Jioserph Bla-skovic. Shortly before his aibducti-on, this Slovak pa-tr,i ot sent ain a11ticle to his friend, alil escapee from .Slovailcia ruow residing in New York. T.hiis stor,y is based on tha,t article whicll was wri1bt,e n in Slovak.) The Czecho-Slovakia the American public is acquainted with is not the real Czecho-Slovakia of Thomas Guarrigue Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes. This glorified "·isle of democracy in Europe," painted in such roseate color-s to deceive the West, particularly the United States of America, was destined to become the European beachhead for communism from its very inception. Believe it or not, the simple fact is that the Russian OGPU (Secret Police) was organized in the propaganda state of Masaryk and Benes already in 1918, after Dr. Benes had concluded a secret agreement with Moscow. The OGPU was directed by the notorious agent Skoblin, who personally bossed the group in Prague whose task it was to kidna:p White Russians and ship them to Russia. Skoblin's outfit organized the Red Cells of volunteers, which were approved by Benes and his intimates, and also made all the arrangements for political murders in Poland. Prague thus became a center of the Cominform, second only to Moscow. The Prague Cominform set up an espionage office under the name of the Central European Bureau (1Stredo-Europska Kancelaria - SEK). This office directed the organized Cells and paid off underground espionage groups in the Central European states for services rendered, which included sabotage, kidnapping, and murder. Skoblin's group also organized the West~European Bureau (Zaipado-Eu- �2 SLOVAKIA ropska Kancelaria - ZEK) in Prague to promote communist interests in the Wes't European States. To organize the communists in the Balkan States, a bureau was set up in Vienna under the supervision of the Prague Bureau. The Vienna office at that time was headed by Dimitrov, the Secretary-General of the Cominform who had gained favor in the W esit. The Prague Bureau was made up of such Red worthies as Dimitrov, Gottwald, Manuilsky, Pakosta, Florin, and Ercoli - all graduates of the Moscow School of Red Leaders. Gottwald and Pakosta, both Czechs were ordered by Moscow to work in Slovakia. Pakosta came to the Turiec province and soon got a jeib in the Tatra furniture enterprise a t Turciansky Svaty Martin. Several months later he was elected an official of the local Sick-Benefit Insurance Association; and six months later he became manager of the branch office at Trnava. Pakosta didn't do too bad for himself in Slovakia: within a year he bought himself a large tract of land in the vicinity of Trnava, even though he kept on bellowing "down with the bourgeoisie"! Gottwald was sent to Vrutky in Slovakia where he was employed by the State railway system as a caibinet-maker. After Gottwald became a "master" of his trade, he began to publish a Red periodical in Banska Bystrica. Gottwald and Pakosta had the task of selecting the "right" people for the Red School in Moscow. Among the first selectees were Stephen Hadera, Vlado Clemen'tis, and Gustav Husak. After this trio completed its schooling in Moscow, it formed a "triangle" in Slovakia. Later on Moscow made Gottwa:ld a liaison officer to relay orders of the Cominform to States that had an organized underground. Orders were sentt from Turkey to the Gibraltar and Copenhagen. Gottwald was assisted by Hlozknecht and Prochniak and, later, also by the Polish Reds of Galicia Krumlov, Berend, Doppler, and Ackermann. The Prague Central Bureau directed the Red organizations in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, and Bulgaria, where the communists engaged in -s ubversive activities as "Social Democrats." As in Czecho-Slovakia, so �SLOVAKIA 3 here too, only "reliable" communists were selected for schooling in Moscow. After graduation, the Reds returned to their respective countries as "socialists" of one shade or another to form "triangles." Whenever things would get too hot for them, they would resort to the tactic of uncovering and repor~ing ordinary laborers as "dangerous communists." It so happened that while innocent people sweated it out in jails, the real subversives, parading as Social Democrats, were free to continue in their nefarious work. In March, 1933, Moscow had prepared detailed plans for the Prague Central Bureau to initiate revolutions in C::echo-Slovakia and Austria. German intelligence, however, uncovered the plot and rushed into action, occupying Austria on March 13. The Reds were lucky to save the incriminating documents of the Vienna office. Otto Katz, alias Andrei Simone, a member of the Zionist and communist organizations, brought them to Bratislava where he personally handed them over to Sankoff-Rappaport, a Zionist, and ·::. o Kreschner, a leader of the German Reds. The latter collaborated closely with the Prague Central Bureau in preparing a revolt in Germany. You may not find it easy to believe, but the fact is that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was organized in Prague. The story was published by the Czech press of Prague in June, 1946, when Lenin's Hall in the "Peoples Home" (Lidovy dum) on Hybernska Street in Prague was ceremoniously opened to the public. It was in this hall that Vladimir Iljic Lenin presided at a meeting of the Russian Social Democratic Party, January 19-30, 1912. And it was at this meeting that J osip Visarionovich Dzhugashvili, later known as Stalin, was eleoted a member of the Central Committee of the party. At that time Lenin used the name of "Majer." The dedication ceremony in 1946 was attended by Soviet Ambassador Zarin, who thanked the government of Benes-Gottwald for honoring the memory of Lenin in such a noble fashion. �4 SLOVAKIA After Hitler came to power and ordered a general round-up of Reds in Germany, the Reds moved their office from Vienna to Paris where they operated under the title "Auslandskomite" (Foreign Committee). Dr. Benes, however, concurred secretly with Litvinov-Finkelste in that it would be more advantageous to transfer the Red German outfit to Prague, making it an adjunct of the Central European Bureau (CIDB). In Prague this group operated under the label "Komunistische Deutsche Partein (KDP). It was assigned the task of organizing Red movements, espionage, sabotage, and political murders in Silesia, central Germany, the Saar, Berlin, Brandenburg, and Bavaria. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds was charged with the responsibility of promoting communism in twothirds of Europe. Dr. Edward Benes, highly trusted and favored by the West, was well aware of this activity. He had his agents in the KDP and other ReJd groups: and he had them in England, America, and Mexico, as well. He knew that Reds operaJted from the Czecho-Slovak embassy in Washington, because he placed them there himself. Nevertheless the West regarded Benes as a non-Marxist socialist and the "greatest democrat" of Europe. The entire CzechoSlovak State propaganda apparatus was controlled by Benes and his political henchmen: the West knew Benes as Benes wanted it to know him. But the West is gradually waking up to the fact that it did not know the real Benes, Benes, the Marxist socialist, Benes, the servant of Moscow. (Edwaird B. Hiitchcook, who had the privilege of knowing Dr. Benes iruttmateI,y, wrote the only complete biography oif Benes. Nevertheless, the author teHs ,u s thalt Benes, ear]Jy in life, "d•eveloped iiruto a believer of brute materia11ilsm, anarch1is,m, socialism. He was aga.inst <religion. He was opposed to almost every estalblished order in bhe world of that day.") The Prague Central Bureau also had to care for Red refugees from Germany; together with the "Zentral Fraktionsleitung" (Central Group Leadership), the Prague Bureau had to train the most capaible Reds in espionage and underground work. The "Rote Hilfe" (Red Aid), a communist banking institution, and the organiza!Uon called "Union flir Freiheit und Recht" (Union for Freedom and Justice) were connected with the Prague Bureau of the �SLOVAKIA 5 Reds. When this motley outfit stamped one as unfit for espionage and subversive work in Germany, it would report him to the Czech police, who in turn would be ordered to surrender him to Germany as a communist. In the eyes of the world this made Dr. Benes and his intimates appear very "anti-communistic" - indeed, the cleanest of all socialists. Duplicity was the hallmark of Benes and his colleagues. Prior to February 25, 1948, when the Reds took over complete power in Czecho-Slovakia, they could not find enough words of prnise for Stalin and the Soviet Union. Then suddenly they were "expelled" from the country and became "anti-communists"! As followers of Benes, Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, Ferdinand Peroutka, and others, nevertheless, had little difficulty in being employed by Radio Free Europe to broadcast "words of truth" to those whom they had helped to betray to the Moloch of Moscow. The Prague Bureau established "Homes For Escapees" in Prague, Strasnice, Kosice, Brno, Msec, and several other cities. The Prague home was managed by a former deputy of the German Reich, one Mrs. Hana Sandtner, a confidante of Karl Schwab who was in charge of the organization called "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten" (The Alliance for the Aid of German Emigrants), the outfit that cared for Red refugees from Germany. One of the largest homes for Red escapees, the Salda Home, was situated in Msec, Bohemia; it was named after the eminent Israelite warrior who was a Red. In this home escapees were given six-month courses in Marxism, espionage, sabotage, and underground activities. The graduates were then sent out to battle for universal communism (the "International Brigades," for example, in Spain). Military training was in charge of Leon Schnittmann, whose real name was Adol,ph Lejba, one of the best the Soviet had in the business. Officers from the Czech General Staff, selected by Lejba himself, helped with the training of recruits; so dii:l French officers who spoke Russian fluently. Lejba at one time had served as military attache in Prague. After Moscow announced that it had removed Lejba :from his position, he did not return to Russia but remained in Prague, where he opened a private business office. As a �6 SLOVAKIA businessman Lejba was free to travel; and he was in constant touch with the authorities, the ministries and political personalities. It was thus that Lej1ba succeeded in building up a "Czechoslovak-Russian" army. When Schnittman-Lejba visited neighboring States, he called on cryptocommunists in the Social Democratic parties to gather information and give orders. His reports were delivered in person to the Central European Bureau in Prague. Thanks to Lejba and the collaboration of Dr. Benes, Moscow had, in 1938, over 2,000 trained spies in Prague who were dispatched to aH countries of Europe and the West. While the press, the diplomats, and the statesmen of the West referred to the republic of Masairyk and Benes as a "model democracy" and an "isle of democracy in Europe," in reality Czecho~Slovakia was a state in which the Reds ruled under the guise of socialists. Financial help for these Red spies and saboteurs also came from the United States. The president of the "Friends of Nature" (3911 Greenview Avenue, Chicago, Ill.) sent money to the Red Bureau in Prague from the account of the "Ocean Travel Bureau" (2233 N. Ashland Avenue). The money was sent to Karl Schwab of the "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten." Comrade Dr. Goldschneidt, a "persecuted" Jew, was in charge of the office in Prague (Jachymov Street, 3), which busied itself with espionage under the label of "Zentral Hilfstelle flir Deutsche Fllichtlingskinder" (Central Office to Help Children of German Escapees). With the outbreak of the civil war in Spain, spies were sent there by these Red training centers. During the first weeks of the revolution more than a thousand men were dispatched to Spain by the Prague Bureau. Karl Schwab took care of all the arrangements: with the Czech police he prepared false passes and provided for the transportation of Reds to Spain. After a time, however, Moscow ordered the leading Reds to quit Spain and return to the haven of the Reds, Benes's Czecho-S'1ovakia. After the Slovak Republic was establi,shed on March 14, 1939, by the proclaimation of independence of the autonomous parliament · of Slovakia, the Prague-trained Reds �SLOVAKIA 7 presented quite a problem. Communism and Freemasonry had been outlawed already in 1938 by autonomous Slovakia while it was still witthin the framework of Czecho-Slovalda. The Reds went underground, but most of their leaders fled from Prague and Bratislava to Moscow. To ferret out the Reds and disarm them, the Slovak Sta.te ordered Imrich (Henry) Sudsky of the State Security Police to organize a special security uni!t of 100 mem!bers. Sudsky was a brilliant police official, having served under the Masaryk-Bene s regimes. Slovak authorities, however, did not know that Sudsky was also a secret agent of the Czech Reds. Charged with the task of rounding up the Reds in Slovakia, Sudsky applied himself diligently and eventually caught up with Stephen Hadera. The latter exposed the Red movement in Slovakia under questioning and the Red "triangle" was disrupted. This was followed by mass arrests of Reds and communist activities practically ceased in Slovakia until the last year of the war. When the Red armies overran the Slovak Republic in May, 1945, and Stalin made Benes "presiden!t" of Czecho-Slovak ia again, Sudsky was immediately placed into service by the Czech Reds. In 1957 he was held res,ponsible for the abduction of several Slovak patriots from Austria. The Czecho-Slovak Republic of Masaryk and Benes which western powers regarded as the most exemplary democratic country in Europe, was in fact the beachhead of Communism in Europe, as Stojadinovich , Yugoslav Minister of the Interior, had declared to newsmen on April 24, 1936, adding that "the Yugoslav communists are financially supported by Benes's Czecho-Slovak Republic." About an hour after he made this statement, Stojadinovich was a dead man, murdered by an agent of the Reds. His assailant escaped to Czecho-Slovakia through Hungary. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds fixed him up with a new set of forged papers so that he might conltinue in his dastardly trade. In the free western world, there are thousands of agents roaming about, promoting the program of Moscow. After the great massacre of World War II, some of them were employed by Radio Free Europe in Munich. I knew them from �8 SLOVAKIA back home. There was, for example, Robert Valuch of Salzburg, an adjutant of a Brigade Commissioner during the Red putsch in Slovakia in August, 1944; then, Mi.so (Michael) Sagat, whose last known address was Etst Delast Marcheprime girange, France, who issued orders to murder people and murdered many himself; also one Joseph Micudik, a captain of the paritsans who was schooled in Moscow; and then, Joseph Antl, and so many others employed by Radio Free Europe and moving aJbout freely in the service of the Reds. In the light of the above, it is surprising indeed that responsi'ble people of western governments do not see, or pretend not to see or know what is going on in their countries to promote the scourge of communism and enslave the remaining free peoples of the earth. Thus far goes the story of the Slovak patriot, Joseph Bla,skovic, written a ,s hort time before he was abducted !from Austria and imprisoned in Prague by the Czech Reds. The people and governments of the West know that Moscow has its trained agents everywhere. But apparently they do not know thaJt Prague is second only to Mo·s oow as a Red espionage center. Governments of the West, if they do know about it, are loathe to divulge information. CzechoSlovakia and its builders, Thomas G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, are still regarded highly, and their followers are still the favored "experts" of government ,people. They still .are the "unltoucha1bles" of the political West. Blaskovic' s story is highly plausi-ble, because it is backed by events past and present. Lausman, B. Cerny, Kucera, Folta, Machacek, Ka;las, Sychrava, Haulik, Molin, Marie Dvorak, and other Czechs, posing a,s "esca,pees" and employed by Radio Free Europe, returned to Prague to broadcast to the world how "stupid" Americans were. These agents received Amer.ican "trnth dollars" for their dastardly work. Back in the days of the Office of War Information (OWI), headman Elmer Davis assured Congress that he could spot Communists by a simple rule of thumb: if he was against Polish.iBritish-French resistance to dictator- �SLOVAKIA 9 ship aggression in the days of the Stalin-Hitler , pact • and then howled for war against Germany when Russia was attacked, then he was a Commie. N :, the very time Davis was speaking, and even afterwards, the chief of the Czech division of the OWI, was a Red Czech, Adolph Hoffmeister, an agent of Dr. Edward Benes, who was not only a card carrying Communist, but later the ambassador to Paris for the first Red Czech government. During the trial of one Emil Swiertina, a Red spy caught and sentenced to 12 years by American authori!ties in Munich, the names of several politicians of Benes's socialistic entourage were mentioned. The matter was treated as hush-hush, getting practkally no publicity here. It was known that Swiertina worked wit h a Czech Colonel, Dr. Springer, a subordinate of Colonel Koenig. After his imprisonment, Swiertina's correspondence was handled by Dr. Patek. On orders .from Col. Koenig, these letters were not turned over to American authorities, because it was feared that ,they would incriminate some of Benes's followers, members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," an organization highly favored by our State Department and the Radio Free Europe people. Otto Katz (alias Andre Simone, alias Kofatko), liquidated in the 1952 Red purge trial in Prague, was an intimate of Dr. Hubert Ripka who was regarded as the righthand man of Dr. Edward Benes. Katz, a Red spy who at one time edi!:ed the Rude Pravo (Red Justice), the official organ of the Czech Communists, spent the war years in Mexico and returned to Prague in 1946. Guenther Reinhardt, author af "Crime Without Punishment," links Katz with the 1943 murder of Ca-rlo Tresca in New York. At his trial Katz declared that he once was hired to work for the Overseas News Agency (ONA) which was affiliated with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency untH 1949. Katz had contacts with Adolph Hoffmeister of the OWI; also with Dezider Benau, wartJi.me editor of the New Y orksky Dennik, a newspaper published in Slovak, and with Karel Leitner, editor of the New Yorkske Listy, published in Czech - both papers at that time being owned by one �SLOVAKIA 10 Richard Vogel who did big business with Czecho-Slovalri'a. Katz was also in touch with Dr. Erwin Munk, Otto Biheller, and T. Florin-Hrkel, Czech agents who worked out of the Czech Embassy in Washington when Dr. Juraj Slavik was Benes's ambassador there. It is signif.icant that Miss Pavlina Svoboda, testifying before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Feb. 5, 1952, was not even asked the names of the newspapers which Benau and Leitner edited. Both newspapers published many editorials by leading Communists. After his escape from the United States, Gerhard t Eisler ended up in Prague, haven of the Reds. When Communist Albert S. Stern, whose wife is the Red Martha Dodd Stern, was wanted to testify in the Jack Soble-Soviet spy case, both made off for Prague via Mexico. There they were joined by Maurice Halpern, a former Boston University teacher. In his testimony before the HUAC (released May 10, 1960), Frantisek Tisler, former Military and Air Attache of Cziecho-Slovakia at the embassy in Washington, declared that "one of the main reasons for the maintenance of a Czechoslovak Embassy in Washington, D. C., is to conduct espionage against the United Sfates." It is a matter of record tha:t most of .the politicians of Dr. Edward Benes's official family were active supporters of his pro-Sovi et poHcy. They were members of CzechoSlovakia's communist-dominated National Front government which eliminated all anti-communist elements from the political life of the country. Now, posing as "democratic" exiles and "an/ti-communist" fighters, they would have the West believe that they alway,s were on our side against the diabolic forces of communism. Incredible as it may sound, the fact is that these Red collaborators were accepted immediately by our Staite Department (under Acheson) as "democratic exiles," and their organiza:tion in America, the Council of Free Czechoslovakia, was recognized as "the supreme political body of the Czech and Slovak exile." With the _b lessing of the State Department, the fellow-1ravelers from Czecho-,Slovakia had no trouble at all in finding employment with Radio Free Europe, The Voice of America , 1 �SLOVAKIA 11 the CIC, the Library of Congress, and other agencies of U. S. Government, as well as our universities. More incredi'ble yet is the fact that some of these people are still holding their jobs. Red Prague is paying off to Red Moscow: with the help of the Czechs, who were "remade" under the regimes of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, Soviet Russia 's campaign of penetration is proceeding successfully in Africa, South America, Mexico, and Nol'lth America, in a word, everywhere! Czech and Soviet officers are instructing Castro's men in tactics and use of Czech arms at Gramma, Baracoa Beach and Managua - the three major bases of Castro's Army. A Czech officer commands the Cuban troops fighting the rebels i-n the Escambray Mountains. Anti-Castro forces in Cuba are trying to speed up the time for civil war there, because Castro, as of now, still does not have much of an air force. But he has about 1000 young Cubans in Czecho-Slovakia learning to fly jets. When they are ready, the Red Russians can create a Cuban air force in less than a day. In the new nations of Africa, you see few Russians, but plenty of Czech salesmen and diplomats. Not Russians, but Czechs are doing the groundwork for Moscow. According to U. S. News and World Report (April 3, 1961) : "Cairo is the Center of Czech operartions i-n, Africa. From Cairo, Czech goods are f11oiwin,g - art twice the 1950 level - to bobh North and West Aifrioa. A Czech airline operates from Praigu:e tlhrowgth Cairo to po'ints in West Afri~. "Am,e,ricans fo Gui•n ea h1ave notioed how fast the Czechs have moved in Wlhen French pulled out. Now, pro-Moscow Guinea is headquarters £or Czech opera,tions in au West Africa. A Czech shoe factory was shipped to Giha;na via Conakry, Gu~•nea. Czech machine to'o1s, preci£·ion instruments for Glhaina and Mali c-ame the same way. "Tirade is jus;t a part of i,t. A total of 270 Czech experts - military advisers, poUce adviisers, teachers - were counted in Cornaik,r,y at one time recently. "To date, this· Sorvi>et-Czech arran,gement has wol'ked smoothly. The Czec1hs are seUing Czech ,goods in Africa for themselves and Commundsm for Moscow." When the Slovaks, over thirty years ago, told America and the world that Benes and his Czech National Socialists were peddling Communism for Moscow, they were ignored �12 SLOVAKIA and scorned. The socialistic state created by Masaryk and Benes came into being in 1918 because of America's intervention. Now we are gradually learning the truth about the poli:tical monstrosity we not only made possible, but nurtured and enriched for over forty years. Imagine, American know-how and doUars are in a large mea·s ure responsible for the fact that Czech Prague has become a Red espion • age training center, second only to Moscow! SLOVAK PEASANT ART: a kitchen in Vinicne � 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 1961, Vol. 11 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 33), March-June 1961.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 34), September-December June 1961.</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 1961 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 by the Slovak League of America VOL. XI MARCH-J,UNE, 1961 NO. 1 (33) PRAGUE: RED ESPIONAGE CENTER By Philip A. Hrobak (Among the Slwaik esoarpees snaitched by the Czech Reds in Austria, alild West Germany is one Jioserph Bla-skovic. Shortly before his aibducti-on, this Slovak pa-tr,i ot sent ain a11ticle to his friend, alil escapee from .Slovailcia ruow residing in New York. T.hiis stor,y is based on tha,t article whicll was wri1bt,e n in Slovak.) The Czecho-Slovakia the American public is acquainted with is not the real Czecho-Slovakia of Thomas Guarrigue Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes. This glorified "·isle of democracy in Europe," painted in such roseate color-s to deceive the West, particularly the United States of America, was destined to become the European beachhead for communism from its very inception. Believe it or not, the simple fact is that the Russian OGPU (Secret Police) was organized in the propaganda state of Masaryk and Benes already in 1918, after Dr. Benes had concluded a secret agreement with Moscow. The OGPU was directed by the notorious agent Skoblin, who personally bossed the group in Prague whose task it was to kidna:p White Russians and ship them to Russia. Skoblin's outfit organized the Red Cells of volunteers, which were approved by Benes and his intimates, and also made all the arrangements for political murders in Poland. Prague thus became a center of the Cominform, second only to Moscow. The Prague Cominform set up an espionage office under the name of the Central European Bureau (1Stredo-Europska Kancelaria - SEK). This office directed the organized Cells and paid off underground espionage groups in the Central European states for services rendered, which included sabotage, kidnapping, and murder. Skoblin's group also organized the West~European Bureau (Zaipado-Eu- 2 SLOVAKIA ropska Kancelaria - ZEK) in Prague to promote communist interests in the Wes't European States. To organize the communists in the Balkan States, a bureau was set up in Vienna under the supervision of the Prague Bureau. The Vienna office at that time was headed by Dimitrov, the Secretary-General of the Cominform who had gained favor in the W esit. The Prague Bureau was made up of such Red worthies as Dimitrov, Gottwald, Manuilsky, Pakosta, Florin, and Ercoli - all graduates of the Moscow School of Red Leaders. Gottwald and Pakosta, both Czechs were ordered by Moscow to work in Slovakia. Pakosta came to the Turiec province and soon got a jeib in the Tatra furniture enterprise a t Turciansky Svaty Martin. Several months later he was elected an official of the local Sick-Benefit Insurance Association; and six months later he became manager of the branch office at Trnava. Pakosta didn't do too bad for himself in Slovakia: within a year he bought himself a large tract of land in the vicinity of Trnava, even though he kept on bellowing "down with the bourgeoisie"! Gottwald was sent to Vrutky in Slovakia where he was employed by the State railway system as a caibinet-maker. After Gottwald became a "master" of his trade, he began to publish a Red periodical in Banska Bystrica. Gottwald and Pakosta had the task of selecting the "right" people for the Red School in Moscow. Among the first selectees were Stephen Hadera, Vlado Clemen'tis, and Gustav Husak. After this trio completed its schooling in Moscow, it formed a "triangle" in Slovakia. Later on Moscow made Gottwa:ld a liaison officer to relay orders of the Cominform to States that had an organized underground. Orders were sentt from Turkey to the Gibraltar and Copenhagen. Gottwald was assisted by Hlozknecht and Prochniak and, later, also by the Polish Reds of Galicia Krumlov, Berend, Doppler, and Ackermann. The Prague Central Bureau directed the Red organizations in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, and Bulgaria, where the communists engaged in -s ubversive activities as "Social Democrats." As in Czecho-Slovakia, so SLOVAKIA 3 here too, only "reliable" communists were selected for schooling in Moscow. After graduation, the Reds returned to their respective countries as "socialists" of one shade or another to form "triangles." Whenever things would get too hot for them, they would resort to the tactic of uncovering and repor~ing ordinary laborers as "dangerous communists." It so happened that while innocent people sweated it out in jails, the real subversives, parading as Social Democrats, were free to continue in their nefarious work. In March, 1933, Moscow had prepared detailed plans for the Prague Central Bureau to initiate revolutions in C::echo-Slovakia and Austria. German intelligence, however, uncovered the plot and rushed into action, occupying Austria on March 13. The Reds were lucky to save the incriminating documents of the Vienna office. Otto Katz, alias Andrei Simone, a member of the Zionist and communist organizations, brought them to Bratislava where he personally handed them over to Sankoff-Rappaport, a Zionist, and ·::. o Kreschner, a leader of the German Reds. The latter collaborated closely with the Prague Central Bureau in preparing a revolt in Germany. You may not find it easy to believe, but the fact is that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was organized in Prague. The story was published by the Czech press of Prague in June, 1946, when Lenin's Hall in the "Peoples Home" (Lidovy dum) on Hybernska Street in Prague was ceremoniously opened to the public. It was in this hall that Vladimir Iljic Lenin presided at a meeting of the Russian Social Democratic Party, January 19-30, 1912. And it was at this meeting that J osip Visarionovich Dzhugashvili, later known as Stalin, was eleoted a member of the Central Committee of the party. At that time Lenin used the name of "Majer." The dedication ceremony in 1946 was attended by Soviet Ambassador Zarin, who thanked the government of Benes-Gottwald for honoring the memory of Lenin in such a noble fashion. 4 SLOVAKIA After Hitler came to power and ordered a general round-up of Reds in Germany, the Reds moved their office from Vienna to Paris where they operated under the title "Auslandskomite" (Foreign Committee). Dr. Benes, however, concurred secretly with Litvinov-Finkelste in that it would be more advantageous to transfer the Red German outfit to Prague, making it an adjunct of the Central European Bureau (CIDB). In Prague this group operated under the label "Komunistische Deutsche Partein (KDP). It was assigned the task of organizing Red movements, espionage, sabotage, and political murders in Silesia, central Germany, the Saar, Berlin, Brandenburg, and Bavaria. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds was charged with the responsibility of promoting communism in twothirds of Europe. Dr. Edward Benes, highly trusted and favored by the West, was well aware of this activity. He had his agents in the KDP and other ReJd groups: and he had them in England, America, and Mexico, as well. He knew that Reds operaJted from the Czecho-Slovak embassy in Washington, because he placed them there himself. Nevertheless the West regarded Benes as a non-Marxist socialist and the "greatest democrat" of Europe. The entire CzechoSlovak State propaganda apparatus was controlled by Benes and his political henchmen: the West knew Benes as Benes wanted it to know him. But the West is gradually waking up to the fact that it did not know the real Benes, Benes, the Marxist socialist, Benes, the servant of Moscow. (Edwaird B. Hiitchcook, who had the privilege of knowing Dr. Benes iruttmateI,y, wrote the only complete biography oif Benes. Nevertheless, the author teHs ,u s thalt Benes, ear]Jy in life, "d•eveloped iiruto a believer of brute materia11ilsm, anarch1is,m, socialism. He was aga.inst <religion. He was opposed to almost every estalblished order in bhe world of that day.") The Prague Central Bureau also had to care for Red refugees from Germany; together with the "Zentral Fraktionsleitung" (Central Group Leadership), the Prague Bureau had to train the most capaible Reds in espionage and underground work. The "Rote Hilfe" (Red Aid), a communist banking institution, and the organiza!Uon called "Union flir Freiheit und Recht" (Union for Freedom and Justice) were connected with the Prague Bureau of the SLOVAKIA 5 Reds. When this motley outfit stamped one as unfit for espionage and subversive work in Germany, it would report him to the Czech police, who in turn would be ordered to surrender him to Germany as a communist. In the eyes of the world this made Dr. Benes and his intimates appear very "anti-communistic" - indeed, the cleanest of all socialists. Duplicity was the hallmark of Benes and his colleagues. Prior to February 25, 1948, when the Reds took over complete power in Czecho-Slovakia, they could not find enough words of prnise for Stalin and the Soviet Union. Then suddenly they were "expelled" from the country and became "anti-communists"! As followers of Benes, Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, Ferdinand Peroutka, and others, nevertheless, had little difficulty in being employed by Radio Free Europe to broadcast "words of truth" to those whom they had helped to betray to the Moloch of Moscow. The Prague Bureau established "Homes For Escapees" in Prague, Strasnice, Kosice, Brno, Msec, and several other cities. The Prague home was managed by a former deputy of the German Reich, one Mrs. Hana Sandtner, a confidante of Karl Schwab who was in charge of the organization called "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten" (The Alliance for the Aid of German Emigrants), the outfit that cared for Red refugees from Germany. One of the largest homes for Red escapees, the Salda Home, was situated in Msec, Bohemia; it was named after the eminent Israelite warrior who was a Red. In this home escapees were given six-month courses in Marxism, espionage, sabotage, and underground activities. The graduates were then sent out to battle for universal communism (the "International Brigades," for example, in Spain). Military training was in charge of Leon Schnittmann, whose real name was Adol,ph Lejba, one of the best the Soviet had in the business. Officers from the Czech General Staff, selected by Lejba himself, helped with the training of recruits; so dii:l French officers who spoke Russian fluently. Lejba at one time had served as military attache in Prague. After Moscow announced that it had removed Lejba :from his position, he did not return to Russia but remained in Prague, where he opened a private business office. As a 6 SLOVAKIA businessman Lejba was free to travel; and he was in constant touch with the authorities, the ministries and political personalities. It was thus that Lej1ba succeeded in building up a "Czechoslovak-Russian" army. When Schnittman-Lejba visited neighboring States, he called on cryptocommunists in the Social Democratic parties to gather information and give orders. His reports were delivered in person to the Central European Bureau in Prague. Thanks to Lejba and the collaboration of Dr. Benes, Moscow had, in 1938, over 2,000 trained spies in Prague who were dispatched to aH countries of Europe and the West. While the press, the diplomats, and the statesmen of the West referred to the republic of Masairyk and Benes as a "model democracy" and an "isle of democracy in Europe," in reality Czecho~Slovakia was a state in which the Reds ruled under the guise of socialists. Financial help for these Red spies and saboteurs also came from the United States. The president of the "Friends of Nature" (3911 Greenview Avenue, Chicago, Ill.) sent money to the Red Bureau in Prague from the account of the "Ocean Travel Bureau" (2233 N. Ashland Avenue). The money was sent to Karl Schwab of the "Vereinigung zur Unterstutzung deutscher Emigranten." Comrade Dr. Goldschneidt, a "persecuted" Jew, was in charge of the office in Prague (Jachymov Street, 3), which busied itself with espionage under the label of "Zentral Hilfstelle flir Deutsche Fllichtlingskinder" (Central Office to Help Children of German Escapees). With the outbreak of the civil war in Spain, spies were sent there by these Red training centers. During the first weeks of the revolution more than a thousand men were dispatched to Spain by the Prague Bureau. Karl Schwab took care of all the arrangements: with the Czech police he prepared false passes and provided for the transportation of Reds to Spain. After a time, however, Moscow ordered the leading Reds to quit Spain and return to the haven of the Reds, Benes's Czecho-S'1ovakia. After the Slovak Republic was establi,shed on March 14, 1939, by the proclaimation of independence of the autonomous parliament · of Slovakia, the Prague-trained Reds SLOVAKIA 7 presented quite a problem. Communism and Freemasonry had been outlawed already in 1938 by autonomous Slovakia while it was still witthin the framework of Czecho-Slovalda. The Reds went underground, but most of their leaders fled from Prague and Bratislava to Moscow. To ferret out the Reds and disarm them, the Slovak Sta.te ordered Imrich (Henry) Sudsky of the State Security Police to organize a special security uni!t of 100 mem!bers. Sudsky was a brilliant police official, having served under the Masaryk-Bene s regimes. Slovak authorities, however, did not know that Sudsky was also a secret agent of the Czech Reds. Charged with the task of rounding up the Reds in Slovakia, Sudsky applied himself diligently and eventually caught up with Stephen Hadera. The latter exposed the Red movement in Slovakia under questioning and the Red "triangle" was disrupted. This was followed by mass arrests of Reds and communist activities practically ceased in Slovakia until the last year of the war. When the Red armies overran the Slovak Republic in May, 1945, and Stalin made Benes "presiden!t" of Czecho-Slovak ia again, Sudsky was immediately placed into service by the Czech Reds. In 1957 he was held res,ponsible for the abduction of several Slovak patriots from Austria. The Czecho-Slovak Republic of Masaryk and Benes which western powers regarded as the most exemplary democratic country in Europe, was in fact the beachhead of Communism in Europe, as Stojadinovich , Yugoslav Minister of the Interior, had declared to newsmen on April 24, 1936, adding that "the Yugoslav communists are financially supported by Benes's Czecho-Slovak Republic." About an hour after he made this statement, Stojadinovich was a dead man, murdered by an agent of the Reds. His assailant escaped to Czecho-Slovakia through Hungary. The Prague Central Bureau of the Reds fixed him up with a new set of forged papers so that he might conltinue in his dastardly trade. In the free western world, there are thousands of agents roaming about, promoting the program of Moscow. After the great massacre of World War II, some of them were employed by Radio Free Europe in Munich. I knew them from 8 SLOVAKIA back home. There was, for example, Robert Valuch of Salzburg, an adjutant of a Brigade Commissioner during the Red putsch in Slovakia in August, 1944; then, Mi.so (Michael) Sagat, whose last known address was Etst Delast Marcheprime girange, France, who issued orders to murder people and murdered many himself; also one Joseph Micudik, a captain of the paritsans who was schooled in Moscow; and then, Joseph Antl, and so many others employed by Radio Free Europe and moving aJbout freely in the service of the Reds. In the light of the above, it is surprising indeed that responsi'ble people of western governments do not see, or pretend not to see or know what is going on in their countries to promote the scourge of communism and enslave the remaining free peoples of the earth. Thus far goes the story of the Slovak patriot, Joseph Bla,skovic, written a ,s hort time before he was abducted !from Austria and imprisoned in Prague by the Czech Reds. The people and governments of the West know that Moscow has its trained agents everywhere. But apparently they do not know thaJt Prague is second only to Mo·s oow as a Red espionage center. Governments of the West, if they do know about it, are loathe to divulge information. CzechoSlovakia and its builders, Thomas G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, are still regarded highly, and their followers are still the favored "experts" of government ,people. They still .are the "unltoucha1bles" of the political West. Blaskovic' s story is highly plausi-ble, because it is backed by events past and present. Lausman, B. Cerny, Kucera, Folta, Machacek, Ka;las, Sychrava, Haulik, Molin, Marie Dvorak, and other Czechs, posing a,s "esca,pees" and employed by Radio Free Europe, returned to Prague to broadcast to the world how "stupid" Americans were. These agents received Amer.ican "trnth dollars" for their dastardly work. Back in the days of the Office of War Information (OWI), headman Elmer Davis assured Congress that he could spot Communists by a simple rule of thumb: if he was against Polish.iBritish-French resistance to dictator- SLOVAKIA 9 ship aggression in the days of the Stalin-Hitler , pact • and then howled for war against Germany when Russia was attacked, then he was a Commie. N :, the very time Davis was speaking, and even afterwards, the chief of the Czech division of the OWI, was a Red Czech, Adolph Hoffmeister, an agent of Dr. Edward Benes, who was not only a card carrying Communist, but later the ambassador to Paris for the first Red Czech government. During the trial of one Emil Swiertina, a Red spy caught and sentenced to 12 years by American authori!ties in Munich, the names of several politicians of Benes's socialistic entourage were mentioned. The matter was treated as hush-hush, getting practkally no publicity here. It was known that Swiertina worked wit h a Czech Colonel, Dr. Springer, a subordinate of Colonel Koenig. After his imprisonment, Swiertina's correspondence was handled by Dr. Patek. On orders .from Col. Koenig, these letters were not turned over to American authorities, because it was feared that ,they would incriminate some of Benes's followers, members of the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," an organization highly favored by our State Department and the Radio Free Europe people. Otto Katz (alias Andre Simone, alias Kofatko), liquidated in the 1952 Red purge trial in Prague, was an intimate of Dr. Hubert Ripka who was regarded as the righthand man of Dr. Edward Benes. Katz, a Red spy who at one time edi!:ed the Rude Pravo (Red Justice), the official organ of the Czech Communists, spent the war years in Mexico and returned to Prague in 1946. Guenther Reinhardt, author af "Crime Without Punishment," links Katz with the 1943 murder of Ca-rlo Tresca in New York. At his trial Katz declared that he once was hired to work for the Overseas News Agency (ONA) which was affiliated with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency untH 1949. Katz had contacts with Adolph Hoffmeister of the OWI; also with Dezider Benau, wartJi.me editor of the New Y orksky Dennik, a newspaper published in Slovak, and with Karel Leitner, editor of the New Yorkske Listy, published in Czech - both papers at that time being owned by one SLOVAKIA 10 Richard Vogel who did big business with Czecho-Slovalri'a. Katz was also in touch with Dr. Erwin Munk, Otto Biheller, and T. Florin-Hrkel, Czech agents who worked out of the Czech Embassy in Washington when Dr. Juraj Slavik was Benes's ambassador there. It is signif.icant that Miss Pavlina Svoboda, testifying before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Feb. 5, 1952, was not even asked the names of the newspapers which Benau and Leitner edited. Both newspapers published many editorials by leading Communists. After his escape from the United States, Gerhard t Eisler ended up in Prague, haven of the Reds. When Communist Albert S. Stern, whose wife is the Red Martha Dodd Stern, was wanted to testify in the Jack Soble-Soviet spy case, both made off for Prague via Mexico. There they were joined by Maurice Halpern, a former Boston University teacher. In his testimony before the HUAC (released May 10, 1960), Frantisek Tisler, former Military and Air Attache of Cziecho-Slovakia at the embassy in Washington, declared that "one of the main reasons for the maintenance of a Czechoslovak Embassy in Washington, D. C., is to conduct espionage against the United Sfates." It is a matter of record tha:t most of .the politicians of Dr. Edward Benes's official family were active supporters of his pro-Sovi et poHcy. They were members of CzechoSlovakia's communist-dominated National Front government which eliminated all anti-communist elements from the political life of the country. Now, posing as "democratic" exiles and "an/ti-communist" fighters, they would have the West believe that they alway,s were on our side against the diabolic forces of communism. Incredible as it may sound, the fact is that these Red collaborators were accepted immediately by our Staite Department (under Acheson) as "democratic exiles," and their organiza:tion in America, the Council of Free Czechoslovakia, was recognized as "the supreme political body of the Czech and Slovak exile." With the _b lessing of the State Department, the fellow-1ravelers from Czecho-,Slovakia had no trouble at all in finding employment with Radio Free Europe, The Voice of America , 1 SLOVAKIA 11 the CIC, the Library of Congress, and other agencies of U. S. Government, as well as our universities. More incredi'ble yet is the fact that some of these people are still holding their jobs. Red Prague is paying off to Red Moscow: with the help of the Czechs, who were "remade" under the regimes of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, Soviet Russia 's campaign of penetration is proceeding successfully in Africa, South America, Mexico, and Nol'lth America, in a word, everywhere! Czech and Soviet officers are instructing Castro's men in tactics and use of Czech arms at Gramma, Baracoa Beach and Managua - the three major bases of Castro's Army. A Czech officer commands the Cuban troops fighting the rebels i-n the Escambray Mountains. Anti-Castro forces in Cuba are trying to speed up the time for civil war there, because Castro, as of now, still does not have much of an air force. But he has about 1000 young Cubans in Czecho-Slovakia learning to fly jets. When they are ready, the Red Russians can create a Cuban air force in less than a day. In the new nations of Africa, you see few Russians, but plenty of Czech salesmen and diplomats. Not Russians, but Czechs are doing the groundwork for Moscow. According to U. S. News and World Report (April 3, 1961) : "Cairo is the Center of Czech operartions i-n, Africa. From Cairo, Czech goods are f11oiwin,g - art twice the 1950 level - to bobh North and West Aifrioa. A Czech airline operates from Praigu:e tlhrowgth Cairo to po'ints in West Afri~. "Am,e,ricans fo Gui•n ea h1ave notioed how fast the Czechs have moved in Wlhen French pulled out. Now, pro-Moscow Guinea is headquarters £or Czech opera,tions in au West Africa. A Czech shoe factory was shipped to Giha;na via Conakry, Gu~•nea. Czech machine to'o1s, preci£·ion instruments for Glhaina and Mali c-ame the same way. "Tirade is jus;t a part of i,t. A total of 270 Czech experts - military advisers, poUce adviisers, teachers - were counted in Cornaik,r,y at one time recently. "To date, this· Sorvi>et-Czech arran,gement has wol'ked smoothly. The Czec1hs are seUing Czech ,goods in Africa for themselves and Commundsm for Moscow." When the Slovaks, over thirty years ago, told America and the world that Benes and his Czech National Socialists were peddling Communism for Moscow, they were ignored 12 SLOVAKIA and scorned. The socialistic state created by Masaryk and Benes came into being in 1918 because of America's intervention. Now we are gradually learning the truth about the poli:tical monstrosity we not only made possible, but nurtured and enriched for over forty years. Imagine, American know-how and doUars are in a large mea·s ure responsible for the fact that Czech Prague has become a Red espion • age training center, second only to Moscow! SLOVAK PEASANT ART: a kitchen in Vinicne  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 Prague: Red Espionage Center Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 11, No. 1 (33), March-June 1961 pp. 1-12 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-June 1961 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/86105fcfd848c81a6136d0b1137c17a0.pdf 8dc77e7bcb31d72620384fbf3335910d PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 2!l '.r.HE LANGUAGE OF STS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS P.A. H'ROBAK In what language did the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, speak to the ancestors of the Slovaks? Undoubtedly in a la,nguaige understandable to the Slovaks. '17he saintly brothera - set by Emperor Michael of Byzantium (Constantinople) in response to a request by Rastislav, ruler of the Greater Moravian ffimpire - came to the land of the Slovaks in 863 - 1,100 years aigo - to complete the work of converting his people to Christianity which was initiated earlier by missionaries who knew little or nothing aibout the language of the people of Great Moravia. It is well to remember that Cyril and Methodius did no Jtjissionary wpnk in the land settled by the Czeeihs, a part of Bohemia (the land of the Boii), because during the lifetime of the saintly brothers that territory was not identical with the territory (Slovensko) occupied by the Slovaks. The Czech country (Cechy, Cesko), first ruled by Prince Bof-i.voj, was conquered by Svatopluk only after the death of St. Methodius (1). The homeland of the ancient Czechs was ecclesiastically under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Regensburg, while the homelamd of the Slovaks was not. A Christian church already existed in Nitra, Slovakia, in 833, while Christianity was still very weak in the Czech country: Bofivoj's wife, St. Ludmila, and his grandson, St. Wenceslaus (Wenzel), were both murdered by their relatives . .St. Methodius of Nitra was already ain archbishop in 873 (2), while the first Czech bishopric was established in Prague in 973. According to Dobrovsky, "Slovakia was really Great Moravia" (3); and Skultety, Hrusovsky, Stanislav and Dekan (!Slovak :philologists and historians) agree with Jozef Safarik that Slovakia was the core of the Great Moravia Empire <4). Historical evidences prove conclusively that Sts. Cyril and Methodius labored in the homeland of the ancient Slovaks jjrom 863 to 8815 ( 5 ). Jozef Dobrovsky (1753-1829), the eminent Czech Slavist, divided the lang1Ua;ges of the Slovanic (Slavic) peoples �SLOVAKIA 30 into two groups: 1. Eastern and southern ; 2. western a,nd northern (6). Dobrovsk y's classifica tion was supported by V. F. Durych, a Czech, Bartolom ew Kopitar (1780-1844), a Slovene, and Paul J. Safarik (1795-1861), a Slovak. Dobrovsky's classifica tion of the Slovanic language, however, did not hold for long, because his choice of distinguis hing character istics was not comprehe nsive enough and his classifica tion did not include all the Slovanic tongues (iBulgarian, Ukrainian , Polabian, for example) - m. Alexande r Vostokov (1781-1864), a Russian philologist, came out with a more natural classifica tion of the Slovanic language s, which he based on the territorie s occupied or inhabited by the Slovaruk nations. He divided the languages into three groups: 1. Southern (Old Slovanic, Bulgaria,n, Srbo-Cro atian, and Slovene); 3. Western (Slovak and Czech, Lusatian- Ser.bian, and Polish with Kashubia n) - (8). Vostokov 's classifica tion was generally adopted after it gained the support of Vatroslav Jagic (1838-1923), the Slovene who is regarded as the greatest Slavist of the prewar era, (9) and Lulbor Niederle (18615-1944), the eminent Czech writer of antiquitie s (10). Now, into what classifica tion shall we place the language in which Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s preached the gospel of Christ to the ancestors of the Slovruks? We know that they came from the territory of Byzantiu m (Constantinople), but their native Salonica (Solun) was influence d by the gigantic waves of the Balkan Slavs. Emperor Michael sent them to the ancient homeland of the .Slovaks, because both could speak the la,nguge of the people there very fluently ("Va bo jesta Solunjani na, da Solunjane v'si cisto slovjen'sk y besjedujo nt" (11). Franc Miklosie (1813-1891), the Slovene philologist, advanced and defended the so-called •~Pannoniain Theory," that is, that the language of ancient manuscri pts of the time of Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s was the language of the Slavs of Pannonia (modern Hungary ) and, therefore , maintaine d that the language was old Slovenia,n (12). A. Leskien, a German, studied the question and concluded, on philological •g rounds, that the language was really old Bulgarian (13). �31 SLOVAKIA Vatroslav Jagic proved scientifically that the language used ·b y the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, was of south-Macedonian origin, the language used by the Slavs of the Salon.i!ka area. This view supported by the very words used by Emperor Michael when he told Cyril and '.Methodius to go to the land of Rastislav, "because both of you are natives of Salon.i!ka, and all Salonikans speaks in pure Slovak" (Iebo vy oba st,e Soluncania, a Soluncania vsetci cisto slovensky beseduju) - CN) . After on exhaustive study of both modern and old Bulgarian, Paul J . Safarik, eminent Slovak scholar cxf Slavistics, convinced him self of the Macedonian origin of Old Slovak which was used by Sts. Cyril and Methodius in the land cxf Rastislav ( 15) • .,tiJD J:UiffL:'JVH:Ul\ffiC0~. :J,Jb-aJUtMraUUl llill1' lfliYK 3. JfflJhm"l'~ 'i1 / ~ 3J!llllln'dbll7M1Dll ~--s IIIfurrruflixffit -::iµ llfflib~ JDK7MJ1J3 dfi, I F~ iffin<itK7..r.1m,m_p IlhPJ. jif{thlhrlJ,p ilfuJK :J~qJbK·BUbrhb!IDDtti jJ:I llIIMnJ,m iJh'r?DffKµ. GLAGOLICA - the most ancient language of Slovak literature The ancient Slovak manuscripts are all ecclesiastical in content. The two generally considered to be the most complete, linguistically purest and oldest, are the Old Slovak versions of the four Gospel referred to as "Codex Zographensis" and "Codex Marianus," which Jagic translated �32 SLOVAKIA into Cyrillic characters from the original Glagolitic (16). The Glagolitic alphabet was invented by St. Cyril (862) after he and his brother, Methodius, had accepted Ra.stislav's invitation to preach the Word of God to his people - the ancient Slovaks of Great Moravia - in a languaige they could understand <17). It was gradually superseded by the clearer Cyrillic, which was invented by the disciples of Cyril and Metlhodius. The majority of the Old Slovak manuscripts are in the Glagolitic script, only the •~Sava Gospels" and "Codex Suprasili~nsis" being originally in Cyrillic <18 >. Old Slov:ak was used for the same purposes as Latin was m Western Europe and Greek in Eastern Europe. The rut il/1 mw® l!i aJ ff 1& . .... ' ' :.,AJ0~~r.A ti Hi ._ P./1 JE4•Jt '"" rA ~w,rny• --. N r nA c-rro @t,ti:\Wf• .. ~ I\ I.IA~ '-;- . f "I:!' Y W f.A ( "r I~ H t:I : /4' 1.• ~t,.)K~ATHWA("H-.n~ C -royc H •C (\' A ,. r..&.-\A\'t'~- R'/1\ 4' e H &A·0& ·1.c½ \" b~~t' KHA~WA nCt\ltl I 6 Iii CT . I,. I( ~NH Ml..• Hr. rA" Nt\ni\l,.NH WA(~0 CYRI LICA - wh i ch developed from the Glagolica �SLOVAKIA 33 language of the aincient Slovaks of the Great Moravian Empire became ooe of the liturgical languages df that time ( the others were Greek and La.tin) ; it had the approval of the Catholic Church of Rome. It .b ecame a language of literature with all the attributes which a literary language could attain at that time; it was, in fact, the third international language of Europe which was used by a large part of the western and southern 'Slovanic peoples. Later, when it was no ionger used in the homeland of the Slovaks, it was spread and preserved, partially tranformed, as the literary medium of the southern and eastern Slovan<ic nations (19). The most importMlt mementos or souvenirs from Old Slovak literature, cultivated by the Slovaks during the Cyrilo-Methodius era, are: 1. The ''Kijevske Iisty" (Kijev letters) from the tenth · century (remains of a Missal according to the Latin rite) ; 2. the "Prai.ske zlomky" (Prague Fragments) from the eleventh century (remains of a Missal accordiing to the Greek, that is, the Eastern rite); 3. ''Zivot Konstan.tinov" (The Life of Constantine) ; the oldest manuscript is a Russian copy from the fifteenth century; 4. "tivot Mefud.01V" (The Life of Methodi,us) ; the oldest is the Russian copy from the twelfth century; 5. "Legenda o sv. Vaclavovi" (The Legend of St. Wenceslaus) - the oldest is the Croatian-Glagofitic copy from the 14th century; 6. "Homilie Gregora. Vel1keho" (The Homilies of Gregory; The Great) - the oldest is the Russian copy £rom the 13th century; 7. "Kazeii pred spoved'ou" (Lnstruction Before Confession) - preserved in the "Frizinske pamiatky" (The Freisingen Souvenirs>, Vol. 2, from the 10th century; 8. Pr:ayers for various occasions (20) . The .Slovaks, rightly proud of their Cyrilo.JMethodius heritage, are determined to let the world know it in 1963, when, wherever they are, they will solemnly commemorate the 1100th anniversary of the advent of the saintly brothers, Cyril and Methodius, to the homeland of their forefathers, the Great Moravian Empire of the Slovak sovereigns Rastislav, Svatopluk rund Mojmir. REFERENCES 1. J . Drrugos-Al:zbetincan. Kde posobili sv. Cyril a Metod? - JiEDNIOTA, Middle town , Pa., 1963 , p . 46. Kalendar �SLOVAKIA 34 2, Dr. Frant. Hrusovsky : Slovenski Vladari, 0brana Press, Scranton, J>a., 1948, p. 208. 3. Joseph M. Kirschbaum : Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of <Central Europe, Robert Speller & !Sons, New Yol'k, 1960, p. 18. 4. Pavel Jozef !:§afarik: Slovanake staroiltnos tl, Praigue, 1837, pp. 794-95. 5. Fr. Hrusovsky : Slovenske dejiny, Matica Slovenaka, Turc. sv. !Martin, 1940, pp. 32-46; Gil1bert L. Oddo: Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & Sons, Ne1W York, 1960, PP. 12-26; Joseph M. Kirsch,baum , op. cit., pp. 14-23; Jozef ~kultety: Nehailte l!.ud Moj! l'Ilure. sv. Martin, 1928, pp. 2-20 (transl. by 0 . D. Koref.f: Sketches From Slovak History, Jednota Printery, Middletmvn , Pa., 1930, pp. 10-39). 6. Josef Dobrovsky : lnstltutione s linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 1822. 7. Fr. Jemelk.a: Putnik cyrllometod ejaky, Trnava, Slovakia, Aug.-Sept. 1947, pp. 137-138. 8. ,.bidem. 9. Vatroslav Jagic: Archlv fUr Slavlache Philologie, 1875-1920. 10. LU!bor Niederle, Slovanake Staro!ltnoa tl, 1902. 11. Jeme1ka: op , cit. 12. IR. G. A. De Bray: Gulde to the Slavonic Languages, London, and New York, 1951, p. 1. 13. A. Leskien: Handbuch der altbulgaris chen (altkirchen -slavischen ) Sprache, Heidel1b erg, 1919, p. XX!I. 14. Jemelka : op. cit.; Dr.Eugen Pa.uliny: Dejlny Splaovnej Slovenclny , ISlovenska Akademia Vied a Umeni, Bratislava, 1948, in which we read (,p. 17): "The !irst literary languaJge of our forefathers , rwhich can be regarded as a national literary language, was Old Slovak ("staroslov enclna"), which had its origin in the Macedonian dialect (ISou:th Slovanic) used in the area of Thessaloni ca ()Solun). In the oldest .Slovanic sources this langua,ge is called "Jenzyk alovenakyi, " and in the Latin sources of that time "lingua sclavinisca , sclavinlca, sclavina." 15. :Pavel Jozef $airarik: op. cit.; R. G. A. De Bray; op_ cit., p. 194. 16. IR.G.A. De Bray: op. cit., p. 1. 17. !Rev. Cyril J . Potocek : Saints Cyril and Methodius, New York, 1941, pp. 64, 124-127; Dr. John Rekem: The Origin and Development of the Slovak Language, SLOVtAK'IA, Middletown , Pa., Vol. lll, .March-Jun e, 1962, p, 2; Jan Stanislav: Kultura atarych Slovakov, Bratislava, 1944; Kalendar Jednota, 1915, !Middletow n, Pa., p, 140. 18. iR.G.IA.. De Bray: op, cit. p. 1; Kalendar Jednota, op. cit., p. 141. 19. Eugen Pauliny: op_ cit., p. 17. 20. Rev. Jan PoruJbaky: K Stemu Vyrociu Literarnej Slovenciny , !Scranton, Pa., 1944-, pp. 50-64; A. V. Isacenko : Jazyk a povod Frizlnskych pamiatok, Bratislava, 1943 - used by Eugen Pauliny, ,who reproduces several reconstruct ed texts and tra.n-slations in 01). cit., pp. 19..;!1. � SLOVAKIA 2!l '.r.HE LANGUAGE OF STS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS P.A. H'ROBAK In what language did the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, speak to the ancestors of the Slovaks? Undoubtedly in a la,nguaige understandable to the Slovaks. '17he saintly brothera - set by Emperor Michael of Byzantium (Constantinople) in response to a request by Rastislav, ruler of the Greater Moravian ffimpire - came to the land of the Slovaks in 863 - 1,100 years aigo - to complete the work of converting his people to Christianity which was initiated earlier by missionaries who knew little or nothing aibout the language of the people of Great Moravia. It is well to remember that Cyril and Methodius did no Jtjissionary wpnk in the land settled by the Czeeihs, a part of Bohemia (the land of the Boii), because during the lifetime of the saintly brothers that territory was not identical with the territory (Slovensko) occupied by the Slovaks. The Czech country (Cechy, Cesko), first ruled by Prince Bof-i.voj, was conquered by Svatopluk only after the death of St. Methodius (1). The homeland of the ancient Czechs was ecclesiastically under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Regensburg, while the homelamd of the Slovaks was not. A Christian church already existed in Nitra, Slovakia, in 833, while Christianity was still very weak in the Czech country: Bofivoj's wife, St. Ludmila, and his grandson, St. Wenceslaus (Wenzel), were both murdered by their relatives . .St. Methodius of Nitra was already ain archbishop in 873 (2), while the first Czech bishopric was established in Prague in 973. According to Dobrovsky, "Slovakia was really Great Moravia" (3); and Skultety, Hrusovsky, Stanislav and Dekan (!Slovak :philologists and historians) agree with Jozef Safarik that Slovakia was the core of the Great Moravia Empire <4). Historical evidences prove conclusively that Sts. Cyril and Methodius labored in the homeland of the ancient Slovaks jjrom 863 to 8815 ( 5 ). Jozef Dobrovsky (1753-1829), the eminent Czech Slavist, divided the lang1Ua;ges of the Slovanic (Slavic) peoples �SLOVAKIA 30 into two groups: 1. Eastern and southern ; 2. western a,nd northern (6). Dobrovsk y's classifica tion was supported by V. F. Durych, a Czech, Bartolom ew Kopitar (1780-1844), a Slovene, and Paul J. Safarik (1795-1861), a Slovak. Dobrovsky's classifica tion of the Slovanic language, however, did not hold for long, because his choice of distinguis hing character istics was not comprehe nsive enough and his classifica tion did not include all the Slovanic tongues (iBulgarian, Ukrainian , Polabian, for example) - m. Alexande r Vostokov (1781-1864), a Russian philologist, came out with a more natural classifica tion of the Slovanic language s, which he based on the territorie s occupied or inhabited by the Slovaruk nations. He divided the languages into three groups: 1. Southern (Old Slovanic, Bulgaria,n, Srbo-Cro atian, and Slovene); 3. Western (Slovak and Czech, Lusatian- Ser.bian, and Polish with Kashubia n) - (8). Vostokov 's classifica tion was generally adopted after it gained the support of Vatroslav Jagic (1838-1923), the Slovene who is regarded as the greatest Slavist of the prewar era, (9) and Lulbor Niederle (18615-1944), the eminent Czech writer of antiquitie s (10). Now, into what classifica tion shall we place the language in which Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s preached the gospel of Christ to the ancestors of the Slovruks? We know that they came from the territory of Byzantiu m (Constantinople), but their native Salonica (Solun) was influence d by the gigantic waves of the Balkan Slavs. Emperor Michael sent them to the ancient homeland of the .Slovaks, because both could speak the la,nguge of the people there very fluently ("Va bo jesta Solunjani na, da Solunjane v'si cisto slovjen'sk y besjedujo nt" (11). Franc Miklosie (1813-1891), the Slovene philologist, advanced and defended the so-called •~Pannoniain Theory," that is, that the language of ancient manuscri pts of the time of Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s was the language of the Slavs of Pannonia (modern Hungary ) and, therefore , maintaine d that the language was old Slovenia,n (12). A. Leskien, a German, studied the question and concluded, on philological •g rounds, that the language was really old Bulgarian (13). �31 SLOVAKIA Vatroslav Jagic proved scientifically that the language used ·b y the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, was of south-Macedonian origin, the language used by the Slavs of the Salon.i!ka area. This view supported by the very words used by Emperor Michael when he told Cyril and '.Methodius to go to the land of Rastislav, "because both of you are natives of Salon.i!ka, and all Salonikans speaks in pure Slovak" (Iebo vy oba st,e Soluncania, a Soluncania vsetci cisto slovensky beseduju) - CN) . After on exhaustive study of both modern and old Bulgarian, Paul J . Safarik, eminent Slovak scholar cxf Slavistics, convinced him self of the Macedonian origin of Old Slovak which was used by Sts. Cyril and Methodius in the land cxf Rastislav ( 15) • .,tiJD J:UiffL:'JVH:Ul\ffiC0~. :J,Jb-aJUtMraUUl llill1' lfliYK 3. JfflJhm"l'~ 'i1 / ~ 3J!llllln'dbll7M1Dll ~--s IIIfurrruflixffit -::iµ llfflib~ JDK7MJ1J3 dfi, I F~ iffin<itK7..r.1m,m_p IlhPJ. jif{thlhrlJ,p ilfuJK :J~qJbK·BUbrhb!IDDtti jJ:I llIIMnJ,m iJh'r?DffKµ. GLAGOLICA - the most ancient language of Slovak literature The ancient Slovak manuscripts are all ecclesiastical in content. The two generally considered to be the most complete, linguistically purest and oldest, are the Old Slovak versions of the four Gospel referred to as "Codex Zographensis" and "Codex Marianus," which Jagic translated �32 SLOVAKIA into Cyrillic characters from the original Glagolitic (16). The Glagolitic alphabet was invented by St. Cyril (862) after he and his brother, Methodius, had accepted Ra.stislav's invitation to preach the Word of God to his people - the ancient Slovaks of Great Moravia - in a languaige they could understand <17). It was gradually superseded by the clearer Cyrillic, which was invented by the disciples of Cyril and Metlhodius. The majority of the Old Slovak manuscripts are in the Glagolitic script, only the •~Sava Gospels" and "Codex Suprasili~nsis" being originally in Cyrillic <18 >. Old Slov:ak was used for the same purposes as Latin was m Western Europe and Greek in Eastern Europe. The rut il/1 mw® l!i aJ ff 1& . .... ' ' :.,AJ0~~r.A ti Hi ._ P./1 JE4•Jt '"" rA ~w,rny• --. N r nA c-rro @t,ti:\Wf• .. ~ I\ I.IA~ '-;- . f "I:!' Y W f.A ( "r I~ H t:I : /4' 1.• ~t,.)K~ATHWA("H-.n~ C -royc H •C (\' A ,. r..&.-\A\'t'~- R'/1\ 4' e H &A·0& ·1.c½ \" b~~t' KHA~WA nCt\ltl I 6 Iii CT . I,. I( ~NH Ml..• Hr. rA" Nt\ni\l,.NH WA(~0 CYRI LICA - wh i ch developed from the Glagolica �SLOVAKIA 33 language of the aincient Slovaks of the Great Moravian Empire became ooe of the liturgical languages df that time ( the others were Greek and La.tin) ; it had the approval of the Catholic Church of Rome. It .b ecame a language of literature with all the attributes which a literary language could attain at that time; it was, in fact, the third international language of Europe which was used by a large part of the western and southern 'Slovanic peoples. Later, when it was no ionger used in the homeland of the Slovaks, it was spread and preserved, partially tranformed, as the literary medium of the southern and eastern Slovan<ic nations (19). The most importMlt mementos or souvenirs from Old Slovak literature, cultivated by the Slovaks during the Cyrilo-Methodius era, are: 1. The ''Kijevske Iisty" (Kijev letters) from the tenth · century (remains of a Missal according to the Latin rite) ; 2. the "Prai.ske zlomky" (Prague Fragments) from the eleventh century (remains of a Missal accordiing to the Greek, that is, the Eastern rite); 3. ''Zivot Konstan.tinov" (The Life of Constantine) ; the oldest manuscript is a Russian copy from the fifteenth century; 4. "tivot Mefud.01V" (The Life of Methodi,us) ; the oldest is the Russian copy from the twelfth century; 5. "Legenda o sv. Vaclavovi" (The Legend of St. Wenceslaus) - the oldest is the Croatian-Glagofitic copy from the 14th century; 6. "Homilie Gregora. Vel1keho" (The Homilies of Gregory; The Great) - the oldest is the Russian copy £rom the 13th century; 7. "Kazeii pred spoved'ou" (Lnstruction Before Confession) - preserved in the "Frizinske pamiatky" (The Freisingen Souvenirs>, Vol. 2, from the 10th century; 8. Pr:ayers for various occasions (20) . The .Slovaks, rightly proud of their Cyrilo.JMethodius heritage, are determined to let the world know it in 1963, when, wherever they are, they will solemnly commemorate the 1100th anniversary of the advent of the saintly brothers, Cyril and Methodius, to the homeland of their forefathers, the Great Moravian Empire of the Slovak sovereigns Rastislav, Svatopluk rund Mojmir. REFERENCES 1. J . Drrugos-Al:zbetincan. Kde posobili sv. Cyril a Metod? - JiEDNIOTA, Middle town , Pa., 1963 , p . 46. Kalendar �SLOVAKIA 34 2, Dr. Frant. Hrusovsky : Slovenski Vladari, 0brana Press, Scranton, J>a., 1948, p. 208. 3. Joseph M. Kirschbaum : Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of <Central Europe, Robert Speller & !Sons, New Yol'k, 1960, p. 18. 4. Pavel Jozef !:§afarik: Slovanake staroiltnos tl, Praigue, 1837, pp. 794-95. 5. Fr. Hrusovsky : Slovenske dejiny, Matica Slovenaka, Turc. sv. !Martin, 1940, pp. 32-46; Gil1bert L. Oddo: Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & Sons, Ne1W York, 1960, PP. 12-26; Joseph M. Kirsch,baum , op. cit., pp. 14-23; Jozef ~kultety: Nehailte l!.ud Moj! l'Ilure. sv. Martin, 1928, pp. 2-20 (transl. by 0 . D. Koref.f: Sketches From Slovak History, Jednota Printery, Middletmvn , Pa., 1930, pp. 10-39). 6. Josef Dobrovsky : lnstltutione s linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 1822. 7. Fr. Jemelk.a: Putnik cyrllometod ejaky, Trnava, Slovakia, Aug.-Sept. 1947, pp. 137-138. 8. ,.bidem. 9. Vatroslav Jagic: Archlv fUr Slavlache Philologie, 1875-1920. 10. LU!bor Niederle, Slovanake Staro!ltnoa tl, 1902. 11. Jeme1ka: op , cit. 12. IR. G. A. De Bray: Gulde to the Slavonic Languages, London, and New York, 1951, p. 1. 13. A. Leskien: Handbuch der altbulgaris chen (altkirchen -slavischen ) Sprache, Heidel1b erg, 1919, p. XX!I. 14. Jemelka : op. cit.; Dr.Eugen Pa.uliny: Dejlny Splaovnej Slovenclny , ISlovenska Akademia Vied a Umeni, Bratislava, 1948, in which we read (,p. 17): "The !irst literary languaJge of our forefathers , rwhich can be regarded as a national literary language, was Old Slovak ("staroslov enclna"), which had its origin in the Macedonian dialect (ISou:th Slovanic) used in the area of Thessaloni ca ()Solun). In the oldest .Slovanic sources this langua,ge is called "Jenzyk alovenakyi, " and in the Latin sources of that time "lingua sclavinisca , sclavinlca, sclavina." 15. :Pavel Jozef $airarik: op. cit.; R. G. A. De Bray; op_ cit., p. 194. 16. IR.G.A. De Bray: op. cit., p. 1. 17. !Rev. Cyril J . Potocek : Saints Cyril and Methodius, New York, 1941, pp. 64, 124-127; Dr. John Rekem: The Origin and Development of the Slovak Language, SLOVtAK'IA, Middletown , Pa., Vol. lll, .March-Jun e, 1962, p, 2; Jan Stanislav: Kultura atarych Slovakov, Bratislava, 1944; Kalendar Jednota, 1915, !Middletow n, Pa., p, 140. 18. iR.G.IA.. De Bray: op, cit. p. 1; Kalendar Jednota, op. cit., p. 141. 19. Eugen Pauliny: op_ cit., p. 17. 20. Rev. Jan PoruJbaky: K Stemu Vyrociu Literarnej Slovenciny , !Scranton, Pa., 1944-, pp. 50-64; A. V. Isacenko : Jazyk a povod Frizlnskych pamiatok, Bratislava, 1943 - used by Eugen Pauliny, ,who reproduces several reconstruct ed texts and tra.n-slations in 01). cit., pp. 19..;!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 1963, Vol. 13 Description An account of the resource Issue 1 (No. 36), March 1963. 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 1963 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!l '.r.HE LANGUAGE OF STS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS P.A. H'ROBAK In what language did the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, speak to the ancestors of the Slovaks? Undoubtedly in a la,nguaige understandable to the Slovaks. '17he saintly brothera - set by Emperor Michael of Byzantium (Constantinople) in response to a request by Rastislav, ruler of the Greater Moravian ffimpire - came to the land of the Slovaks in 863 - 1,100 years aigo - to complete the work of converting his people to Christianity which was initiated earlier by missionaries who knew little or nothing aibout the language of the people of Great Moravia. It is well to remember that Cyril and Methodius did no Jtjissionary wpnk in the land settled by the Czeeihs, a part of Bohemia (the land of the Boii), because during the lifetime of the saintly brothers that territory was not identical with the territory (Slovensko) occupied by the Slovaks. The Czech country (Cechy, Cesko), first ruled by Prince Bof-i.voj, was conquered by Svatopluk only after the death of St. Methodius (1). The homeland of the ancient Czechs was ecclesiastically under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Regensburg, while the homelamd of the Slovaks was not. A Christian church already existed in Nitra, Slovakia, in 833, while Christianity was still very weak in the Czech country: Bofivoj's wife, St. Ludmila, and his grandson, St. Wenceslaus (Wenzel), were both murdered by their relatives . .St. Methodius of Nitra was already ain archbishop in 873 (2), while the first Czech bishopric was established in Prague in 973. According to Dobrovsky, "Slovakia was really Great Moravia" (3); and Skultety, Hrusovsky, Stanislav and Dekan (!Slovak :philologists and historians) agree with Jozef Safarik that Slovakia was the core of the Great Moravia Empire <4). Historical evidences prove conclusively that Sts. Cyril and Methodius labored in the homeland of the ancient Slovaks jjrom 863 to 8815 ( 5 ). Jozef Dobrovsky (1753-1829), the eminent Czech Slavist, divided the lang1Ua;ges of the Slovanic (Slavic) peoples SLOVAKIA 30 into two groups: 1. Eastern and southern ; 2. western a,nd northern (6). Dobrovsk y's classifica tion was supported by V. F. Durych, a Czech, Bartolom ew Kopitar (1780-1844), a Slovene, and Paul J. Safarik (1795-1861), a Slovak. Dobrovsky's classifica tion of the Slovanic language, however, did not hold for long, because his choice of distinguis hing character istics was not comprehe nsive enough and his classifica tion did not include all the Slovanic tongues (iBulgarian, Ukrainian , Polabian, for example) - m. Alexande r Vostokov (1781-1864), a Russian philologist, came out with a more natural classifica tion of the Slovanic language s, which he based on the territorie s occupied or inhabited by the Slovaruk nations. He divided the languages into three groups: 1. Southern (Old Slovanic, Bulgaria,n, Srbo-Cro atian, and Slovene); 3. Western (Slovak and Czech, Lusatian- Ser.bian, and Polish with Kashubia n) - (8). Vostokov 's classifica tion was generally adopted after it gained the support of Vatroslav Jagic (1838-1923), the Slovene who is regarded as the greatest Slavist of the prewar era, (9) and Lulbor Niederle (18615-1944), the eminent Czech writer of antiquitie s (10). Now, into what classifica tion shall we place the language in which Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s preached the gospel of Christ to the ancestors of the Slovruks? We know that they came from the territory of Byzantiu m (Constantinople), but their native Salonica (Solun) was influence d by the gigantic waves of the Balkan Slavs. Emperor Michael sent them to the ancient homeland of the .Slovaks, because both could speak the la,nguge of the people there very fluently ("Va bo jesta Solunjani na, da Solunjane v'si cisto slovjen'sk y besjedujo nt" (11). Franc Miklosie (1813-1891), the Slovene philologist, advanced and defended the so-called •~Pannoniain Theory," that is, that the language of ancient manuscri pts of the time of Sts. Cyril and Methodiu s was the language of the Slavs of Pannonia (modern Hungary ) and, therefore , maintaine d that the language was old Slovenia,n (12). A. Leskien, a German, studied the question and concluded, on philological •g rounds, that the language was really old Bulgarian (13). 31 SLOVAKIA Vatroslav Jagic proved scientifically that the language used ·b y the Slovak Apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, was of south-Macedonian origin, the language used by the Slavs of the Salon.i!ka area. This view supported by the very words used by Emperor Michael when he told Cyril and '.Methodius to go to the land of Rastislav, "because both of you are natives of Salon.i!ka, and all Salonikans speaks in pure Slovak" (Iebo vy oba st,e Soluncania, a Soluncania vsetci cisto slovensky beseduju) - CN) . After on exhaustive study of both modern and old Bulgarian, Paul J . Safarik, eminent Slovak scholar cxf Slavistics, convinced him self of the Macedonian origin of Old Slovak which was used by Sts. Cyril and Methodius in the land cxf Rastislav ( 15) • .,tiJD J:UiffL:'JVH:Ul\ffiC0~. :J,Jb-aJUtMraUUl llill1' lfliYK 3. JfflJhm"l'~ 'i1 / ~ 3J!llllln'dbll7M1Dll ~--s IIIfurrruflixffit -::iµ llfflib~ JDK7MJ1J3 dfi, I F~ iffin<itK7..r.1m,m_p IlhPJ. jif{thlhrlJ,p ilfuJK :J~qJbK·BUbrhb!IDDtti jJ:I llIIMnJ,m iJh'r?DffKµ. GLAGOLICA - the most ancient language of Slovak literature The ancient Slovak manuscripts are all ecclesiastical in content. The two generally considered to be the most complete, linguistically purest and oldest, are the Old Slovak versions of the four Gospel referred to as "Codex Zographensis" and "Codex Marianus," which Jagic translated 32 SLOVAKIA into Cyrillic characters from the original Glagolitic (16). The Glagolitic alphabet was invented by St. Cyril (862) after he and his brother, Methodius, had accepted Ra.stislav's invitation to preach the Word of God to his people - the ancient Slovaks of Great Moravia - in a languaige they could understand <17). It was gradually superseded by the clearer Cyrillic, which was invented by the disciples of Cyril and Metlhodius. The majority of the Old Slovak manuscripts are in the Glagolitic script, only the •~Sava Gospels" and "Codex Suprasili~nsis" being originally in Cyrillic <18 >. Old Slov:ak was used for the same purposes as Latin was m Western Europe and Greek in Eastern Europe. The rut il/1 mw® l!i aJ ff 1& . .... ' ' :.,AJ0~~r.A ti Hi ._ P./1 JE4•Jt '"" rA ~w,rny• --. N r nA c-rro @t,ti:\Wf• .. ~ I\ I.IA~ '-;- . f "I:!' Y W f.A ( "r I~ H t:I : /4' 1.• ~t,.)K~ATHWA("H-.n~ C -royc H •C (\' A ,. r..&.-\A\'t'~- R'/1\ 4' e H &A·0& ·1.c½ \" b~~t' KHA~WA nCt\ltl I 6 Iii CT . I,. I( ~NH Ml..• Hr. rA" Nt\ni\l,.NH WA(~0 CYRI LICA - wh i ch developed from the Glagolica SLOVAKIA 33 language of the aincient Slovaks of the Great Moravian Empire became ooe of the liturgical languages df that time ( the others were Greek and La.tin) ; it had the approval of the Catholic Church of Rome. It .b ecame a language of literature with all the attributes which a literary language could attain at that time; it was, in fact, the third international language of Europe which was used by a large part of the western and southern 'Slovanic peoples. Later, when it was no ionger used in the homeland of the Slovaks, it was spread and preserved, partially tranformed, as the literary medium of the southern and eastern Slovan<ic nations (19). The most importMlt mementos or souvenirs from Old Slovak literature, cultivated by the Slovaks during the Cyrilo-Methodius era, are: 1. The ''Kijevske Iisty" (Kijev letters) from the tenth · century (remains of a Missal according to the Latin rite) ; 2. the "Prai.ske zlomky" (Prague Fragments) from the eleventh century (remains of a Missal accordiing to the Greek, that is, the Eastern rite); 3. ''Zivot Konstan.tinov" (The Life of Constantine) ; the oldest manuscript is a Russian copy from the fifteenth century; 4. "tivot Mefud.01V" (The Life of Methodi,us) ; the oldest is the Russian copy from the twelfth century; 5. "Legenda o sv. Vaclavovi" (The Legend of St. Wenceslaus) - the oldest is the Croatian-Glagofitic copy from the 14th century; 6. "Homilie Gregora. Vel1keho" (The Homilies of Gregory; The Great) - the oldest is the Russian copy £rom the 13th century; 7. "Kazeii pred spoved'ou" (Lnstruction Before Confession) - preserved in the "Frizinske pamiatky" (The Freisingen Souvenirs>, Vol. 2, from the 10th century; 8. Pr:ayers for various occasions (20) . The .Slovaks, rightly proud of their Cyrilo.JMethodius heritage, are determined to let the world know it in 1963, when, wherever they are, they will solemnly commemorate the 1100th anniversary of the advent of the saintly brothers, Cyril and Methodius, to the homeland of their forefathers, the Great Moravian Empire of the Slovak sovereigns Rastislav, Svatopluk rund Mojmir. REFERENCES 1. J . Drrugos-Al:zbetincan. Kde posobili sv. Cyril a Metod? - JiEDNIOTA, Middle town , Pa., 1963 , p . 46. Kalendar SLOVAKIA 34 2, Dr. Frant. Hrusovsky : Slovenski Vladari, 0brana Press, Scranton, J>a., 1948, p. 208. 3. Joseph M. Kirschbaum : Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of <Central Europe, Robert Speller & !Sons, New Yol'k, 1960, p. 18. 4. Pavel Jozef !:§afarik: Slovanake staroiltnos tl, Praigue, 1837, pp. 794-95. 5. Fr. Hrusovsky : Slovenske dejiny, Matica Slovenaka, Turc. sv. !Martin, 1940, pp. 32-46; Gil1bert L. Oddo: Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & Sons, Ne1W York, 1960, PP. 12-26; Joseph M. Kirsch,baum , op. cit., pp. 14-23; Jozef ~kultety: Nehailte l!.ud Moj! l'Ilure. sv. Martin, 1928, pp. 2-20 (transl. by 0 . D. Koref.f: Sketches From Slovak History, Jednota Printery, Middletmvn , Pa., 1930, pp. 10-39). 6. Josef Dobrovsky : lnstltutione s linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 1822. 7. Fr. Jemelk.a: Putnik cyrllometod ejaky, Trnava, Slovakia, Aug.-Sept. 1947, pp. 137-138. 8. ,.bidem. 9. Vatroslav Jagic: Archlv fUr Slavlache Philologie, 1875-1920. 10. LU!bor Niederle, Slovanake Staro!ltnoa tl, 1902. 11. Jeme1ka: op , cit. 12. IR. G. A. De Bray: Gulde to the Slavonic Languages, London, and New York, 1951, p. 1. 13. A. Leskien: Handbuch der altbulgaris chen (altkirchen -slavischen ) Sprache, Heidel1b erg, 1919, p. XX!I. 14. Jemelka : op. cit.; Dr.Eugen Pa.uliny: Dejlny Splaovnej Slovenclny , ISlovenska Akademia Vied a Umeni, Bratislava, 1948, in which we read (,p. 17): "The !irst literary languaJge of our forefathers , rwhich can be regarded as a national literary language, was Old Slovak ("staroslov enclna"), which had its origin in the Macedonian dialect (ISou:th Slovanic) used in the area of Thessaloni ca ()Solun). In the oldest .Slovanic sources this langua,ge is called "Jenzyk alovenakyi, " and in the Latin sources of that time "lingua sclavinisca , sclavinlca, sclavina." 15. :Pavel Jozef $airarik: op. cit.; R. G. A. De Bray; op_ cit., p. 194. 16. IR.G.A. De Bray: op. cit., p. 1. 17. !Rev. Cyril J . Potocek : Saints Cyril and Methodius, New York, 1941, pp. 64, 124-127; Dr. John Rekem: The Origin and Development of the Slovak Language, SLOVtAK'IA, Middletown , Pa., Vol. lll, .March-Jun e, 1962, p, 2; Jan Stanislav: Kultura atarych Slovakov, Bratislava, 1944; Kalendar Jednota, 1915, !Middletow n, Pa., p, 140. 18. iR.G.IA.. De Bray: op, cit. p. 1; Kalendar Jednota, op. cit., p. 141. 19. Eugen Pauliny: op_ cit., p. 17. 20. Rev. Jan PoruJbaky: K Stemu Vyrociu Literarnej Slovenciny , !Scranton, Pa., 1944-, pp. 50-64; A. V. Isacenko : Jazyk a povod Frizlnskych pamiatok, Bratislava, 1943 - used by Eugen Pauliny, ,who reproduces several reconstruct ed texts and tra.n-slations in 01). cit., pp. 19..;!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 Language of Sts. Cyril and Methodius Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobák Slovakia, Vol. 13, No. 1 (36), March 1963 pp. 29-34 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 1963 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6a8a09c216e7b7661efe6c3de1a0d511.pdf b14e793df6c682021c427c97b9b4dde8 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA n ffiHE)RE DID ST. METHODIUS DIE? P.A. H'ROBAK All attempts to ascertain just exactly where St. Methodius breathed his last and where he was buried have thus far failed. However, we do know that he died on April 6, 885. It seems that at the time of his death it was generally known where St. Methodius, the apostle of the Slova;ks, had his Archbishopric, but no one thought it necessary to note the exact location. St. Methodius, according to historical sources, died i,n Great Moravia, where he was also buried. The center or nucleus of that empire was Slovakia, which included at that time Trans-.Danubian Pannonia. The question of the location of St. Method's grave came out in the open in 1885, when the millenium of his death was commemorated. At that time many historians and theologians, particularly those of Mora;via, claimed that Velehrad in Moravia was the place where Methodius not only died, but also was the seat of his ecclesiastical province. His Eminence, Fridrich Cardinal Furstenberg, Archbishop of Olomouc, issued a pastoral letter on December 25, 1884, on the occasion of the l,000th anniversary of the death of St. Methodius in which he said: "However, visit and this your Archbishop requests - the place where, according to tradition, the holy body of your apostle is hidden: make a visit to Velehrad in 1885 ... " In the pastoral letter, issued by the Bishop of Brno on December 115, 1884, we find the statement: ",S t. Methodius died and was buried in Moravia." The exact place of his grave, however, is not given; Velehrad is not even mentiooed. Quite underatandably, the community of Velehrad had its "Central Jubilee Committee" which issued a call to all people to come to Velehrad "where our Apostle parted with world." The ,p roclamation was signed by over two hundred individuals. On February 22, 1885, the Cardinal-Arch1bishop of �14 SLOVAKIA Prague, the Bishop of Kralovy Hradec, the Bishop of Litomerice, and the Bishop of Budejovice issued a joint pastoral letter in which they exhorted theiT faithful to make a pilgrimage to Velehrad, where, according to tradition, St. Methodius was buried. During the height of the celebrations, honoring the l,OOOth anniversary of the death of St. Methodius, an article relevant to the death of St. Methodius, written by the Ruthenian Canon Petrusevic of r..vov, reacted like a bombshell. He told the people of Moravia to look for the grave of St. Methodius not at Velehrad, but at Mosburg across the Danube. 1 Matej Procha~ of Moravia angrily expressed his dissent and vituperated Canon Petrusevic, telling him that only by a magic wand could he change Modoblll'lgus into Mosruburg. 2 In his book, which was published a bit later, Prochazka descri-b ed the last farewell of St. Methodius in the Velehrad Cathedral to his priests and people, and to Arch-Prince Svatopluk, but does not have anything to say about the grave of St. Methodius. 3 Morie Kraemer, writing a·b out St. Methodius's grave, first sought his grave in Rome, where, of course, he did not find it, and then, following the Bulgarian legend (by Konsnantm Galejdovic) and fragmentary reports from the book "About the Conversion of the Corutanians," he sought it in Moravia. 4 Kraemer thought the "great Moravian Cathedral," mentioned in Dobrovsky's: '\Mahrische Legende" (Moravian Legends), referred to Velehrad. But the fact is that no one can prove that St. Methodius's grave was there either in 1885 or is located there even now. Snopek fared no better with the question: "Where is St. Methodius, the Slovanic Apostole, buried ?" 5 He mentions the Bulgarian manuscript, discovered by Viktor J. Grigorovic, which describes the labors of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. This manuscript, supposed to have been written in the tenth century, refers to an inhabitant of Velehrad as a "velegraidanin". But even if we allow that it does, we still cannot definitely claim that the Velehrad referred to is the one in Moravia, ,b ecause in the ninth and tenth centuries there were many "Velehrads" - and we know that �SLOVAKIA 15 the Velehrad in Moravia. did not exist either in the ninth or the tenth century, inasmuch as historical records mention nothing a:bout it until the thirteenth century. But the "Velehradists" are stubborn and proud people; they still claim, without being able to offer any proof, that St. Methodius is buried at Velehrad in Moravia. Dudik was another of those who sought the grave of St. Methodius in Rome, but could not find it there. 6 Alexander Bruckner looked for his remains in the mighty fortress of Rastislav at "Grossburg" but did not indicate •t he exact location. 7 Anton Sin8 claims that Rab was the seat of government for Rastislav and Mojmir I, and that there, too, rest the remains of St. Methodius. His claim, however, is not supported by historical and archeological proofs. Dr. Robenek wrote that St. Methodi'llS is buried in Ostrihom.9 In 1822, when the foundations were being dug for the present basilica. there, a stone grave was uncovered which is still unidentified. Robenek thought it might be the grave of St. Methodius. Now we know definitely that St. Methodius labored for the most part in Slovakia and in Traru!.J)anubia, in former P8lll.Ilonia. Why then should we not assume that he could be buried in the territory inha,bited by the ancient Slovaks? History tells us that St. Methodius was in western Slovakia, in Nitra, where he installed his suffragan, Bishop Wiching. We also know that, in the ninth century, Devin was the impregnaible fortress of both Rastislav and Svatopluk. This fortress secured the independence of Grea;t Moravia and terrorized the F1:ranko-Germans. Devin, near Bratislava, was the subject of ma.ny historical and archeological treatises, some of which were even authored by Czechs. 10 Professor Dr. Jan Eisner came upon a huge Slov,anic burial ground in the vicinity of Devin which dates baok to the 6th or 7th century and contained many valuable archeological and historical relics. The excavations showed that Slovans (the ancient Slovaks) and Ava.rs were buried in individual graves with full armor and many other objects. 1He uncovered several hundred graves which indicated that the dead were buried according to pagan fashion, that is, before the Christian era in :Slovakia. These discoveries proved that this fortress must have existed long before �SLOVAKIA 16 Great Moravia and, therefore, had to exist during the life of the Great Moravian :IDmpire. Dr. Eisner also uncovered a Christian burial ground in the vicinity of Devin, where the dead were buried next to each other and on top of one another, just as they were in the cemetery near the Nitra church. So we can claim that there must have been a church cemetery at Devin. We must assume, on the basis of what history and archeology have uncovered thus far, that St. Methodius is buried either at Nitra or Devin, in the heart of the Great Moravia which was inhabited by the ancient Slovaks. REFERENCES 1. "Bohemia" No. 83, March 25, 1885; and "Hist. Blatter," Vol. 97, pp. 120-. 2. ••C•aaopia Katolickeho Duchovenstva," 1885, !ILi, p. 156; and "Blahovest," 1885, p . 156. 3. ·Matej Prochazka: "Zivot sv. Methoda," Brno, 1885, p. 208. 4. In "Cech," 188'5, No. 148 amd following ,numbers. 5. In "Obzor," Vol. XV1I, No. 7. 1893; P'P- 97-100. 6. J). Dudik: "lter Romanum," Vienna, 18'5'5, Vol. I, p. 63. 7. "Die Wahrhelt iiber die Slavenapostel," TiiJbill!gen, 1913, ii. 101. 8. A. !§In: "Omyl Dejin," Kyjov, 1926, p. 223. 9. In "H lidka," 1928, NO. 3. 10. J. L. Cervinka: "Devin a Velehrad," Kromefiz, 1902; Jozef Zavadil: "Devin a Nitra," Kromefiz, 1912; Dr. Em. l§i,mek: ''Devin," Pa•m atky archeologickt:5, 1920, Vols. 1, 2. 11. Jan Eisner: "Slovensko v praveku," Bratislava, 1933. RED CZECHS win another first: recenUy they alllllounced making tJhe firs,t gadget to jam TV programs, especially from Vienna, that does a ,real jamming job. They'•r e not doing 'badly for Castro, either - and the Reds of Laos, Africa, Vietnam, etc. Jamming and killing real demQcracy has been th e i r business si!nce 1918! 3(! 3(! 3(! awairded a doctora,te in Ecclesiastical and Civil Law, and the fo/1Iowi,n g ye-air a '<H•ploma for successfully concluding bis study on the Law of the Ela.stern Oburc'b.. In December, 1961, Father Faltin became a CQunsellor for ,t he Sacred Roman Rota. 3(! lit! 3(! Americans of Slovak descent will be in Rome, Italy, for the dedica- Rev. Daniel Faltin, 0.F.M.Conv., tion o'f the Institute of SS. Cyril wa,s named a,ssistant secretary of Mld Methodius on Sept. 15, 1963. the Papal Commission !or the Co- A delegartion of several hundred, dification of EcclesLastical Law for the Eastern Church. Father Faltin was born April 21, 1927, oi.n Kurimjany, near Levo-ca, Slovakia. He studiw hi Rome since 19-50 and received his doctorate in rtheology in 1955. In 1959, Father Fa!ltin wrus led by tile Most Rev. Andrew G. Grutka, Bi-shop of Gary, Ind., will be i-n Roane from Sept. 11-1'5 to commemora,te the 1100.th annivers,airy of the advent or the Slovak Apost-Les to the ancient homeland of ,t he Slovaks, Great Moravia. � SLOVAKIA n ffiHE)RE DID ST. METHODIUS DIE? P.A. H'ROBAK All attempts to ascertain just exactly where St. Methodius breathed his last and where he was buried have thus far failed. However, we do know that he died on April 6, 885. It seems that at the time of his death it was generally known where St. Methodius, the apostle of the Slova;ks, had his Archbishopric, but no one thought it necessary to note the exact location. St. Methodius, according to historical sources, died i,n Great Moravia, where he was also buried. The center or nucleus of that empire was Slovakia, which included at that time Trans-.Danubian Pannonia. The question of the location of St. Method's grave came out in the open in 1885, when the millenium of his death was commemorated. At that time many historians and theologians, particularly those of Mora;via, claimed that Velehrad in Moravia was the place where Methodius not only died, but also was the seat of his ecclesiastical province. His Eminence, Fridrich Cardinal Furstenberg, Archbishop of Olomouc, issued a pastoral letter on December 25, 1884, on the occasion of the l,000th anniversary of the death of St. Methodius in which he said: "However, visit and this your Archbishop requests - the place where, according to tradition, the holy body of your apostle is hidden: make a visit to Velehrad in 1885 ... " In the pastoral letter, issued by the Bishop of Brno on December 115, 1884, we find the statement: ",S t. Methodius died and was buried in Moravia." The exact place of his grave, however, is not given; Velehrad is not even mentiooed. Quite underatandably, the community of Velehrad had its "Central Jubilee Committee" which issued a call to all people to come to Velehrad "where our Apostle parted with world." The ,p roclamation was signed by over two hundred individuals. On February 22, 1885, the Cardinal-Arch1bishop of �14 SLOVAKIA Prague, the Bishop of Kralovy Hradec, the Bishop of Litomerice, and the Bishop of Budejovice issued a joint pastoral letter in which they exhorted theiT faithful to make a pilgrimage to Velehrad, where, according to tradition, St. Methodius was buried. During the height of the celebrations, honoring the l,OOOth anniversary of the death of St. Methodius, an article relevant to the death of St. Methodius, written by the Ruthenian Canon Petrusevic of r..vov, reacted like a bombshell. He told the people of Moravia to look for the grave of St. Methodius not at Velehrad, but at Mosburg across the Danube. 1 Matej Procha~ of Moravia angrily expressed his dissent and vituperated Canon Petrusevic, telling him that only by a magic wand could he change Modoblll'lgus into Mosruburg. 2 In his book, which was published a bit later, Prochazka descri-b ed the last farewell of St. Methodius in the Velehrad Cathedral to his priests and people, and to Arch-Prince Svatopluk, but does not have anything to say about the grave of St. Methodius. 3 Morie Kraemer, writing a·b out St. Methodius's grave, first sought his grave in Rome, where, of course, he did not find it, and then, following the Bulgarian legend (by Konsnantm Galejdovic) and fragmentary reports from the book "About the Conversion of the Corutanians," he sought it in Moravia. 4 Kraemer thought the "great Moravian Cathedral," mentioned in Dobrovsky's: '\Mahrische Legende" (Moravian Legends), referred to Velehrad. But the fact is that no one can prove that St. Methodius's grave was there either in 1885 or is located there even now. Snopek fared no better with the question: "Where is St. Methodius, the Slovanic Apostole, buried ?" 5 He mentions the Bulgarian manuscript, discovered by Viktor J. Grigorovic, which describes the labors of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. This manuscript, supposed to have been written in the tenth century, refers to an inhabitant of Velehrad as a "velegraidanin". But even if we allow that it does, we still cannot definitely claim that the Velehrad referred to is the one in Moravia, ,b ecause in the ninth and tenth centuries there were many "Velehrads" - and we know that �SLOVAKIA 15 the Velehrad in Moravia. did not exist either in the ninth or the tenth century, inasmuch as historical records mention nothing a:bout it until the thirteenth century. But the "Velehradists" are stubborn and proud people; they still claim, without being able to offer any proof, that St. Methodius is buried at Velehrad in Moravia. Dudik was another of those who sought the grave of St. Methodius in Rome, but could not find it there. 6 Alexander Bruckner looked for his remains in the mighty fortress of Rastislav at "Grossburg" but did not indicate •t he exact location. 7 Anton Sin8 claims that Rab was the seat of government for Rastislav and Mojmir I, and that there, too, rest the remains of St. Methodius. His claim, however, is not supported by historical and archeological proofs. Dr. Robenek wrote that St. Methodi'llS is buried in Ostrihom.9 In 1822, when the foundations were being dug for the present basilica. there, a stone grave was uncovered which is still unidentified. Robenek thought it might be the grave of St. Methodius. Now we know definitely that St. Methodius labored for the most part in Slovakia and in Traru!.J)anubia, in former P8lll.Ilonia. Why then should we not assume that he could be buried in the territory inha,bited by the ancient Slovaks? History tells us that St. Methodius was in western Slovakia, in Nitra, where he installed his suffragan, Bishop Wiching. We also know that, in the ninth century, Devin was the impregnaible fortress of both Rastislav and Svatopluk. This fortress secured the independence of Grea;t Moravia and terrorized the F1:ranko-Germans. Devin, near Bratislava, was the subject of ma.ny historical and archeological treatises, some of which were even authored by Czechs. 10 Professor Dr. Jan Eisner came upon a huge Slov,anic burial ground in the vicinity of Devin which dates baok to the 6th or 7th century and contained many valuable archeological and historical relics. The excavations showed that Slovans (the ancient Slovaks) and Ava.rs were buried in individual graves with full armor and many other objects. 1He uncovered several hundred graves which indicated that the dead were buried according to pagan fashion, that is, before the Christian era in :Slovakia. These discoveries proved that this fortress must have existed long before �SLOVAKIA 16 Great Moravia and, therefore, had to exist during the life of the Great Moravian :IDmpire. Dr. Eisner also uncovered a Christian burial ground in the vicinity of Devin, where the dead were buried next to each other and on top of one another, just as they were in the cemetery near the Nitra church. So we can claim that there must have been a church cemetery at Devin. We must assume, on the basis of what history and archeology have uncovered thus far, that St. Methodius is buried either at Nitra or Devin, in the heart of the Great Moravia which was inhabited by the ancient Slovaks. REFERENCES 1. "Bohemia" No. 83, March 25, 1885; and "Hist. Blatter," Vol. 97, pp. 120-. 2. ••C•aaopia Katolickeho Duchovenstva," 1885, !ILi, p. 156; and "Blahovest," 1885, p . 156. 3. ·Matej Prochazka: "Zivot sv. Methoda," Brno, 1885, p. 208. 4. In "Cech," 188'5, No. 148 amd following ,numbers. 5. In "Obzor," Vol. XV1I, No. 7. 1893; P'P- 97-100. 6. J). Dudik: "lter Romanum," Vienna, 18'5'5, Vol. I, p. 63. 7. "Die Wahrhelt iiber die Slavenapostel," TiiJbill!gen, 1913, ii. 101. 8. A. !§In: "Omyl Dejin," Kyjov, 1926, p. 223. 9. In "H lidka," 1928, NO. 3. 10. J. L. Cervinka: "Devin a Velehrad," Kromefiz, 1902; Jozef Zavadil: "Devin a Nitra," Kromefiz, 1912; Dr. Em. l§i,mek: ''Devin," Pa•m atky archeologickt:5, 1920, Vols. 1, 2. 11. Jan Eisner: "Slovensko v praveku," Bratislava, 1933. RED CZECHS win another first: recenUy they alllllounced making tJhe firs,t gadget to jam TV programs, especially from Vienna, that does a ,real jamming job. They'•r e not doing 'badly for Castro, either - and the Reds of Laos, Africa, Vietnam, etc. Jamming and killing real demQcracy has been th e i r business si!nce 1918! 3(! 3(! 3(! awairded a doctora,te in Ecclesiastical and Civil Law, and the fo/1Iowi,n g ye-air a '<H•ploma for successfully concluding bis study on the Law of the Ela.stern Oburc'b.. In December, 1961, Father Faltin became a CQunsellor for ,t he Sacred Roman Rota. 3(! lit! 3(! Americans of Slovak descent will be in Rome, Italy, for the dedica- Rev. Daniel Faltin, 0.F.M.Conv., tion o'f the Institute of SS. Cyril wa,s named a,ssistant secretary of Mld Methodius on Sept. 15, 1963. the Papal Commission !or the Co- A delegartion of several hundred, dification of EcclesLastical Law for the Eastern Church. Father Faltin was born April 21, 1927, oi.n Kurimjany, near Levo-ca, Slovakia. He studiw hi Rome since 19-50 and received his doctorate in rtheology in 1955. In 1959, Father Fa!ltin wrus led by tile Most Rev. Andrew G. Grutka, Bi-shop of Gary, Ind., will be i-n Roane from Sept. 11-1'5 to commemora,te the 1100.th annivers,airy of the advent or the Slovak Apost-Les to the ancient homeland of ,t he Slovaks, Great Moravia. � 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 1963, Vol. 13 Description An account of the resource Issue 1 (No. 36), March 1963. 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 1963 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 n ffiHE)RE DID ST. METHODIUS DIE? P.A. H'ROBAK All attempts to ascertain just exactly where St. Methodius breathed his last and where he was buried have thus far failed. However, we do know that he died on April 6, 885. It seems that at the time of his death it was generally known where St. Methodius, the apostle of the Slova;ks, had his Archbishopric, but no one thought it necessary to note the exact location. St. Methodius, according to historical sources, died i,n Great Moravia, where he was also buried. The center or nucleus of that empire was Slovakia, which included at that time Trans-.Danubian Pannonia. The question of the location of St. Method's grave came out in the open in 1885, when the millenium of his death was commemorated. At that time many historians and theologians, particularly those of Mora;via, claimed that Velehrad in Moravia was the place where Methodius not only died, but also was the seat of his ecclesiastical province. His Eminence, Fridrich Cardinal Furstenberg, Archbishop of Olomouc, issued a pastoral letter on December 25, 1884, on the occasion of the l,000th anniversary of the death of St. Methodius in which he said: "However, visit and this your Archbishop requests - the place where, according to tradition, the holy body of your apostle is hidden: make a visit to Velehrad in 1885 ... " In the pastoral letter, issued by the Bishop of Brno on December 115, 1884, we find the statement: ",S t. Methodius died and was buried in Moravia." The exact place of his grave, however, is not given; Velehrad is not even mentiooed. Quite underatandably, the community of Velehrad had its "Central Jubilee Committee" which issued a call to all people to come to Velehrad "where our Apostle parted with world." The ,p roclamation was signed by over two hundred individuals. On February 22, 1885, the Cardinal-Arch1bishop of 14 SLOVAKIA Prague, the Bishop of Kralovy Hradec, the Bishop of Litomerice, and the Bishop of Budejovice issued a joint pastoral letter in which they exhorted theiT faithful to make a pilgrimage to Velehrad, where, according to tradition, St. Methodius was buried. During the height of the celebrations, honoring the l,OOOth anniversary of the death of St. Methodius, an article relevant to the death of St. Methodius, written by the Ruthenian Canon Petrusevic of r..vov, reacted like a bombshell. He told the people of Moravia to look for the grave of St. Methodius not at Velehrad, but at Mosburg across the Danube. 1 Matej Procha~ of Moravia angrily expressed his dissent and vituperated Canon Petrusevic, telling him that only by a magic wand could he change Modoblll'lgus into Mosruburg. 2 In his book, which was published a bit later, Prochazka descri-b ed the last farewell of St. Methodius in the Velehrad Cathedral to his priests and people, and to Arch-Prince Svatopluk, but does not have anything to say about the grave of St. Methodius. 3 Morie Kraemer, writing a·b out St. Methodius's grave, first sought his grave in Rome, where, of course, he did not find it, and then, following the Bulgarian legend (by Konsnantm Galejdovic) and fragmentary reports from the book "About the Conversion of the Corutanians," he sought it in Moravia. 4 Kraemer thought the "great Moravian Cathedral," mentioned in Dobrovsky's: '\Mahrische Legende" (Moravian Legends), referred to Velehrad. But the fact is that no one can prove that St. Methodius's grave was there either in 1885 or is located there even now. Snopek fared no better with the question: "Where is St. Methodius, the Slovanic Apostole, buried ?" 5 He mentions the Bulgarian manuscript, discovered by Viktor J. Grigorovic, which describes the labors of Sts. Cyril and Methodius. This manuscript, supposed to have been written in the tenth century, refers to an inhabitant of Velehrad as a "velegraidanin". But even if we allow that it does, we still cannot definitely claim that the Velehrad referred to is the one in Moravia, ,b ecause in the ninth and tenth centuries there were many "Velehrads" - and we know that SLOVAKIA 15 the Velehrad in Moravia. did not exist either in the ninth or the tenth century, inasmuch as historical records mention nothing a:bout it until the thirteenth century. But the "Velehradists" are stubborn and proud people; they still claim, without being able to offer any proof, that St. Methodius is buried at Velehrad in Moravia. Dudik was another of those who sought the grave of St. Methodius in Rome, but could not find it there. 6 Alexander Bruckner looked for his remains in the mighty fortress of Rastislav at "Grossburg" but did not indicate •t he exact location. 7 Anton Sin8 claims that Rab was the seat of government for Rastislav and Mojmir I, and that there, too, rest the remains of St. Methodius. His claim, however, is not supported by historical and archeological proofs. Dr. Robenek wrote that St. Methodi'llS is buried in Ostrihom.9 In 1822, when the foundations were being dug for the present basilica. there, a stone grave was uncovered which is still unidentified. Robenek thought it might be the grave of St. Methodius. Now we know definitely that St. Methodius labored for the most part in Slovakia and in Traru!.J)anubia, in former P8lll.Ilonia. Why then should we not assume that he could be buried in the territory inha,bited by the ancient Slovaks? History tells us that St. Methodius was in western Slovakia, in Nitra, where he installed his suffragan, Bishop Wiching. We also know that, in the ninth century, Devin was the impregnaible fortress of both Rastislav and Svatopluk. This fortress secured the independence of Grea;t Moravia and terrorized the F1:ranko-Germans. Devin, near Bratislava, was the subject of ma.ny historical and archeological treatises, some of which were even authored by Czechs. 10 Professor Dr. Jan Eisner came upon a huge Slov,anic burial ground in the vicinity of Devin which dates baok to the 6th or 7th century and contained many valuable archeological and historical relics. The excavations showed that Slovans (the ancient Slovaks) and Ava.rs were buried in individual graves with full armor and many other objects. 1He uncovered several hundred graves which indicated that the dead were buried according to pagan fashion, that is, before the Christian era in :Slovakia. These discoveries proved that this fortress must have existed long before SLOVAKIA 16 Great Moravia and, therefore, had to exist during the life of the Great Moravian :IDmpire. Dr. Eisner also uncovered a Christian burial ground in the vicinity of Devin, where the dead were buried next to each other and on top of one another, just as they were in the cemetery near the Nitra church. So we can claim that there must have been a church cemetery at Devin. We must assume, on the basis of what history and archeology have uncovered thus far, that St. Methodius is buried either at Nitra or Devin, in the heart of the Great Moravia which was inhabited by the ancient Slovaks. REFERENCES 1. "Bohemia" No. 83, March 25, 1885; and "Hist. Blatter," Vol. 97, pp. 120-. 2. ••C•aaopia Katolickeho Duchovenstva," 1885, !ILi, p. 156; and "Blahovest," 1885, p . 156. 3. ·Matej Prochazka: "Zivot sv. Methoda," Brno, 1885, p. 208. 4. In "Cech," 188'5, No. 148 amd following ,numbers. 5. In "Obzor," Vol. XV1I, No. 7. 1893; P'P- 97-100. 6. J). Dudik: "lter Romanum," Vienna, 18'5'5, Vol. I, p. 63. 7. "Die Wahrhelt iiber die Slavenapostel," TiiJbill!gen, 1913, ii. 101. 8. A. !§In: "Omyl Dejin," Kyjov, 1926, p. 223. 9. In "H lidka," 1928, NO. 3. 10. J. L. Cervinka: "Devin a Velehrad," Kromefiz, 1902; Jozef Zavadil: "Devin a Nitra," Kromefiz, 1912; Dr. Em. l§i,mek: ''Devin," Pa•m atky archeologickt:5, 1920, Vols. 1, 2. 11. Jan Eisner: "Slovensko v praveku," Bratislava, 1933. RED CZECHS win another first: recenUy they alllllounced making tJhe firs,t gadget to jam TV programs, especially from Vienna, that does a ,real jamming job. They'•r e not doing 'badly for Castro, either - and the Reds of Laos, Africa, Vietnam, etc. Jamming and killing real demQcracy has been th e i r business si!nce 1918! 3(! 3(! 3(! awairded a doctora,te in Ecclesiastical and Civil Law, and the fo/1Iowi,n g ye-air a '<H•ploma for successfully concluding bis study on the Law of the Ela.stern Oburc'b.. In December, 1961, Father Faltin became a CQunsellor for ,t he Sacred Roman Rota. 3(! lit! 3(! Americans of Slovak descent will be in Rome, Italy, for the dedica- Rev. Daniel Faltin, 0.F.M.Conv., tion o'f the Institute of SS. Cyril wa,s named a,ssistant secretary of Mld Methodius on Sept. 15, 1963. the Papal Commission !or the Co- A delegartion of several hundred, dification of EcclesLastical Law for the Eastern Church. Father Faltin was born April 21, 1927, oi.n Kurimjany, near Levo-ca, Slovakia. He studiw hi Rome since 19-50 and received his doctorate in rtheology in 1955. In 1959, Father Fa!ltin wrus led by tile Most Rev. Andrew G. Grutka, Bi-shop of Gary, Ind., will be i-n Roane from Sept. 11-1'5 to commemora,te the 1100.th annivers,airy of the advent or the Slovak Apost-Les to the ancient homeland of ,t he Slovaks, Great Moravia.  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 Where Did St. Methodius Die? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobák Slovakia, Vol. 13, No. 1 (36), March 1963 pp. 13-16 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 1963 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/c45f1d2c56012b6738f56b0c792ac597.pdf 0b12b1071ee898dc55ee4e6734578df8 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. XIII MARCH, 1963 NO. 1 (36) HOW OHBIS'DANITY CAME TO THE SLOVAKS P.A. HROBAK Christianity came to the pagan Slovaks slowly and gradually. And there are no indications that the Slovaks, once Christianized, openly rebelled against Christianity and reverted to paganism. This is evidence that the SlovaJks of the early 9th century were under the influence of Christianity for several generations. They were converted to Christianity by missionaries who came from countries in which Christianity was already sufficiently developed and prepared for missionary activities among their pagan neighbors. There are certain indications that missionaries from the southern countries tried to spread Christianity on the territory of the Slovans (Slov,anic peoples) along the Danube River rwho were subjugated by the Avars before the end of the sixth century. The centers of this missionary activity were the ·b ishoprics and monasteries situated on the Adriatic Sea or in the northern countries of the Balkan Peninsula, where remnants of an ecclesiastical organization have been preserved. 1 But systematic missionary activity in this area, which included the territory of the ancient Slova.iks, was developed by missionaries from Bavaria. Christianity came to Bavaria both on the Danube and on the Rhine through soldiers and merchants. 2 Then, as is well :known, at first Irish, and later Frankish and AngloSa.xJon missionaries sowed the seed of the Gospel in the hearu; of the rude warriors. Among those missionaries were: St. Kilian and his ,p upils Colonat (Coloman) and Totnan at WtiriJburg; in the Alpgau region !St. Magnus; at Ratisbon and Freising St. Rupert, St. Emuneram and St. Corbinian.3 Stricter regulations were introduced by Winfrid (St. Boniface), familiarly known as the "Apostle of the Germans." St. Columban came to Bavaria from France, while St. Gall :was active in southern Germany and in 612 settled in what later became Switzerland. �2 SLOVAKIA St. Co11binian, the Apostle of Central Bavaria, worked in and out of ·F lreising where there was an Irish monastery, the monks of which later foll!Ilded other monasteries, among them the one established in 769 at Innichen in the Tyrol. This latter monastery had the special task to spread Christianity in neighboring Corutania which was inhabited by the Slovenes (ISlovinci). The Irish bishop St. Emmeram resided in Regensburg where he built a monastery and became its abbot with the dignity of a bishop.t Because the city was situated on the Danube, on the road that connected Bavaria with the territory of the Danubian Slovanic peoples, it had all the prerequisites for missionary work among them. St. Rupert, Bishop of Worms, ba,ptized Duke Theodo of Bavaria, erected at Waldersee a church in honor of St. Peter, and at the end of the seventh century made Juvavum (Salzburg), where he found the ruins of Roman buildings, his episcopal seat.5 The monastery, which St. Rupert built there in honor of St. Peter, became an important center for the activity of the Irish monks in Bavaria. From the life history of St. Emmeram we learn that he did .plan to do mission wor,k among the A vars. He actually left Bavaria but on the advice of the Bavarian prince remained in Regensburg, so that he himself did not get to the territory of the A vars and the Slovans (Slovanic peoples) whom the Avars dominated. There is evidence, however, that some members of his group, or some Irish missionaries from the Regensburg monastery, did some missionary work there. 6 The first Christian church on Slovak territory, built by Prince Pribina at Nitra, was dedicated to St. E)mmeram. in 833. It is significant, too, that among the churches built ,b y Slovak rulers in the ninth century in Pannonia, there is one dedicated to St. Rupert, Bishop of Salzburg. 7 In the eighth century quite a few Benedictine monasteries were established in Bavaria and Austria. One of the most significant was the monastery at Tegernsee, whose members did missionary work among the Al,p ian Slovans and also founded the monastery of St. Hippolitus in Lower Austria. It appears that it was this monastery of St. Hippolitus that was charged with the task of doing missionary work on the territory of Slovakia: on the slope of Mt. Zobor, near Nitra - the seat of Slovak princes, a monastery �SLOVAKIA 3 was built and dedicated to St. llippolitus. We do not know exactly when this monastery was founded, but there are indications that it was early in the 9th century. The Mt. Zobor Benedictine monastery wery well could have been a mission station of the Bavarian missionaries who labored in ancient Slovakia. 8 The Irish mission, which developed in Bavaria and extended to the lands occupied by the Avars and Slovans, had no political character; there was no political power backing it. Bavarian missionaries, however, alongside their religious and ecclesiastical mission fulfilled also a political role: there activity, especially at the end of the 8th century, had the full support of the Frankish Empire. Working out of Salzburg, missionaries ,b egan to develop their activity on the territory of the Slovanic tribes who had occupied the Danubian region and the eastern spurs of the Alps. In the beginning, while the Danubian Slovans ('Slovaks) were dominated by the Avars, the Salzburg missionaries worked more on the territory of the Corutanian Slovans (Slovenes-Slovinci) which was more accessible from Salzburg. The influence of Salzburg extended to Corutania already some time in the half of the eighth century, that is, in the very early years of the Bavarian ecclesiastical organization. It is more than probaJble that the Salzburg missionaries visited also other Slovanic provinces, especially Trans-Danubian Pannonia which was settled by Slovak tribes. They had to work cautiously ,a nd covertly, since the dominating Avars were .p agans.9 It is also very probable that missionaries from the Passau vicinity visited the Slovak tribes along the Danube and its tributaries. Some of the monasteries located near the banks of the Danube were devoted to mission work from their inception and it is very probable that they labored among the ancient Slovaks who suffered Avar hegemony. Of course, systematic and effective missionary activity could be developed by the Bavarian apostles only after the Frankish armies of Charles the Great (Charlemagne) subdued the Avars in the last decade of the eighth century and the Frankish Empire displayed a great interest in the extensive territory. Bishop Arno of Salzburg was entrusted by Charlemagne with the work of Christianizing the Avar- �4 SLOVAKIA Slovanic lands. When the latter suggested that Bishop Arno be elevated to an archbishop, Pope Leo m obliged in 798. 10 Letters, which the learned .Aibbot Alcuin wrote to the Archbishop of Sal~burg and to Charlemagne, reveal the preparations made for mission work among the Avars and Slovanic peoples; they learned their language to some extent, translated current prayers and the texts used for confession and baptism. The linguistic characteristics of these ancient literary souvenirs, probably from the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century, prove that Bavarian missionaries did la,,bor on the territory of the ancient Slovaks. 11 Salzburg fulfilled its mission role during the lifetime of Archbishop Arno and continued in it under his succes-sors. Naturally, the Salzburg missionaries developed their actilvity first of all on the territory that was most accessible to them. This was Trans-Danubian Pannonia, which was occupied for the most part by Slovwk tribes who in the southwestern part af this country had contacts with the Slovene tribes. Among the missionaries, who came from Sabiburg, were also missionary bishops who, by the authority af the Archbishop of Salzburg, exercised ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Pannonia. Bishop Deodoric was one of them; he labored in Pannonia also under Archbishop Arno's successor, Archbishop Adalram (&21-836). Later, during the lifetime of Archbishop Adalwin (859-873), Bishop Osbald was head of the mission work Pannonia. 12 After the victory of the Fra:n'ks over the A vars a new situation arose on the German-Slovanic border on the middle Danube. Charlemagne sought to Christianize the peoples he subjugated. On the territory occupied by the Frankish armies, after the defeat of the Avars, on both ban!ks of the middle Danube, the East Mark (Ostmark) was established, which became the immediate neighbor of the land accupied by the Slovaks. In comparison with the Germans, the SlovaJks, and all Slovans generally, lagged behind in their political and cultural development. 13 Reports of Frankish chroniclers began to speak in a clear language how individual Slovanic tribes were forced under the sovereignty of the Frankish kings. Accorrnng to these reports representatives of Slovanic tribes came to German towns to pay �SLOVAKIA fj tribute to the German king. Among the first Slovanic princes, representatives of the Slovak tribes were also present. The report of 8~5 relates about chieftains and messengers of all Slovans, who lived along the eastern border of the Frankish Empire. The report of 822 states that the Empire Assembly, called to Frankfurt by Louis the Pious, was attended also by representatives of the Czechs, Moravians, and even the Avars who still remained in Pa:nnonia. All delegations came with gifts, for Louis, which demonstrated that the Slovanic tribes rec.ognized the Gennan sovereign as their master. 14 The Slovaks in this report appear under the name of Moravians, because in those times thus were indicated the Slovanic tribes which had settled on both sides of the Morava River. They were the Slovak tribes which settled on the territories of present day Moravi,a and Slovakia and were also called "iSloveni." We do not know exactly how many tribes composed the Slovak Moravians, but we can assume that they formed a tribal alliance made up of several tribes. According to some reports there were eleven Slovak tribes north of the Danube. Besides these there also were several tribes on the southern bank, on the territory of Pannonia, but these were not called Moravians. 15 From available records, it would appear that at the beginning of the 9th century the Slovak tribes were divided into three groups. The western group occupied both sides of the Morava River and was, therefore, called Moravian. The eastern group, settled on the plains, valleys and basins of present-day .Slovakia, was indicated by the name "Sloveni." The third group, disrupted both by Avar hegemony and anti-Avar wars and settled on the territory of TransDanubian Pannonia, also belonged to the ''Sloveni". 16 The three groups formed one tribal alliance, united by a bond of common origin, close relationship and a common language, settled on connected territory on the middle Danube, appearing under a common name and endur.ing or sharing, at least partially and for a time, even a common historic lot. History tells us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg came to Slowlkia to bless a church in Nitra, the seat of the Slovak Prince Pribina. Since he was Archbishop of �6 SLOVAKIA Saraburg from 821 to 836, this event must have taken place within those yeaTS, most .p robably a,'bout 833. The report of this blessing for the first time mentions the name of a Slovak ruler, the seat of Slovak princes and the Christian church built on the territory of ,p resent-day Slov~kia. There were, however, more churches in Pannonia, where the Slovaks had accepted Christianity at the beginning of the 9th century through the Bavarian missionaries. The greatest significaJllce of this event, however, is that it mar,ks the entrance of the Slovaiks into Christian society, the society of the cultured nations of Europe. The Slovaks are, therefore, not only the oldest Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube B~in, but also the oldest cultured nation on the middle Danube. 17 While Prince Pribina united the SlovaJk tribes of pre.sent day Slovakia and was related to the Slovak tribes of Pannonia, Prince Mojmiir united the Slovak tribes on both sides of the Morava River. Pribina's seat of government was the Nitra Castle, while that of Mojmir was Devin. Mojmir's people were Christianized by the Bavarian missionaries who came from the monasteries of the Passau bishopric. In time a struggle for supremacy took place and in the end Mojmir won out, banishing Pri-bina from Nitra. Mojmir thus became the ruler of all the Slovak tribes above the north bank of the Danube. Neighbol'ling on the exipanding Frankish Empire, the Slova!ks recognized the need for unification in the interest of their own security and welfare. Mojmir, the stronger Oif the two Slovak princes, imposed his will on Plribina without bloodshed and, it would appear, with thte a,p.proval of the Frankish sovereign. Pribina, his wife and son, Kocel', escorted by several magnates, were given asylum by Count Ratbod, Margrave of the Eastern Mark (Ostmark). There he sought the aid of the Frankish sovereign to regain his Nitra principality.18 &successful and falling out with Ratbod, Pribina, still intent on regainig his former principality, sougtht the aid of the Bulgairians, but to no avaiil. Then he went to Ratimir, the Croatian prince, who ruled the country along the Sava River, but he, too, could not help him, because he had his own troubles with the ,F rankish king. In 838, King Louis the German ordered Ratbod to subdue the troublesome �SLOVAKIA 7 subjects of Raltimir. In the battle that ensued, Ratimir was fortunate to escape, as was Pribina and his retinue. Wearied and dejected, Pribina crossed the Sava River and asked Count Salach of Corutania to attempt a reconciliation with Ratbod. 19 After Pribina made his peace with Ratbod, the latter used his influence witill King Louis the German who entrusted Pribina (in 847) with a principality in Pannonia, near Blatno. There Pribina built a formidable citadel which was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). Prince Pribina build churches and endowed monasteries, and often welcomed the h-chbishop of Salzburg to his court.20 His son Kocef continued in his work: 32 churches were built in Pannonia. m the meantime, ~arlmann, oldest son of Louis the German, allied himse1f with Rastislav, ruler of Great Moravia and revolted against his father. Pribina remained loyal to the dcing. He lost his life in 861 in one of the many skirmishes with warriors of Rastislav, Slovak prince and Mojmir's nephew, who governed the Nitra principality.21 MojmiiI''s success in organizing a strong principality, uniting Slovak tribes and gaining the favor of the magnates, roused the suspicions of the Frankish king. AB a result Mojmir was unseated in 846 by King Louis the German, who then made Rastislav the governor of Great Moravia, the land of the Slovaks. .Prince Rastislav continued in his uncle's footsteps, building a stronger and mightier Great Moravia, which Kmg Louis eventually regarded with growing concern. The result was mutual distrust which led to the invasion of Rastislav's territory by the Frankish king in the spring of 855, when the Bavarian .Alrmy under Count Ernst invia.ded the Ozech lands. Louis attacked Rastislav's anny, but was repulsed. Not being aible to penetrate Rastislav's defense positions, Louis withdrew and in his rage ravaged the land of the Slovaks. Rastislav · retaliated in kind, took over the offensive, chased Louis out of the country and laid waste the German territory on the Danube.22 After this victory Rastislav gaive serious thought to organizing an ecclesiastical province in his land, one which would not be dependent on the Bavarian province, because he fully appreciated what the German missionaries. were �8 SLOVAKIA doing for the Frankish Empire: they spread not only Christianity but endeavored to extend tihe empire. Rastislav decided to emulate the Franks who influenced and were recognired by the Cln.1.rch. In 860, Rastislav sent a special mismon to Pope Nicholas I, in Rome with a request for missionaries who could speak the language of his people. After quite some delay, the mission returned to report to Rastislav, that the Pope could not oblige, ,b ecause there were no such missionaries in Rome. It was then, in 862, that Rastislav sent a delegation to Emperor Michael LH, to Constantinople, with the same request. The mission was successful. The saintly brothers, Consoontine (Cyril) and Methodius, came to the land of Rastislav, the homeland of the ancient Slovaks, in 863, to complete the work of Ohristianizing the Slovaks.23 REFERENCES 1. iDr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky : Sfovenski Vladari, Obrana Pre ss, Inc., !Scranton, Pa., 1948, p. 45. 2. iEiuber:Geschichte der Einfilhrung und Verbreitung des Chrlstenthums in SUdosten Deutschlands, Salzburg, 1874-75, 4 Vols.; Hefele : Geschichte der EinfUhrung des Christenthums im Siidwestlichen Deutschland, TU.bingen, 1837. 3. The Catholic Encyclopedia : Bavaria. 4. Hrui§ovsky, op. cit., p . 51. 6. The Oathollc Encyclopedia : Salzburg. 6. Hrusov,s ky : op. cit., p. 62. 7. ['bid em, p. 63. 8. IJlbidem, P. 55. 9. ,Ibidem, p. 60. 10. !llbid-em, p . 61. 11. lllbidem, pp. 63-64. 12. Elidem, p. 65. 13. 'Ilb!dem, p . 70. H. •I lbidem, p . 73. 15. i11bidem, p . 74. 16. \Ibidem, p. 7 4. 17. Jibiilem, p. 79 ; Hrusov.sky : Slovens kc dejiny, M atica Slovenska, Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1940; pp. 3'3-34 ; Gi!lbert L . Oddo : Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & S ons, New York, 1960 ; p. 10; Joseph M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, Robert Speller & Sons, New York, 1960.; p . 16. 18. Hrusovsky: Slovenski Vladari, pp. 84--86. 19. Ilbidem, p . 87. 20. illbidem, P. 91. 21. lllbidem, p. 95. 12. Ilbidem, p . 116. .23. l'bid~m, p . 134 . . . � SLOVAKIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. XIII MARCH, 1963 NO. 1 (36) HOW OHBIS'DANITY CAME TO THE SLOVAKS P.A. HROBAK Christianity came to the pagan Slovaks slowly and gradually. And there are no indications that the Slovaks, once Christianized, openly rebelled against Christianity and reverted to paganism. This is evidence that the SlovaJks of the early 9th century were under the influence of Christianity for several generations. They were converted to Christianity by missionaries who came from countries in which Christianity was already sufficiently developed and prepared for missionary activities among their pagan neighbors. There are certain indications that missionaries from the southern countries tried to spread Christianity on the territory of the Slovans (Slov,anic peoples) along the Danube River rwho were subjugated by the Avars before the end of the sixth century. The centers of this missionary activity were the ·b ishoprics and monasteries situated on the Adriatic Sea or in the northern countries of the Balkan Peninsula, where remnants of an ecclesiastical organization have been preserved. 1 But systematic missionary activity in this area, which included the territory of the ancient Slova.iks, was developed by missionaries from Bavaria. Christianity came to Bavaria both on the Danube and on the Rhine through soldiers and merchants. 2 Then, as is well :known, at first Irish, and later Frankish and AngloSa.xJon missionaries sowed the seed of the Gospel in the hearu; of the rude warriors. Among those missionaries were: St. Kilian and his ,p upils Colonat (Coloman) and Totnan at WtiriJburg; in the Alpgau region !St. Magnus; at Ratisbon and Freising St. Rupert, St. Emuneram and St. Corbinian.3 Stricter regulations were introduced by Winfrid (St. Boniface), familiarly known as the "Apostle of the Germans." St. Columban came to Bavaria from France, while St. Gall :was active in southern Germany and in 612 settled in what later became Switzerland. �2 SLOVAKIA St. Co11binian, the Apostle of Central Bavaria, worked in and out of ·F lreising where there was an Irish monastery, the monks of which later foll!Ilded other monasteries, among them the one established in 769 at Innichen in the Tyrol. This latter monastery had the special task to spread Christianity in neighboring Corutania which was inhabited by the Slovenes (ISlovinci). The Irish bishop St. Emmeram resided in Regensburg where he built a monastery and became its abbot with the dignity of a bishop.t Because the city was situated on the Danube, on the road that connected Bavaria with the territory of the Danubian Slovanic peoples, it had all the prerequisites for missionary work among them. St. Rupert, Bishop of Worms, ba,ptized Duke Theodo of Bavaria, erected at Waldersee a church in honor of St. Peter, and at the end of the seventh century made Juvavum (Salzburg), where he found the ruins of Roman buildings, his episcopal seat.5 The monastery, which St. Rupert built there in honor of St. Peter, became an important center for the activity of the Irish monks in Bavaria. From the life history of St. Emmeram we learn that he did .plan to do mission wor,k among the A vars. He actually left Bavaria but on the advice of the Bavarian prince remained in Regensburg, so that he himself did not get to the territory of the A vars and the Slovans (Slovanic peoples) whom the Avars dominated. There is evidence, however, that some members of his group, or some Irish missionaries from the Regensburg monastery, did some missionary work there. 6 The first Christian church on Slovak territory, built by Prince Pribina at Nitra, was dedicated to St. E)mmeram. in 833. It is significant, too, that among the churches built ,b y Slovak rulers in the ninth century in Pannonia, there is one dedicated to St. Rupert, Bishop of Salzburg. 7 In the eighth century quite a few Benedictine monasteries were established in Bavaria and Austria. One of the most significant was the monastery at Tegernsee, whose members did missionary work among the Al,p ian Slovans and also founded the monastery of St. Hippolitus in Lower Austria. It appears that it was this monastery of St. Hippolitus that was charged with the task of doing missionary work on the territory of Slovakia: on the slope of Mt. Zobor, near Nitra - the seat of Slovak princes, a monastery �SLOVAKIA 3 was built and dedicated to St. llippolitus. We do not know exactly when this monastery was founded, but there are indications that it was early in the 9th century. The Mt. Zobor Benedictine monastery wery well could have been a mission station of the Bavarian missionaries who labored in ancient Slovakia. 8 The Irish mission, which developed in Bavaria and extended to the lands occupied by the Avars and Slovans, had no political character; there was no political power backing it. Bavarian missionaries, however, alongside their religious and ecclesiastical mission fulfilled also a political role: there activity, especially at the end of the 8th century, had the full support of the Frankish Empire. Working out of Salzburg, missionaries ,b egan to develop their activity on the territory of the Slovanic tribes who had occupied the Danubian region and the eastern spurs of the Alps. In the beginning, while the Danubian Slovans ('Slovaks) were dominated by the Avars, the Salzburg missionaries worked more on the territory of the Corutanian Slovans (Slovenes-Slovinci) which was more accessible from Salzburg. The influence of Salzburg extended to Corutania already some time in the half of the eighth century, that is, in the very early years of the Bavarian ecclesiastical organization. It is more than probaJble that the Salzburg missionaries visited also other Slovanic provinces, especially Trans-Danubian Pannonia which was settled by Slovak tribes. They had to work cautiously ,a nd covertly, since the dominating Avars were .p agans.9 It is also very probable that missionaries from the Passau vicinity visited the Slovak tribes along the Danube and its tributaries. Some of the monasteries located near the banks of the Danube were devoted to mission work from their inception and it is very probable that they labored among the ancient Slovaks who suffered Avar hegemony. Of course, systematic and effective missionary activity could be developed by the Bavarian apostles only after the Frankish armies of Charles the Great (Charlemagne) subdued the Avars in the last decade of the eighth century and the Frankish Empire displayed a great interest in the extensive territory. Bishop Arno of Salzburg was entrusted by Charlemagne with the work of Christianizing the Avar- �4 SLOVAKIA Slovanic lands. When the latter suggested that Bishop Arno be elevated to an archbishop, Pope Leo m obliged in 798. 10 Letters, which the learned .Aibbot Alcuin wrote to the Archbishop of Sal~burg and to Charlemagne, reveal the preparations made for mission work among the Avars and Slovanic peoples; they learned their language to some extent, translated current prayers and the texts used for confession and baptism. The linguistic characteristics of these ancient literary souvenirs, probably from the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century, prove that Bavarian missionaries did la,,bor on the territory of the ancient Slovaks. 11 Salzburg fulfilled its mission role during the lifetime of Archbishop Arno and continued in it under his succes-sors. Naturally, the Salzburg missionaries developed their actilvity first of all on the territory that was most accessible to them. This was Trans-Danubian Pannonia, which was occupied for the most part by Slovwk tribes who in the southwestern part af this country had contacts with the Slovene tribes. Among the missionaries, who came from Sabiburg, were also missionary bishops who, by the authority af the Archbishop of Salzburg, exercised ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Pannonia. Bishop Deodoric was one of them; he labored in Pannonia also under Archbishop Arno's successor, Archbishop Adalram (&21-836). Later, during the lifetime of Archbishop Adalwin (859-873), Bishop Osbald was head of the mission work Pannonia. 12 After the victory of the Fra:n'ks over the A vars a new situation arose on the German-Slovanic border on the middle Danube. Charlemagne sought to Christianize the peoples he subjugated. On the territory occupied by the Frankish armies, after the defeat of the Avars, on both ban!ks of the middle Danube, the East Mark (Ostmark) was established, which became the immediate neighbor of the land accupied by the Slovaks. In comparison with the Germans, the SlovaJks, and all Slovans generally, lagged behind in their political and cultural development. 13 Reports of Frankish chroniclers began to speak in a clear language how individual Slovanic tribes were forced under the sovereignty of the Frankish kings. Accorrnng to these reports representatives of Slovanic tribes came to German towns to pay �SLOVAKIA fj tribute to the German king. Among the first Slovanic princes, representatives of the Slovak tribes were also present. The report of 8~5 relates about chieftains and messengers of all Slovans, who lived along the eastern border of the Frankish Empire. The report of 822 states that the Empire Assembly, called to Frankfurt by Louis the Pious, was attended also by representatives of the Czechs, Moravians, and even the Avars who still remained in Pa:nnonia. All delegations came with gifts, for Louis, which demonstrated that the Slovanic tribes rec.ognized the Gennan sovereign as their master. 14 The Slovaks in this report appear under the name of Moravians, because in those times thus were indicated the Slovanic tribes which had settled on both sides of the Morava River. They were the Slovak tribes which settled on the territories of present day Moravi,a and Slovakia and were also called "iSloveni." We do not know exactly how many tribes composed the Slovak Moravians, but we can assume that they formed a tribal alliance made up of several tribes. According to some reports there were eleven Slovak tribes north of the Danube. Besides these there also were several tribes on the southern bank, on the territory of Pannonia, but these were not called Moravians. 15 From available records, it would appear that at the beginning of the 9th century the Slovak tribes were divided into three groups. The western group occupied both sides of the Morava River and was, therefore, called Moravian. The eastern group, settled on the plains, valleys and basins of present-day .Slovakia, was indicated by the name "Sloveni." The third group, disrupted both by Avar hegemony and anti-Avar wars and settled on the territory of TransDanubian Pannonia, also belonged to the ''Sloveni". 16 The three groups formed one tribal alliance, united by a bond of common origin, close relationship and a common language, settled on connected territory on the middle Danube, appearing under a common name and endur.ing or sharing, at least partially and for a time, even a common historic lot. History tells us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg came to Slowlkia to bless a church in Nitra, the seat of the Slovak Prince Pribina. Since he was Archbishop of �6 SLOVAKIA Saraburg from 821 to 836, this event must have taken place within those yeaTS, most .p robably a,'bout 833. The report of this blessing for the first time mentions the name of a Slovak ruler, the seat of Slovak princes and the Christian church built on the territory of ,p resent-day Slov~kia. There were, however, more churches in Pannonia, where the Slovaks had accepted Christianity at the beginning of the 9th century through the Bavarian missionaries. The greatest significaJllce of this event, however, is that it mar,ks the entrance of the Slovaiks into Christian society, the society of the cultured nations of Europe. The Slovaks are, therefore, not only the oldest Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube B~in, but also the oldest cultured nation on the middle Danube. 17 While Prince Pribina united the SlovaJk tribes of pre.sent day Slovakia and was related to the Slovak tribes of Pannonia, Prince Mojmiir united the Slovak tribes on both sides of the Morava River. Pribina's seat of government was the Nitra Castle, while that of Mojmir was Devin. Mojmir's people were Christianized by the Bavarian missionaries who came from the monasteries of the Passau bishopric. In time a struggle for supremacy took place and in the end Mojmir won out, banishing Pri-bina from Nitra. Mojmir thus became the ruler of all the Slovak tribes above the north bank of the Danube. Neighbol'ling on the exipanding Frankish Empire, the Slova!ks recognized the need for unification in the interest of their own security and welfare. Mojmir, the stronger Oif the two Slovak princes, imposed his will on Plribina without bloodshed and, it would appear, with thte a,p.proval of the Frankish sovereign. Pribina, his wife and son, Kocel', escorted by several magnates, were given asylum by Count Ratbod, Margrave of the Eastern Mark (Ostmark). There he sought the aid of the Frankish sovereign to regain his Nitra principality.18 &successful and falling out with Ratbod, Pribina, still intent on regainig his former principality, sougtht the aid of the Bulgairians, but to no avaiil. Then he went to Ratimir, the Croatian prince, who ruled the country along the Sava River, but he, too, could not help him, because he had his own troubles with the ,F rankish king. In 838, King Louis the German ordered Ratbod to subdue the troublesome �SLOVAKIA 7 subjects of Raltimir. In the battle that ensued, Ratimir was fortunate to escape, as was Pribina and his retinue. Wearied and dejected, Pribina crossed the Sava River and asked Count Salach of Corutania to attempt a reconciliation with Ratbod. 19 After Pribina made his peace with Ratbod, the latter used his influence witill King Louis the German who entrusted Pribina (in 847) with a principality in Pannonia, near Blatno. There Pribina built a formidable citadel which was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). Prince Pribina build churches and endowed monasteries, and often welcomed the h-chbishop of Salzburg to his court.20 His son Kocef continued in his work: 32 churches were built in Pannonia. m the meantime, ~arlmann, oldest son of Louis the German, allied himse1f with Rastislav, ruler of Great Moravia and revolted against his father. Pribina remained loyal to the dcing. He lost his life in 861 in one of the many skirmishes with warriors of Rastislav, Slovak prince and Mojmir's nephew, who governed the Nitra principality.21 MojmiiI''s success in organizing a strong principality, uniting Slovak tribes and gaining the favor of the magnates, roused the suspicions of the Frankish king. AB a result Mojmir was unseated in 846 by King Louis the German, who then made Rastislav the governor of Great Moravia, the land of the Slovaks. .Prince Rastislav continued in his uncle's footsteps, building a stronger and mightier Great Moravia, which Kmg Louis eventually regarded with growing concern. The result was mutual distrust which led to the invasion of Rastislav's territory by the Frankish king in the spring of 855, when the Bavarian .Alrmy under Count Ernst invia.ded the Ozech lands. Louis attacked Rastislav's anny, but was repulsed. Not being aible to penetrate Rastislav's defense positions, Louis withdrew and in his rage ravaged the land of the Slovaks. Rastislav · retaliated in kind, took over the offensive, chased Louis out of the country and laid waste the German territory on the Danube.22 After this victory Rastislav gaive serious thought to organizing an ecclesiastical province in his land, one which would not be dependent on the Bavarian province, because he fully appreciated what the German missionaries. were �8 SLOVAKIA doing for the Frankish Empire: they spread not only Christianity but endeavored to extend tihe empire. Rastislav decided to emulate the Franks who influenced and were recognired by the Cln.1.rch. In 860, Rastislav sent a special mismon to Pope Nicholas I, in Rome with a request for missionaries who could speak the language of his people. After quite some delay, the mission returned to report to Rastislav, that the Pope could not oblige, ,b ecause there were no such missionaries in Rome. It was then, in 862, that Rastislav sent a delegation to Emperor Michael LH, to Constantinople, with the same request. The mission was successful. The saintly brothers, Consoontine (Cyril) and Methodius, came to the land of Rastislav, the homeland of the ancient Slovaks, in 863, to complete the work of Ohristianizing the Slovaks.23 REFERENCES 1. iDr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky : Sfovenski Vladari, Obrana Pre ss, Inc., !Scranton, Pa., 1948, p. 45. 2. iEiuber:Geschichte der Einfilhrung und Verbreitung des Chrlstenthums in SUdosten Deutschlands, Salzburg, 1874-75, 4 Vols.; Hefele : Geschichte der EinfUhrung des Christenthums im Siidwestlichen Deutschland, TU.bingen, 1837. 3. The Catholic Encyclopedia : Bavaria. 4. Hrui§ovsky, op. cit., p . 51. 6. The Oathollc Encyclopedia : Salzburg. 6. Hrusov,s ky : op. cit., p. 62. 7. ['bid em, p. 63. 8. IJlbidem, P. 55. 9. ,Ibidem, p. 60. 10. !llbid-em, p . 61. 11. lllbidem, pp. 63-64. 12. Elidem, p. 65. 13. 'Ilb!dem, p . 70. H. •I lbidem, p . 73. 15. i11bidem, p . 74. 16. \Ibidem, p. 7 4. 17. Jibiilem, p. 79 ; Hrusov.sky : Slovens kc dejiny, M atica Slovenska, Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1940; pp. 3'3-34 ; Gi!lbert L . Oddo : Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & S ons, New York, 1960 ; p. 10; Joseph M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, Robert Speller & Sons, New York, 1960.; p . 16. 18. Hrusovsky: Slovenski Vladari, pp. 84--86. 19. Ilbidem, p . 87. 20. illbidem, P. 91. 21. lllbidem, p. 95. 12. Ilbidem, p . 116. .23. l'bid~m, p . 134 . . . � 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 1963, Vol. 13 Description An account of the resource Issue 1 (No. 36), March 1963. 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 1963 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 by the Slovak League of America VOL. XIII MARCH, 1963 NO. 1 (36) HOW OHBIS'DANITY CAME TO THE SLOVAKS P.A. HROBAK Christianity came to the pagan Slovaks slowly and gradually. And there are no indications that the Slovaks, once Christianized, openly rebelled against Christianity and reverted to paganism. This is evidence that the SlovaJks of the early 9th century were under the influence of Christianity for several generations. They were converted to Christianity by missionaries who came from countries in which Christianity was already sufficiently developed and prepared for missionary activities among their pagan neighbors. There are certain indications that missionaries from the southern countries tried to spread Christianity on the territory of the Slovans (Slov,anic peoples) along the Danube River rwho were subjugated by the Avars before the end of the sixth century. The centers of this missionary activity were the ·b ishoprics and monasteries situated on the Adriatic Sea or in the northern countries of the Balkan Peninsula, where remnants of an ecclesiastical organization have been preserved. 1 But systematic missionary activity in this area, which included the territory of the ancient Slova.iks, was developed by missionaries from Bavaria. Christianity came to Bavaria both on the Danube and on the Rhine through soldiers and merchants. 2 Then, as is well :known, at first Irish, and later Frankish and AngloSa.xJon missionaries sowed the seed of the Gospel in the hearu; of the rude warriors. Among those missionaries were: St. Kilian and his ,p upils Colonat (Coloman) and Totnan at WtiriJburg; in the Alpgau region !St. Magnus; at Ratisbon and Freising St. Rupert, St. Emuneram and St. Corbinian.3 Stricter regulations were introduced by Winfrid (St. Boniface), familiarly known as the "Apostle of the Germans." St. Columban came to Bavaria from France, while St. Gall :was active in southern Germany and in 612 settled in what later became Switzerland. 2 SLOVAKIA St. Co11binian, the Apostle of Central Bavaria, worked in and out of ·F lreising where there was an Irish monastery, the monks of which later foll!Ilded other monasteries, among them the one established in 769 at Innichen in the Tyrol. This latter monastery had the special task to spread Christianity in neighboring Corutania which was inhabited by the Slovenes (ISlovinci). The Irish bishop St. Emmeram resided in Regensburg where he built a monastery and became its abbot with the dignity of a bishop.t Because the city was situated on the Danube, on the road that connected Bavaria with the territory of the Danubian Slovanic peoples, it had all the prerequisites for missionary work among them. St. Rupert, Bishop of Worms, ba,ptized Duke Theodo of Bavaria, erected at Waldersee a church in honor of St. Peter, and at the end of the seventh century made Juvavum (Salzburg), where he found the ruins of Roman buildings, his episcopal seat.5 The monastery, which St. Rupert built there in honor of St. Peter, became an important center for the activity of the Irish monks in Bavaria. From the life history of St. Emmeram we learn that he did .plan to do mission wor,k among the A vars. He actually left Bavaria but on the advice of the Bavarian prince remained in Regensburg, so that he himself did not get to the territory of the A vars and the Slovans (Slovanic peoples) whom the Avars dominated. There is evidence, however, that some members of his group, or some Irish missionaries from the Regensburg monastery, did some missionary work there. 6 The first Christian church on Slovak territory, built by Prince Pribina at Nitra, was dedicated to St. E)mmeram. in 833. It is significant, too, that among the churches built ,b y Slovak rulers in the ninth century in Pannonia, there is one dedicated to St. Rupert, Bishop of Salzburg. 7 In the eighth century quite a few Benedictine monasteries were established in Bavaria and Austria. One of the most significant was the monastery at Tegernsee, whose members did missionary work among the Al,p ian Slovans and also founded the monastery of St. Hippolitus in Lower Austria. It appears that it was this monastery of St. Hippolitus that was charged with the task of doing missionary work on the territory of Slovakia: on the slope of Mt. Zobor, near Nitra - the seat of Slovak princes, a monastery SLOVAKIA 3 was built and dedicated to St. llippolitus. We do not know exactly when this monastery was founded, but there are indications that it was early in the 9th century. The Mt. Zobor Benedictine monastery wery well could have been a mission station of the Bavarian missionaries who labored in ancient Slovakia. 8 The Irish mission, which developed in Bavaria and extended to the lands occupied by the Avars and Slovans, had no political character; there was no political power backing it. Bavarian missionaries, however, alongside their religious and ecclesiastical mission fulfilled also a political role: there activity, especially at the end of the 8th century, had the full support of the Frankish Empire. Working out of Salzburg, missionaries ,b egan to develop their activity on the territory of the Slovanic tribes who had occupied the Danubian region and the eastern spurs of the Alps. In the beginning, while the Danubian Slovans ('Slovaks) were dominated by the Avars, the Salzburg missionaries worked more on the territory of the Corutanian Slovans (Slovenes-Slovinci) which was more accessible from Salzburg. The influence of Salzburg extended to Corutania already some time in the half of the eighth century, that is, in the very early years of the Bavarian ecclesiastical organization. It is more than probaJble that the Salzburg missionaries visited also other Slovanic provinces, especially Trans-Danubian Pannonia which was settled by Slovak tribes. They had to work cautiously ,a nd covertly, since the dominating Avars were .p agans.9 It is also very probable that missionaries from the Passau vicinity visited the Slovak tribes along the Danube and its tributaries. Some of the monasteries located near the banks of the Danube were devoted to mission work from their inception and it is very probable that they labored among the ancient Slovaks who suffered Avar hegemony. Of course, systematic and effective missionary activity could be developed by the Bavarian apostles only after the Frankish armies of Charles the Great (Charlemagne) subdued the Avars in the last decade of the eighth century and the Frankish Empire displayed a great interest in the extensive territory. Bishop Arno of Salzburg was entrusted by Charlemagne with the work of Christianizing the Avar- 4 SLOVAKIA Slovanic lands. When the latter suggested that Bishop Arno be elevated to an archbishop, Pope Leo m obliged in 798. 10 Letters, which the learned .Aibbot Alcuin wrote to the Archbishop of Sal~burg and to Charlemagne, reveal the preparations made for mission work among the Avars and Slovanic peoples; they learned their language to some extent, translated current prayers and the texts used for confession and baptism. The linguistic characteristics of these ancient literary souvenirs, probably from the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century, prove that Bavarian missionaries did la,,bor on the territory of the ancient Slovaks. 11 Salzburg fulfilled its mission role during the lifetime of Archbishop Arno and continued in it under his succes-sors. Naturally, the Salzburg missionaries developed their actilvity first of all on the territory that was most accessible to them. This was Trans-Danubian Pannonia, which was occupied for the most part by Slovwk tribes who in the southwestern part af this country had contacts with the Slovene tribes. Among the missionaries, who came from Sabiburg, were also missionary bishops who, by the authority af the Archbishop of Salzburg, exercised ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Pannonia. Bishop Deodoric was one of them; he labored in Pannonia also under Archbishop Arno's successor, Archbishop Adalram (&21-836). Later, during the lifetime of Archbishop Adalwin (859-873), Bishop Osbald was head of the mission work Pannonia. 12 After the victory of the Fra:n'ks over the A vars a new situation arose on the German-Slovanic border on the middle Danube. Charlemagne sought to Christianize the peoples he subjugated. On the territory occupied by the Frankish armies, after the defeat of the Avars, on both ban!ks of the middle Danube, the East Mark (Ostmark) was established, which became the immediate neighbor of the land accupied by the Slovaks. In comparison with the Germans, the SlovaJks, and all Slovans generally, lagged behind in their political and cultural development. 13 Reports of Frankish chroniclers began to speak in a clear language how individual Slovanic tribes were forced under the sovereignty of the Frankish kings. Accorrnng to these reports representatives of Slovanic tribes came to German towns to pay SLOVAKIA fj tribute to the German king. Among the first Slovanic princes, representatives of the Slovak tribes were also present. The report of 8~5 relates about chieftains and messengers of all Slovans, who lived along the eastern border of the Frankish Empire. The report of 822 states that the Empire Assembly, called to Frankfurt by Louis the Pious, was attended also by representatives of the Czechs, Moravians, and even the Avars who still remained in Pa:nnonia. All delegations came with gifts, for Louis, which demonstrated that the Slovanic tribes rec.ognized the Gennan sovereign as their master. 14 The Slovaks in this report appear under the name of Moravians, because in those times thus were indicated the Slovanic tribes which had settled on both sides of the Morava River. They were the Slovak tribes which settled on the territories of present day Moravi,a and Slovakia and were also called "iSloveni." We do not know exactly how many tribes composed the Slovak Moravians, but we can assume that they formed a tribal alliance made up of several tribes. According to some reports there were eleven Slovak tribes north of the Danube. Besides these there also were several tribes on the southern bank, on the territory of Pannonia, but these were not called Moravians. 15 From available records, it would appear that at the beginning of the 9th century the Slovak tribes were divided into three groups. The western group occupied both sides of the Morava River and was, therefore, called Moravian. The eastern group, settled on the plains, valleys and basins of present-day .Slovakia, was indicated by the name "Sloveni." The third group, disrupted both by Avar hegemony and anti-Avar wars and settled on the territory of TransDanubian Pannonia, also belonged to the ''Sloveni". 16 The three groups formed one tribal alliance, united by a bond of common origin, close relationship and a common language, settled on connected territory on the middle Danube, appearing under a common name and endur.ing or sharing, at least partially and for a time, even a common historic lot. History tells us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg came to Slowlkia to bless a church in Nitra, the seat of the Slovak Prince Pribina. Since he was Archbishop of 6 SLOVAKIA Saraburg from 821 to 836, this event must have taken place within those yeaTS, most .p robably a,'bout 833. The report of this blessing for the first time mentions the name of a Slovak ruler, the seat of Slovak princes and the Christian church built on the territory of ,p resent-day Slov~kia. There were, however, more churches in Pannonia, where the Slovaks had accepted Christianity at the beginning of the 9th century through the Bavarian missionaries. The greatest significaJllce of this event, however, is that it mar,ks the entrance of the Slovaiks into Christian society, the society of the cultured nations of Europe. The Slovaks are, therefore, not only the oldest Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube B~in, but also the oldest cultured nation on the middle Danube. 17 While Prince Pribina united the SlovaJk tribes of pre.sent day Slovakia and was related to the Slovak tribes of Pannonia, Prince Mojmiir united the Slovak tribes on both sides of the Morava River. Pribina's seat of government was the Nitra Castle, while that of Mojmir was Devin. Mojmir's people were Christianized by the Bavarian missionaries who came from the monasteries of the Passau bishopric. In time a struggle for supremacy took place and in the end Mojmir won out, banishing Pri-bina from Nitra. Mojmir thus became the ruler of all the Slovak tribes above the north bank of the Danube. Neighbol'ling on the exipanding Frankish Empire, the Slova!ks recognized the need for unification in the interest of their own security and welfare. Mojmir, the stronger Oif the two Slovak princes, imposed his will on Plribina without bloodshed and, it would appear, with thte a,p.proval of the Frankish sovereign. Pribina, his wife and son, Kocel', escorted by several magnates, were given asylum by Count Ratbod, Margrave of the Eastern Mark (Ostmark). There he sought the aid of the Frankish sovereign to regain his Nitra principality.18 &successful and falling out with Ratbod, Pribina, still intent on regainig his former principality, sougtht the aid of the Bulgairians, but to no avaiil. Then he went to Ratimir, the Croatian prince, who ruled the country along the Sava River, but he, too, could not help him, because he had his own troubles with the ,F rankish king. In 838, King Louis the German ordered Ratbod to subdue the troublesome SLOVAKIA 7 subjects of Raltimir. In the battle that ensued, Ratimir was fortunate to escape, as was Pribina and his retinue. Wearied and dejected, Pribina crossed the Sava River and asked Count Salach of Corutania to attempt a reconciliation with Ratbod. 19 After Pribina made his peace with Ratbod, the latter used his influence witill King Louis the German who entrusted Pribina (in 847) with a principality in Pannonia, near Blatno. There Pribina built a formidable citadel which was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). Prince Pribina build churches and endowed monasteries, and often welcomed the h-chbishop of Salzburg to his court.20 His son Kocef continued in his work: 32 churches were built in Pannonia. m the meantime, ~arlmann, oldest son of Louis the German, allied himse1f with Rastislav, ruler of Great Moravia and revolted against his father. Pribina remained loyal to the dcing. He lost his life in 861 in one of the many skirmishes with warriors of Rastislav, Slovak prince and Mojmir's nephew, who governed the Nitra principality.21 MojmiiI''s success in organizing a strong principality, uniting Slovak tribes and gaining the favor of the magnates, roused the suspicions of the Frankish king. AB a result Mojmir was unseated in 846 by King Louis the German, who then made Rastislav the governor of Great Moravia, the land of the Slovaks. .Prince Rastislav continued in his uncle's footsteps, building a stronger and mightier Great Moravia, which Kmg Louis eventually regarded with growing concern. The result was mutual distrust which led to the invasion of Rastislav's territory by the Frankish king in the spring of 855, when the Bavarian .Alrmy under Count Ernst invia.ded the Ozech lands. Louis attacked Rastislav's anny, but was repulsed. Not being aible to penetrate Rastislav's defense positions, Louis withdrew and in his rage ravaged the land of the Slovaks. Rastislav · retaliated in kind, took over the offensive, chased Louis out of the country and laid waste the German territory on the Danube.22 After this victory Rastislav gaive serious thought to organizing an ecclesiastical province in his land, one which would not be dependent on the Bavarian province, because he fully appreciated what the German missionaries. were 8 SLOVAKIA doing for the Frankish Empire: they spread not only Christianity but endeavored to extend tihe empire. Rastislav decided to emulate the Franks who influenced and were recognired by the Cln.1.rch. In 860, Rastislav sent a special mismon to Pope Nicholas I, in Rome with a request for missionaries who could speak the language of his people. After quite some delay, the mission returned to report to Rastislav, that the Pope could not oblige, ,b ecause there were no such missionaries in Rome. It was then, in 862, that Rastislav sent a delegation to Emperor Michael LH, to Constantinople, with the same request. The mission was successful. The saintly brothers, Consoontine (Cyril) and Methodius, came to the land of Rastislav, the homeland of the ancient Slovaks, in 863, to complete the work of Ohristianizing the Slovaks.23 REFERENCES 1. iDr. Frantisek Hrus ovsky : Sfovenski Vladari, Obrana Pre ss, Inc., !Scranton, Pa., 1948, p. 45. 2. iEiuber:Geschichte der Einfilhrung und Verbreitung des Chrlstenthums in SUdosten Deutschlands, Salzburg, 1874-75, 4 Vols.; Hefele : Geschichte der EinfUhrung des Christenthums im Siidwestlichen Deutschland, TU.bingen, 1837. 3. The Catholic Encyclopedia : Bavaria. 4. Hrui§ovsky, op. cit., p . 51. 6. The Oathollc Encyclopedia : Salzburg. 6. Hrusov,s ky : op. cit., p. 62. 7. ['bid em, p. 63. 8. IJlbidem, P. 55. 9. ,Ibidem, p. 60. 10. !llbid-em, p . 61. 11. lllbidem, pp. 63-64. 12. Elidem, p. 65. 13. 'Ilb!dem, p . 70. H. •I lbidem, p . 73. 15. i11bidem, p . 74. 16. \Ibidem, p. 7 4. 17. Jibiilem, p. 79 ; Hrusov.sky : Slovens kc dejiny, M atica Slovenska, Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1940; pp. 3'3-34 ; Gi!lbert L . Oddo : Slovakia And Its People, Robert Speller & S ons, New York, 1960 ; p. 10; Joseph M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, Robert Speller & Sons, New York, 1960.; p . 16. 18. Hrusovsky: Slovenski Vladari, pp. 84--86. 19. Ilbidem, p . 87. 20. illbidem, P. 91. 21. lllbidem, p. 95. 12. Ilbidem, p . 116. .23. l'bid~m, p . 134 . . .  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 How Christianity Came to the Slovaks Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobák Slovakia, Vol. 13, No. 1 (36), March 1963 pp. 1-8 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 1963 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cd244d83d7853c521a3dab8ef3a32836.pdf d44550d5710a130c245721fea999ca98 PDF Text Text Slovakia - The Oldest State in Central Europe Prof. Francis Hrušovský The world, slowly but surely, is learning that the small Slovak nation in the Danube basin is asserting its right to independent national existence. Since a nation that is relatively small is concerned - a nation which through the fault of its larger neighbors for long ages did not have the possibility of appearing independently before the eyes of the cultural world - some European and non-European nations were not conscious of the existence of the Slovaks as an individual nation and did not, therefore, evince any interest In their existence. And yet, in the case of the Slovaks, we are concerned with a nation that deserves attention and has the right to strive for a position in the Carpatho-Danube area that belongs to an individual nation with an ancient past and a rich, cultural tradition. The Slovaks have remained a small nation, but they are neither a young nor a new nation. They are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe which had its own Independent state. The historical destiny of the Slovak nation was determined first of all by the geographical position of the territory which the Slovaks colonized after their arrival in Central Europe in the sixth century. When the Slovaks crossed the Carpathians and established their permanent colonies on the banks of the central Danube and Its tributaries, they occupied the territory that lay on the very western edge of the Slovanic world and was in direct contact with the eastern countries of the Germans. The more numerous, militarily stronger, politically more developed and culturally more advanced Germans, especially since the times of Emperor Charles the Great (768-814), exerted a pressure on their Slovanic neighbors. This political and cultural pressure of the Germans was strongest In the area settled by the numerous small Slovak tribes. It was only natural that the small Slovak tribes, threatened by the growing pressure of their German neighbors, began to realize more clearly their mutual family ties and felt the need of uniting their forces in defense of their common interests which were threatened by a common danger. By such a unification of the small Slovak principalities already in the first half of the ninth century, there arose on the central Danube the Slovak state - known in historical literature as the Great Moravian Empire. The Slovak state - the nucleus and main castle of which were near the Morava river - was the first state organized on the territory of Central Europe. The geographical position of the Slovak territory was the reason why the Slovaks organized their own state as a defense against outside danger. The Slovak rulers who built and managed this state proved that the Slovaks orientated themselves early and well to the situation that evolved near the central Danube and they were quite able and capable to defend their vital interests and to decide their own destiny. The territory of the Slovak state was gradually extended to include the territories of neighboring Slovanic tribes. It became less dependent on the Frankish empire, and the military might of the Slovak princes increased to such an extent that they successfully repelled the attacks of the German kings. In the second half of the ninth century - during the reign of the prudent Rastislav (847-870), the belligerent Svätopluk (870-894), whom contemporary sources called King, and his heroic successor Mojmir II (894-906) - the Slovak state had gained such an international position that Slovak princes could make and keep diplomatic contacts with the Emperor's court in Constantinople and the Holy See. Slovak rulers were allies of the Emperor of Constantinople against Bulgar-Germanic coalition, and maintained active ties with the Vatican as Christian rulers because they wanted their country to have its own church organization and be an independent ecclesiastical province. The Slovaks came Into contact with Christianity right at the outset of their history in Central Europe. In the seat of the Slovak princes in Nitra already in 830 there stood a Christian church - the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slavs. The Slovaks received the Christian faith under the leadership of their princes and appropriated unto themselves all the attainments of Christian civilization and cultural progress. The Slovak state from its very inception was a Christian state. The new faith - due to the merits of western and eastern missionaries, especially the merits of Sts. Cyril and Methodius - was so deeply rooted in the Slovaks that no pagan reaction could grow on Slovak territory. Slovak Christianity became so firm, in fact, that Slovakia already in the ninth century became the mediator of the Christian faith and Christian culture even in neighboring countries to the east and performed this function even in the centuries that followed. In the very first centuries of its Christian life, Slovakia became a strong support of the Christian faith in the Danube basin and for whole ages it was a bastion of the Christian culture which was threatened by the invasion of eastern barbarians. Slovak rulers tried to solidify and safeguard the Independence of the Slovak state with the help of an independent ecclesiastical organization and the aid of an Independent ecclesiastical hierarchy. King Svätopluk, on the advice of Archbishop Methodius, went so far in his efforts that in 879 he sent a special delegation to Pope John VIII and placed himself, his princes, magnates and people under the protection of the Holy See. The Papal See accepted the Slovak state under the protection of St. Peter, and the successors of Pope John VIII most condescendingly showed their paternal altruism to the Slovak rulers and their anxiety for the fate of the ecclesiastical organization on the territory of the Slovak state. The Slovak rulers and the Slovak people sacrificed everything to preserve the independence of their country. They fought valiantly against their enemies in the east and the west. The Slovaks were greatly outnumbered and the continual defensive battles sapped the blood of their nation. Finally they were overcome by the superior forces of the enemy - the Germans and the Magyars - at the beginning of the tenth century and Slovakia lost its independence. At the beginning of the 11th century the Slovak territory became a part of the Hungarian state. Slovakia lost its independence in the tenth century, but the Slovak nation did not lose its rights to a free life. The picture of the Slovak state of the ninth century has been preserved throughout the long centuries in the mind of the Slovak nation and, revived In the works of Slovak writers and poets, has maintained in all Slovak generations the hope that Slovakia once again shall be an independent state and the free homeland of all Slovaks. SLOVAKIA 1 SLOVAKIATHE OLDEST STATE IN CENTRAL EUROPE PROF. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY The world, slowly but surely, is learning that the small Slovak na,tion in the Danube basin is asserting its right to independent national existence. Since a nation that is relatively ,small Is concerned - a nation which through the fault of Its larger neighbors for long ~es did not have the possibility of a,ppearlng Independently before the eyes of the cultural world - some European and non-European nations were not conscious of the existence of the Slovaks as an individual nation and did not, therefore, evince any interest In their existence. And yet, in the ca,se of the Slovaks, we are concerned with a nation that deserves attention and has the right to strive for a posttlon in the Carpatho-Danube area that belongs to an Individual nation with an ancient past and a rich, cultural ,tradition. The Slovaks have r emain,ed a small nation, but they are neither a young nor a new nation. They are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe which had its own Independent state. The historical destiny of the Slovak nation was determined flr~t of all by the geographical position of the territory which the Slovaks colonized after their arrival in Central Europe in the slxth century. When ,the Slovaks crossed the Carpathians and established their permanent colonies on the banks of the central Danube and Its tribu• tarles, they occupied the territory that lay on the very western edge of the Slovanic world and was In direct contact with -the eastern countries of the Germans. The more numerous, militari1y stronger, politically more developed and culturally more advanced Germans, especially since the times of Emperor Charles the Great (768-&14), exerted a pressure on their Slovanic neighbors. This political and cultural pressure of the Germans was strongest In the area settled by the numerous small Slovak tribes. It was only natural that the small Slovak tribes, threaitened by the growing pressure of their German neighbors, began to realize more clearly their mutual family ties and felt the need of uniting their forces In defense of ,their common interests which were threatened by a common danger. By such a unification of the small Slovak principalities already In the first half of the ninth century, there arose on the central Danube the Slovak state - known in historical literature as the Great Moravian Empire. The Slovak state - the nucleus and main castle of which were near the Morava river - was the first state organized on the territory of Central Europe. The geographical ,posl,Uon of the Slovak territory wa,s the reason why the Slovaks organized their own state a,s a defense against outside danger. The Slovak rulers who built and managed this state proved that the Slovaks orientated themselves early and well to the �2 SLOVAKIA situation that evolved near the central Danube and the) wer0 quite able and capable to defend their vital interests anJ to decide their own destiny. The territory of the Slovak state was gradually ex;tended to in· elude the territories of neighboring Slov:i!1ic tribes. It became less dependent on the Frankish empire, and the military might of the Slovak princes increased to such an extent that they sucoessfully re• pelied the attacks of the German kings. In the second half of the ninth century during the re ign of the prudent Rastislav (847--870), the belligerent Svatopluk (870-894), whom contemporary sources called King, and his heroic successor Mojmir 11 (894--906) th e Slovak state had gained such an international position that Slovak princes could make and keep diplomatic contacts with the Emperor's court in Constantinople and the Holy Sec. Slovak rulers were allies of the Emperor of Constantinople against Bulgar-Germanic coalition, and maintained active ties with the Vatican as Christian rulers because they wanted their country to have its own church organization and be an independent ecclesiastical province. The Slovaks came Into contact with Christianity right at the out• set of their history in Central Europe. In the seat of the Slovak princes in Nltra already in 830 there stood a Christian chu rch the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slavs. The Slo• vaks received the Christian faith under the leadership of th~r princes and appropriated unto themselves all the attainments of Christian civilization and cultural progress. The Slovak state from its very inception was a Christian state. The new faith - due to the merits of western and eastern missionaries, especially the merits of Sts. Cyril and Methodius - was &o deeply rooted in the Slovaks that no pagan reaction could grow on Slovak territory. Slovak Christianity became so firm, in tact, that Slovakia already in the ninth century became the mediator of the Christian faith and Christian culture even in neighboring countries to the east and performed this function even in the centuries ,that !ol· lowed. In the very first centuries of its Christian life, Slovakia became a strong support of the Christian faith in the Danube basin and for whole ages it was a bastion of the Christian culture which was threatened by the invasion of eastern barbarians. Slovak rulers tried to ,solidify and safeguard the Independence of the Slovak state wtth the help of an independent ecclesiastical organization and the aid of an Independent eccLesiastical hierarchy. King Sviitopluk, on the advice of Archbishop Methodius, went so far in his efforts that in 879 he sent a special delegation to Pope John VIII and placed hmself, his princes, magnates and people under the protection of the Holy See-. The Papal See accepted the Slovak state under the protection or St. Peter, and the successors of Pope John VIII most condescendingly showed their paternal altruism to the Slovak rulers and their anxiety for the Cate of the acclesiastical organization on the territory of the Slovak state. The Slovak rulers and the Slovak people sacrificed everything to pre11erve the independence of their country. They fought valiantly against their enemies in the east and ,the west. The Slovaks we1 e greatly outnumbered and the continual defensive battles sapped the �SLOVAKIA 3 blood of. their nation. Finally they were overcome by the superior forces of the enemy - the Germans and the Magyars - at ,the beginning of the tenth century and Slovakia lost its Independence. At the b eginning of the 11th century the Slovak territory became a part of the Hungarian state. Slovakla lost its independence in the tenth century, but the Slovak nation did not lose its rights to a free life. The picture of the Slovak state of the ninth century has been preserved throughout the long centuries in the mind of the Slovak nation and, revived In the works of Slovak writers and poets, has maintained in all S lovak generations the hope that Slovakia once again shall be an independent state and the free homeland of all S lovaks. • • • PEOPLE'S COURTS IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA As a result at Teheran and Yalta, so-called People's Courts were immediately organized in the countries that were "liberated" by the Soviet armies. Naturally these courts w-ere set up on the paittern on those in the Soviet countries. In Bulgaria, tor example, th ey were set up in September 1944 and in Hungary In January 1945, even though the war was ,still on and t h ere were no governments elected by the people in those respective countries. These two states are still under Soviet occupation (P aris Peace Con• ference) and so it actually was not possible to <'Onduct free and democratic elections there. People's Courts, then, were established on the incentive of outside countries. This pro\1'8s -the veracity of the statement: "might makes right." These courts quite obviously rendered such verdicts as were prescribed by ,the power of the state or by the power of the foreign state to which the state in question was subject. Benes, as the president of Czechoslovakia, Immediately after the "liberation" ruled t he state on the basis of the decrees h e himself issued. He received the authority to rule by decrees from the State Council which he personally appointed in London. So that these decrees might have a legal color, the National Assembly in Prague was elected in 1946 and its deputies approved all of the "presidential" decrees of Benes. It is doubtful, however, whether these decrees were constitutional and whether the elected Constitutional National Assembly was actually elected democratically in 1946. The system of People's Courts developed ind-ependently of each other in the so-called historic lands (Bohemia and Moravia) and In Slovakia. As president of the state, Benes Issu ed the decree No. 16/1945 for Bohemia and Moravia on June 19, 1945. With •this decree B enes established the People's Courts in Bohemia and Moravia. It is interesting to note here that this decree carries the signat ure not only of the Pesident, but also the signatures of several Czech ministers, who today are proclaiming in free America that they are democrats, that they "fought" against dictatorship, etc. These same pseudodemocrats had the audacity to form the Council of Free Czechoslovakia. The names of the ministers on that decree, � 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 1951, Vol. 1 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 1951 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 1), May 1951.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 2), December 1951.</li> </ul> Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context <ul><li><a href="https://n2t.net/ark:/13960/s261hfmshm7" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><span>ark:/13960/s261hfmshm7</span></a></li> <li><a href="https://n2t.net/ark:/13960/s21tk2wkzj4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><span>ark:/13960/s21tk2wkzj4</span></a></li> </ul> 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 - The Oldest State in Central Europe Prof. Francis Hrušovský The world, slowly but surely, is learning that the small Slovak nation in the Danube basin is asserting its right to independent national existence. Since a nation that is relatively small is concerned - a nation which through the fault of its larger neighbors for long ages did not have the possibility of appearing independently before the eyes of the cultural world - some European and non-European nations were not conscious of the existence of the Slovaks as an individual nation and did not, therefore, evince any interest In their existence. And yet, in the case of the Slovaks, we are concerned with a nation that deserves attention and has the right to strive for a position in the Carpatho-Danube area that belongs to an individual nation with an ancient past and a rich, cultural tradition. The Slovaks have remained a small nation, but they are neither a young nor a new nation. They are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe which had its own Independent state. The historical destiny of the Slovak nation was determined first of all by the geographical position of the territory which the Slovaks colonized after their arrival in Central Europe in the sixth century. When the Slovaks crossed the Carpathians and established their permanent colonies on the banks of the central Danube and Its tributaries, they occupied the territory that lay on the very western edge of the Slovanic world and was in direct contact with the eastern countries of the Germans. The more numerous, militarily stronger, politically more developed and culturally more advanced Germans, especially since the times of Emperor Charles the Great (768-814), exerted a pressure on their Slovanic neighbors. This political and cultural pressure of the Germans was strongest In the area settled by the numerous small Slovak tribes. It was only natural that the small Slovak tribes, threatened by the growing pressure of their German neighbors, began to realize more clearly their mutual family ties and felt the need of uniting their forces in defense of their common interests which were threatened by a common danger. By such a unification of the small Slovak principalities already in the first half of the ninth century, there arose on the central Danube the Slovak state - known in historical literature as the Great Moravian Empire. The Slovak state - the nucleus and main castle of which were near the Morava river - was the first state organized on the territory of Central Europe. The geographical position of the Slovak territory was the reason why the Slovaks organized their own state as a defense against outside danger. The Slovak rulers who built and managed this state proved that the Slovaks orientated themselves early and well to the situation that evolved near the central Danube and they were quite able and capable to defend their vital interests and to decide their own destiny. The territory of the Slovak state was gradually extended to include the territories of neighboring Slovanic tribes. It became less dependent on the Frankish empire, and the military might of the Slovak princes increased to such an extent that they successfully repelled the attacks of the German kings. In the second half of the ninth century - during the reign of the prudent Rastislav (847-870), the belligerent Svätopluk (870-894), whom contemporary sources called King, and his heroic successor Mojmir II (894-906) - the Slovak state had gained such an international position that Slovak princes could make and keep diplomatic contacts with the Emperor's court in Constantinople and the Holy See. Slovak rulers were allies of the Emperor of Constantinople against Bulgar-Germanic coalition, and maintained active ties with the Vatican as Christian rulers because they wanted their country to have its own church organization and be an independent ecclesiastical province. The Slovaks came Into contact with Christianity right at the outset of their history in Central Europe. In the seat of the Slovak princes in Nitra already in 830 there stood a Christian church - the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slavs. The Slovaks received the Christian faith under the leadership of their princes and appropriated unto themselves all the attainments of Christian civilization and cultural progress. The Slovak state from its very inception was a Christian state. The new faith - due to the merits of western and eastern missionaries, especially the merits of Sts. Cyril and Methodius - was so deeply rooted in the Slovaks that no pagan reaction could grow on Slovak territory. Slovak Christianity became so firm, in fact, that Slovakia already in the ninth century became the mediator of the Christian faith and Christian culture even in neighboring countries to the east and performed this function even in the centuries that followed. In the very first centuries of its Christian life, Slovakia became a strong support of the Christian faith in the Danube basin and for whole ages it was a bastion of the Christian culture which was threatened by the invasion of eastern barbarians. Slovak rulers tried to solidify and safeguard the Independence of the Slovak state with the help of an independent ecclesiastical organization and the aid of an Independent ecclesiastical hierarchy. King Svätopluk, on the advice of Archbishop Methodius, went so far in his efforts that in 879 he sent a special delegation to Pope John VIII and placed himself, his princes, magnates and people under the protection of the Holy See. The Papal See accepted the Slovak state under the protection of St. Peter, and the successors of Pope John VIII most condescendingly showed their paternal altruism to the Slovak rulers and their anxiety for the fate of the ecclesiastical organization on the territory of the Slovak state. The Slovak rulers and the Slovak people sacrificed everything to preserve the independence of their country. They fought valiantly against their enemies in the east and the west. The Slovaks were greatly outnumbered and the continual defensive battles sapped the blood of their nation. Finally they were overcome by the superior forces of the enemy - the Germans and the Magyars - at the beginning of the tenth century and Slovakia lost its independence. At the beginning of the 11th century the Slovak territory became a part of the Hungarian state. Slovakia lost its independence in the tenth century, but the Slovak nation did not lose its rights to a free life. The picture of the Slovak state of the ninth century has been preserved throughout the long centuries in the mind of the Slovak nation and, revived In the works of Slovak writers and poets, has maintained in all Slovak generations the hope that Slovakia once again shall be an independent state and the free homeland of all Slovaks. 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 - The Oldest State in Central Europe Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1951 Description An account of the resource Prof. Francis Hrušovský Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1), May 1951 pp. 1-3 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrušovský, František, 1903-1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6394be7187e3ab8f7c136ae6bea94f28.pdf 9ba5b71db2ea2fc1783abb5eab2fc013 PDF Text Text DECEMBER, 1953 SLOVAKIA 1 INFLUENCE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY ON SWVAK LIFE Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Actual living conditions of the Slovak immigrants in the new warild, especially in the United States oif America, were very much different from those in hi1s homeland which was under the domination of Hungary until the end of the first world war. The natural temperament of the average Slovak was determined, to some degree, by the circumstances of his life in a land that had been under foreign nrle for centuries. Economically, the native of Slovakia found life hard and difficult; socially, his lot was unprogressive; politically, freedom and equality had no practical meaning for him. His energies were drained by the relentless struggle for survival. Not infrequently, he suffered from want; his entire life was spent in misery and poverty. The downtrodden Slovak peasant, though inwardly protesting against social inequality and injustice, had not suffi. cient strength and vitality to break the chains of his servitude. He resigned hims~lf to his misfortune, concluding that unkind fate decreed that misery was to be his n a tural lot on earth. Under such adverse circumstances, it was extremely difficult to arouse and maintain a feeling of Slovak national patriotism ; and it was doubly difficult to organize a Slovak society that would espouse the idea of Slovak nationalism, because the average Slovak was hampered at every step by his enemies who tenaciously held to the age-old concept of Magyar feudalism, a way of life that was contrary to the idea of Slovak nationalism. Every Slovak knew that he was not a Magyar but a Slovak; yet, this consciousness of nationalism was never allowed to develop freely. Patriotism and loyalty in the Hugarian State was only one: all had to acknowledge their adherence to the Crown of St. Stephen and Magyar hegemony. It is not surprising, therefore, that the peasant in Slovaikia had no clearcut understanding of the meaning of nationalism ; that he failed to aspire to national emancipation is manifestly an indication that he �2 SLOVA-IHA failed to grasp the glorious meaning of having one's own government in power and one's own native language as the official tongue of the land. And, hence, at first, the aver age Slovak was not inclined to partici,pate in political gatherings that were designe'd· to bring his own country ultimate freedom and democra;cy. Weighed . down ,b y the burdens of life as an oppressed human being, the Slovak's paJtience and endurance were truly remarkable. In the long succession of centuries of political servitude and 'tymnny, he had become resigned to his unchanging misery, injustice, humiliation and serfdom, for to him it seemed that this was decreed by fate, or a higher power. This was, then, the average Slova,k immigrant who came to America. Imagine how great was his amazement upon discovering that living an:d social conditions in the New World were so diametrically different from his life in the land of his birth, his Slova:kia beneath the Tatras. He was amazed by the vast difference between life at home in Slovakia and here in America and the unlimited opportunities offered the immigrant, provided he was willing to work. And since hard work was practica,lly s~cond nature to the Slovak immigra,nrt, he found his new home to his liking. At home, his sphere of activity ha,d been limited, while here, in his new home land, unlimited opportunities presented themselves on all sides, so that a man of inte1ligence, ingenuity and industry just could not fail to become a success in America. At hame, the Slovak could only hope to eke out a bare existence with hardly a chance for improvement; here in America he could look forward to a steady improvement of his social conditions. Here, in the new world, his .progress was not impeded by circumstances, on the contrary, the conditions for his advancement exceeded his fondest dreams. No doubt the primary motive for Slovak emigration was to seek a solution for financial difficulties; the Slovak went abroad chiefly to secure economic advantages which were lacking at home. He envisioned the day when he would rise above his lowly station in life with the help of his incr:eased earning power. Hence, there was no job, no matter �SLOVAKIA 3 how strenuorus or dangerous, that he shirked S'O long as ft promised him immediate returns. There is little doubt that tlhe Slovak immigrant in America worked harder than he had ever worked at home, •b ut t:Jhis was a sacrifice well worthwhile, in his estimation, if it helped his loved one$ in the old country and improved his own condition. America attracted the simple peaJsant from the hills and villages throughout Slovakfa. He was uneducated, though generally not illiterate, but equirpped with the natural gifts of remarkahle stamina, courage, ingenuity, industry and native intelligence. Possessing unusual powers of observation, sound judgment and ability to assimilate new ways of life, as well as being blessed witJh a good moral training, the Slov,a k found America a fertile field for his endeavors. He learned much in the new land of freedom and opportunity; and though he received much from it, he ailso gave much in return. He put his heart and will in his work, employed his mind in developing new tech:. niques, spared no effort, time and energy to produce an unending stream of goods for human consumption and welfare. Thus, the Slovak, who had been held in political bondage and who had lapsed into a state of social and economic retrogression, suddenly found a dynamic release for his pent-up energies in a land that was forever dedicated to freedom and equality, a land which offered him constant inspiration for his enterprising spirit and proved to be a never-ending source of visions of a great destiny. The de_~ mocratic atmosphere of America was to him a tonic, an elixir of magical powers that turned him into a veritable giant who feared no undertaking, avoided no difficulty. Consequently, many of his kind, working doggedly and persistently with indomitable energy, achieved comparative success in America. The typical American immigr ant from Slovakia was confronted with the difficulties of language, strange cus~ toms and new surroundings, and the immedi•a te necessity of employment. After securing a job, he quickly adjusted · himself to his new emrironment, acquired vaJ1uaJble expe~ riences over a period of years, steadHy increased his earnings and saved his money. He soon perceived that he, too, �4 SLOVAKIA ·was a human being with natural aspirations, desires and ideals which he knew could be realized if he worked for their attainment. It wa;s in America that he found himself as an ind!iividual, no:t only with civic responstbilites, but with personal rights as weH. As a full-fledged naturalized citizen of hi:s adopted country, he became acutely aware of his added dignity as a free man. This both satisfied him and aLso aroused in him the determination to emulate his fellow-citizens in the fullest a;ppreciation of his precious inheritance. Of course, there were some unfortunate exceptions to the general respon:se of the typical Slovak to his Ameriican surroundings; but on the whole, the great majority reacted favorably to the stimulating influences of a democratic way of life in the United States. Life's vicissitudes make human existence a constant struggle with obstacles strewn on the path that ,l eads to the ultimaJte goal. The SlovaJk lras never been without hardships and, therefore, he has never been afraid of the future. At home, all his efforts to overcome the handicaps of his lowly station in life were to no avail. He was doomed to remain in the same social caiste into which he was born. If he was born in poverty, he was destined to a lifelong struggle for a mere livelhood. There was no opportunity for him to rise above his station, being inextricably bound by ties of an outmoded feudal ,s ystem which kept him hopelessly mired in a bog of caste-privileged society. But his patient endurance and peritina;city, his indefatigable industry, which had helped him to survive under the most adverse conditions, served him well in the new land; and his ingrained habits of determination, dependability and native ingenuity were qualities which gave him the impetus to succeed when he was suddenly thrust into the fresh atmosphere of American free enterpr1se and democracy. The a;ma:zing discovery that he was on a plane of political and social equality with men of more than a score of nationa-lities, enjoy}ng freedom under one flag, the Stars and Stripes, made him feel that he had accomplished something worthwhile; and the consciousness of his abilities and achievements inspired him to work even harder to advance further on the road to Americanization, a process that �SLOVAKIA 5 brought out the native powers of the Slovak to adopt himself to new surroundings and to assimilate without losing his identity as a new American of Slovak ancestry. The immigrant Slovak's contacts with men of various races made him conscious of his own distinctness as a national figure, for he was unable to converse with them and he did not understand their ways. This factor affected him in two ways: 1) he was inclined to keep aloof from "strangers" and, 2) he was instinctively drawn to follow Slovaks who spoke his language and who knew his ways. Thus, it was but natural for him to draw closer to men of his own kind for companionship and understanding. All Slovak immigrants came together wherever they went, being drawn to each other by their common longing for the homes they had but recently left behind across the sea. Following the example of other nationalities, they organized societies and founded churches thaJt soon became the centers of their activities. This association kept them closely united and helped them to protect and enhance their common interests. Moreover, the feeling of national consciousness grew stronger among them as they sought refuge and comfort in these islands of Slovak memories and realities in the midst of a sea of representatives of every nation on earth. Slovaks in their homeland could not publicly express their national aspirations without reprisals, but here in America they were free to profess their patriotism and write about their ideals of nationhood. Every American of Slovak parentage could acknowledge his Slovak heritage publicly, and no one took it amiss, nobody was suspicious of his motives, no one insulted him for it. Moreover, his fellow-citizens of other national origins, in business and politics, accepted the new Americans as equals without regard to national origins. A Slovak immigrant who became a naturalized American citizen soon realized that he not only had civic responsibilities but personal rights, too, and the fact that 'he did · not have to renounce his Slovak heritage as such, while pledging loyalty to his new homeland, became the source �SLOVAKIA of his national pride of being a descendant of Slovak an~estors who had not been able to call their ancient hearths their own for many centuries. They cherished the national traditions of their forefathers and soon gave voice to them in this new land of freedom. In a comparatively short time, the Slovak in America · teaHzed that he, too, could voice his opinions freely, that he could have convictions wiithout fear of repression. Slovak organizations gave him ample opportunities to express himself; and hls newspapers were for him mediums of information, instruction and inspiration. These <:!orrstituted the keystone of Slovak unity for all fellow Americans of Slovak ancestry. From the stand,point of individual advancement, any Slovak, no matter how humble his origin, could ·air his views in his own newspapers. This was a veritable school for many simple, uneducated Slovaks who became well-informed and law-abiding citizens of their •a dopted -country, but who, nevertheless, spoke proudly of their native Slovakia, the land in which they had been born, the ·land of their forefathers. The Slovak immigrant found it impossible to forget the land of his birth; he fondly recalled the scenes of Ms childhood, and often spolke of the relatives and friends beyond the sea. This was perfectly natural, for despite 1:!he hard lot and misery •o f his oTiginal home, yet he longed to be with his parents and friends, if only for a little whHe. He could see the village church wit'h its cross uplifted to the sky, as an eternal sign of salvation, a symbol of the deep faith in God that was in his soul, a symbol at once of his own pain and suffering, of his strength and hope. The church, located in the center of Slovak village life, with spires rising high above the simple peasant huts in whose shadow they reclined, stood out in sharp relief in his memory, for religion was the keystone of his existence. The church was his fortress in time of danger, his solace in time of grief, his hope in time of despair. Without his qhurch, his village priest, without prayer, his life would, indeed, be empty and forelorn. The Slovak has been able to bear life's burdens because he staunchly believes in Di- �SLOVAKIA 7 vine Providence and because he seeks resources in prayer at all times. Abroad, in foreign lands, the church with its Slovak prayers and hymns, has been the bulwaTk of the Slovak immigrant. It has been his ,anchor on a foreign shore, a compass in an uncharted sea. Because the church is all hnportant in his life, the Slovak has invariably built a church, then school. With a ,s trong religious and social foundation, the Slovak in America maintained his national character and expanded his cultural endeavors as the years went by. It was his faith that kept him loyal to his sacred traditions, preserved his language, and made him cherish his nationality. On Sundays, he joined his fellow countrymen in Slovak prayers and hymns; this, perhaps, more than any ot'her single factor, perpetuated the most sacred and treasured memories of Slovakia. Imposing Slovak churches, modern parish and school buildings, and office building,s· of the Slovak societies are. concrete expressions of the deep religious convictions a:nd· cultural aspirations of the Slovak immigrant. They are monuments of self-sacrifice and devotion to time-honored institutions, permeated with the same fervent spirit of his forefathers who cherished their Christian traditions be·neath the Tatras since time immemorial. At home, unfortunately, genuine Slovaik societies and organizations did not exist, and the few that functioned were -p rimarily designed to serve elements and interests that were alien to the Slovak cause. Even ibhe churcih, in some instances, became an agency for these forces. But · in America, Slovak churches, organizations and schools became the centers of Slovak national culture. Moreover, the .spark of nationalism which was barely kept alight ait home, burst into a bright flame in the new Land of freedom. The Slovak immigrant caught t:Jhe spirit of American democracy whose blessings he had personally experienced in his daily life. He accepted these with a deep sense of gratitude. He was proud of his new status of citizenship, an'd now · tlia.t he was content, he yearned to have his folks back home· enjoy these self-same rights and advantages of the democratic way of life. �8 SLOVAKIA Slovak poets and writers, keenly aware of this stifling atmosphere in which their people were slowly expiring, made every effort to arouse the masses out of their lethargy. Although their voices were unheeded in their native land, where the people were submissive and demoralized, nevertheless, a small but determined minority of patriaticminded Slovaks organized political clubs to fight for their nation's inherent rights and to formulate a program for an active political movement. The Slovaks had leadership, but failed to support their leaders efficiently, and on various occasions some of their leaders joined the opposition to work against the best interests and welfare of their nat,ion. Before the first World War Slovakia's national life was caught in a nut-cracker net-wor'k of political and social intrigue and seemed doomed. National extinction was. indeed, a grave danger which had to be averted. The Slovaks were helpless in the fa:ce of the opposition whi•c h prevented them from developing their native culture and realizing their right to self-government and independence. Internally, the Slovak nation was vitally sound-physically, biologically and morally it was sound - and it possessed untapped natural resources, but needed an external force to set it free. And this dynamic force came from America. Actual statistics are not available to indicate to what extent the American Slovaks influenced various developments in their ancient homeland, but, perhaps, in the future this vital information will be gathered and compiled in order to determine approximately, if nat precisely, to what measure they affected the social and political progress of their native country. Even without this material, however, w~ are able to mention the beginnings of the movements that were inspired and inaugurated by the Slorvaks in America. Naturally, a considerable number of Slovak emigrants returned home after spending several years abroad. These had. fulfilled. their goal to attain sufficient funds for their particular needs; but a large number, the majority as a matter of fact, remained in America and made their permanent home in the land of their adoption. These had overcome the almost irresistable desire to return to their native land �SLOVAKIA 9 and, though they never returned, during their entire life-time they nevertheless maintained close contaet with their relatives and friends in Slovakia. Even those, who brdke their ties with Europe irrevoc~bly, sti'll remained in touch w.iith their fellow-countrymen and, consequently, ma.de some contribution to the S'lovak cause indirectly. Actual instances of individua1s who broke completely wi1:Jh their past and lost contact wii!h their fellow Slovaks in Amerka were so rare that they can be d1scounted in our attempts to evaluate the destiny of the Slovaks in America and to arrive at a realistic analysis of the influence of American Slovaks on Slovia'k life in the country of their birtJh. The American phase of Slovak life, with its democratic texture and blend, effected several significant changes on home life in their native land. S,i nce the impeUing force of ~heir emigration in many cases was economic, there is no doubt whatsoever that corresponding returns from their labors abroad became the direct and immediate source of a relatiivelly large national income in Slovakia. The amount of new capital that was brought in by returning , Slovak emigrants is, perhaps, impossible to determine even approximately, but the fact remains that it was a windfall which gave Slovakia a new lease on its economic life. Foremost among the effec,ts of this influx of new capital to Slova'kia, was the ability of the average Slovak to own his own land by redeeming it if he hia,d lost it, and to purchase the necessary equiipment and livestock to insure his future economically. This gave him a chance to live as a free man to a large degree, for he was no longer subject completely to the whims and caprice's of his overlords in a smaill country, where the steadily increasing population made it imperative for the native Slovak to have .his plot of land, if he hoped to survive. The emergence of a growing number of debt-free, well-equipped arrd wellstocked small landowners marked the estalblishment, imperceptrbly but none-the-less surely, of a sound well-balanced economic unit in Slovakia's clhanging social order, Sma!ll landowners formed the nucleus of Slovakia's national life, for now they not only inha;bited the land of their forefathers, but they aetually owned it. Economic power, though �10 SLOVAKIA lllodest, indeed, had nevertheless enabled them to effect their social emancipation. Their improved status i'S readily ~derstood and appreciaited if we realize to what extent it freed them from the dead-weight of an oppressive feudal system stHl in vogue throughout Hungary and its domination - a feudal inheritance that had put most of Slovakia's ;forests and ara!ble soil, its rivers and la:kes, a'S weH as its ,l)O\litica1 control, into the ha,nds of an exclusively foreigz:i aristocracy. Under this system the Slovaks were nothing more than servants in their own homes and the fruits of their labors were plucked by usur,peTS who had seized control of tlheiir household. Originally, Slovakia's nobility was largely Slovak by birth, but in the course of time it degenerated by wholesale pesertion to a foreign cause. In this · way, large tracts of Jand passed into the hand'S of those who no longer were Slovak by temperament or nature and, hence, their policies were not designed to benefit the Slovaks. Moreover, in modern times, many large estates came into the hands of fore1gners whose policies were injurious to Slovak interests and whose political al'ignment with ,parties hostile to the Slovaks constituted· a positive menace to the national ex,i stence of the Slovaks in their own country. There is no doubt that the loss of ownership by the majority of the Slovak gentry, which was the backbone of the nation, put the national destiny of Slovakia into a most precarious posit!i:on. Moreover, the necessity of brea:king up their smal>l estates, because of the increasing population, :I'65ttlted in reducing the land to such small units as to make them unprofitable. 'J.ihis inevitably forced the s·m all land-holders to go into debt whenever there was the least mi:sca}Jeulation in their p1ans, or when there was a crop fai-lure. Improvements, or an expansion of one's holdings, were out of the question, for there was seldom a:ny surplus which the Slovalk could use · as an investment in a new enterprise. As a matter of fact, iit often ha:rppened thiat a landpwner was unable to meet his interest, not to speak of reducing the principal on his loan. Eventually, therefore, mahy estates fell into the hands of receivers, arid ·1ater were �SLOVAKIA 11 1bought up by non-Slovaks. As a result, the Slovaks suffered. in a twofold manner: 1) native land-owners dmlinished greatly in numbers, and 2) many diispossessed Slovaks emigrated to o1!her lands where, having settled chiefly in industrial areas, they no longer cared to return to the land and, consequently, they and their children were lost to their country forever. The continual drain of human resources from the n_a ti.onal reservoi'I' of Slovakia weakened the country economica'1ly, morrully and poliitically, because non-Slovaks replaced. the original Slovaks in their native homeland. Under such conditions, Slovak life, as su~h, suffered a sharp decline. Without a doubt, the most essential unit of the Slovalk nation, w'hich gave it permanent character, solidarity and stability, was its independent gentry which had been close .to the sdil for centuries. It was imperative that this group be ,p reserved in its pristine strength and vigor if Slova'kia was to survive as a distinct race in its original niationrul domain. The land-holdings, instead of being sub_ject to di,visions, must be held intact - otherwise, a complete economic breakdown would result and national dissolution would inevitably follow. This was their fear, a well-founded one, of which the Slovaks were acutely aware. 1 America -came to the rescue in this national crisis. The many opportunities for work and good pay in the new world offered a solution to the problems of economic reihabili~ tion at home. Accordingly, t:Jhousands of debt-r:idden and almost destitute Slovaks departed. for American shores with high hopes for the future. And that they were not disillusioned is attested to by the fact that, in a few years, many returned home again with savings which reestablishe d their fortunes in thcir homeland. New homes a.ppeared, old ones were repaired, new equipment and livestock were purchased, old debts were liquidated and Slova'kia's national economy was once more in the hands of iits own native population. ParadoxicaUy enough, the emigration on a large scale from Slovakia which threatened to destroy the nation irre- �12 SLOVAKIA :voca;bly beyond revival, actually restored it to its rightful ownership and renewed vigor. The returning emigrants manifested remarkable energy and enthusiasm in this national restoration. Moreover, many former workers and tenants upon their return were a)ble to buy sufficient parcels pf land to insure a preponderantly Slovak ownership. Others, profiting from their varied experiences abroad, established some sort of business by buying a sawmill, a flour mill, a tavern, etc., and thereby reenforced Slovakia's eco-, nomy by their initiative in founding diversified enterprises. These manifold activities by a thoroughly-awakened Slovak populace were greeted with keen competition by alien interlopers who had established a monopoly in many fields, but the returning Slovaks, having had the advantages of rich experience in the new world, proved to be a match for them. Of tantamount importance was the need for wider education, so that their children might have the opportunity to acquire a high school and college training. The need was both soci'a.'l and political, for they needed Slovak leaders in public Hfe and industry. It was a serious menace, indeed, to have a large percentage of their sons desert to an alien camp and serve a foreign cause stmply because of their training in the anti-Slovak schools sponsored by chauvinistic Magyar regimes which produced countless renegades. Fortunately, not all the Slovak graduates of these schools turned against their Slovak nation. The blessings of American capital became aga,in apparent in the struggle of the Slovak nationalists to maintain the Slovak spirit of loyalty in their ~hildren by providing speciali>zed training for them. Thus, Slovak fathers in America secured the funds necessary for the task of educating their sons in Slovakia for the common welfare of their own countrymen. In homes that had an Ameri'c an background, the spirit of democracy and patriotism kept alive the national life of Slovakia. This is to be .attribulted to Amerka as her gift of freedom to a small nation which was struggling to emancipate itself from foreign domination. An essentia~ element in directing the destiny of a nation is undoubtedly the press, for newspapers, magazines �SLOVAKIA 13 and books provide an index for the spiritual condition of a people. In this respect, the situation in Slovakia was really ~ploralble, because. only a fow Slovak neiwspaipers were published, and these did not enjoy wide circulation. The masses, as yet, had:·not acquired the habit of reading, because they did not feel the need of it. Moreover, they were impoverished and, hence, bought few boolks. For a long time, the only reading they had at hand was limited to their praye:tibodks, religious .bulletins and an occasional publication of the Spalok sv. Vojtecha (St. Adalbert's Society). The average Slovak showed l.ittle or no interest in politics, for he had become accustomed to the view that this was a game, or hobby, exclusively reserved for the nobility. The Americanized Slovaik, however, adopted a different view, and even native-born Slovaks, who had never been outside the confines of their country, gradually cihanged their attitude by reading Slovak newspapers which were sent to them from across the sea. From their pages they learned for the first time how grave the situation was in reality in their own b'ac'k yards. It was truly paradoxical that they were informed of things that happened right at home by receiving newspapers, published in their own language and spirit, more than three thousand miles away. They learned to defend their rights by a unified public opinion which was being crysta1Uzed largely through the influence of publications from foreign lands. And returning emigi.·ants strengthened this movement by keeping up their subscriptions to American newspapers. Many of them kept in close touch with their brother Slovaks abroad by retaining their membership in American Slovak societies for several years after coming back to Slovakia. Perhaps the most precious gift that America presented to Slovakia were the Slovaks who returned to their na.tive country, not only because they brought their savings, but also because these men had learned much by their new experiences whirch had matured them in many ways and which were to help Slovakia on the way towards winning her national freedom. Men who had left their country, dejected and despirrited, now returned refreshed and revivified by the atmosphere of American democracy. �14 SLOVAKIA In America, the Slovak who became a naturalized citizen lost his inferiority complex and acquired a healthy selfconfidence. He felt important once more as an individual, for he was proud of his new staJtus as a full-fledged citi'zeri of a great, democratic country. He respected the rights of others, While his own rights were a'liso respected. Moreover, as a member of free Slovak organizations, he learned to work not only in his own, but also in other's !interests. In fulfilling his responsibilities, as well as in insisting on his own rights, he was doing his work well in the spirit of true democracy. Although he became a vital part of American democratic life, the new citizen of S'lovak ancestry did not forget his native counrtrymen who lived in the land of his fathers in the Slovaik hills and woodlands and fields that stretched from the Low Carpathians in the West to the High Carpathians in the East. The Slovak language became a golden bond by whkh he was united to his fellow-countrymen beyond the seas ; and the concept ·of a wider extention of these rights to his people back home inspired him to work for the realrization of that idea!. Thus America became the fertile soil for the growth of Siovak national consciousness and freedom. Every Slovak town and village felt the impact of American democracy. The returning emigrant did not remain aloof from affairs of public welfare, but plunged 'into the thick of thfogs. Polirt:fos was no longer the here noire of the common man, for, after learning the democratic technique of American life, the Slovak entered into the arena of political struggles for his rights. He had both the courage and confidence to carry on the fight for his country's freedom as well as for his rights as a free man. While tracing 1:he direct influence of American democratic elements on Slovakia, we ought to reca:11 tha,t there was a strong cross-current that was felt in Slovak circles in America. This mutual assistance was ruppreciaited by leading Slovaks on both sides of the Atlantic, and they tried to establish closer ties of rela1Jionshilp with ea:ch other in order to achieve their goal of freedom. Communications �SLOVAKIA 15 betw~n leading Slovak thinkers in Slovakia and America were mruintained through · personal messages, · writings in the mag~ines a,nd,_ newsipapers, annuals and almanacs in which the freedom-lov,ing Slovaks at home kept in touch with their brothers across the sea. Americans of Slovak descent, former immigrants from Slovakia, learned the iJ.esson of democracy and freedom well in Ameri'Ca. Freedom, they learned, is the natural birthright of all mankind. If and when the Slovak nation wins its fight for fireedom and complete pwitical independenrce, the Slovak people will have America to tJhank for it. Am~ rica was, and still is, a constant source of insipiration and hope for the Slovaks in their hom~land, despite what has happened in 1945. 'I1he Slovaks shall remain eternally grateful to Ameri'ca and Americans of Slo,va'k ancestry for the priceless contributions to their struggle for freedom and independence, for the many sacrifices made so that true democracy once may rule not only in Slovakia, butt in an countries of the world. The roots of democracy and freedom in .Slovalk,i a had their beginnings in America, and Slovaks everywhere, at home and aJbroad in foreign lands, firmly believe that America will not abandon Slovakia in her darkest hour. The Slovaks look longingly to America for liberat ion from the scourge of manlkind, the greatest enemy of the democratic way of life - Communism . 1 • • • WHO SAID IT? "We lay pa;roiooJar stress on ithe fadt that the few Slovaik rei:f.ugees wandering about in the we:sit, adwooating the idea of a Ozooh.os!lova!k State, do not r~resent the Slovalk people, who are today fanat~ca'lly anti-Czeoh. Ozeohoslovakia can only be restored against the wi:H of the S-loivaks. Concerning the Czeicihs, they s'hould wnderstand that onJy the federation suggested aJbQlVe (!the Da.nulbian federation) can protect theisr nation from new adventures." - (F. 0. Miksche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, p. 216 ; Faber and Faber Ltd .. London). � DECEMBER, 1953 SLOVAKIA 1 INFLUENCE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY ON SWVAK LIFE Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Actual living conditions of the Slovak immigrants in the new warild, especially in the United States oif America, were very much different from those in hi1s homeland which was under the domination of Hungary until the end of the first world war. The natural temperament of the average Slovak was determined, to some degree, by the circumstances of his life in a land that had been under foreign nrle for centuries. Economically, the native of Slovakia found life hard and difficult; socially, his lot was unprogressive; politically, freedom and equality had no practical meaning for him. His energies were drained by the relentless struggle for survival. Not infrequently, he suffered from want; his entire life was spent in misery and poverty. The downtrodden Slovak peasant, though inwardly protesting against social inequality and injustice, had not suffi. cient strength and vitality to break the chains of his servitude. He resigned hims~lf to his misfortune, concluding that unkind fate decreed that misery was to be his n a tural lot on earth. Under such adverse circumstances, it was extremely difficult to arouse and maintain a feeling of Slovak national patriotism ; and it was doubly difficult to organize a Slovak society that would espouse the idea of Slovak nationalism, because the average Slovak was hampered at every step by his enemies who tenaciously held to the age-old concept of Magyar feudalism, a way of life that was contrary to the idea of Slovak nationalism. Every Slovak knew that he was not a Magyar but a Slovak; yet, this consciousness of nationalism was never allowed to develop freely. Patriotism and loyalty in the Hugarian State was only one: all had to acknowledge their adherence to the Crown of St. Stephen and Magyar hegemony. It is not surprising, therefore, that the peasant in Slovaikia had no clearcut understanding of the meaning of nationalism ; that he failed to aspire to national emancipation is manifestly an indication that he �2 SLOVA-IHA failed to grasp the glorious meaning of having one's own government in power and one's own native language as the official tongue of the land. And, hence, at first, the aver age Slovak was not inclined to partici,pate in political gatherings that were designe'd· to bring his own country ultimate freedom and democra;cy. Weighed . down ,b y the burdens of life as an oppressed human being, the Slovak's paJtience and endurance were truly remarkable. In the long succession of centuries of political servitude and 'tymnny, he had become resigned to his unchanging misery, injustice, humiliation and serfdom, for to him it seemed that this was decreed by fate, or a higher power. This was, then, the average Slova,k immigrant who came to America. Imagine how great was his amazement upon discovering that living an:d social conditions in the New World were so diametrically different from his life in the land of his birth, his Slova:kia beneath the Tatras. He was amazed by the vast difference between life at home in Slovakia and here in America and the unlimited opportunities offered the immigrant, provided he was willing to work. And since hard work was practica,lly s~cond nature to the Slovak immigra,nrt, he found his new home to his liking. At home, his sphere of activity ha,d been limited, while here, in his new home land, unlimited opportunities presented themselves on all sides, so that a man of inte1ligence, ingenuity and industry just could not fail to become a success in America. At hame, the Slovak could only hope to eke out a bare existence with hardly a chance for improvement; here in America he could look forward to a steady improvement of his social conditions. Here, in the new world, his .progress was not impeded by circumstances, on the contrary, the conditions for his advancement exceeded his fondest dreams. No doubt the primary motive for Slovak emigration was to seek a solution for financial difficulties; the Slovak went abroad chiefly to secure economic advantages which were lacking at home. He envisioned the day when he would rise above his lowly station in life with the help of his incr:eased earning power. Hence, there was no job, no matter �SLOVAKIA 3 how strenuorus or dangerous, that he shirked S'O long as ft promised him immediate returns. There is little doubt that tlhe Slovak immigrant in America worked harder than he had ever worked at home, •b ut t:Jhis was a sacrifice well worthwhile, in his estimation, if it helped his loved one$ in the old country and improved his own condition. America attracted the simple peaJsant from the hills and villages throughout Slovakfa. He was uneducated, though generally not illiterate, but equirpped with the natural gifts of remarkahle stamina, courage, ingenuity, industry and native intelligence. Possessing unusual powers of observation, sound judgment and ability to assimilate new ways of life, as well as being blessed witJh a good moral training, the Slov,a k found America a fertile field for his endeavors. He learned much in the new land of freedom and opportunity; and though he received much from it, he ailso gave much in return. He put his heart and will in his work, employed his mind in developing new tech:. niques, spared no effort, time and energy to produce an unending stream of goods for human consumption and welfare. Thus, the Slovak, who had been held in political bondage and who had lapsed into a state of social and economic retrogression, suddenly found a dynamic release for his pent-up energies in a land that was forever dedicated to freedom and equality, a land which offered him constant inspiration for his enterprising spirit and proved to be a never-ending source of visions of a great destiny. The de_~ mocratic atmosphere of America was to him a tonic, an elixir of magical powers that turned him into a veritable giant who feared no undertaking, avoided no difficulty. Consequently, many of his kind, working doggedly and persistently with indomitable energy, achieved comparative success in America. The typical American immigr ant from Slovakia was confronted with the difficulties of language, strange cus~ toms and new surroundings, and the immedi•a te necessity of employment. After securing a job, he quickly adjusted · himself to his new emrironment, acquired vaJ1uaJble expe~ riences over a period of years, steadHy increased his earnings and saved his money. He soon perceived that he, too, �4 SLOVAKIA ·was a human being with natural aspirations, desires and ideals which he knew could be realized if he worked for their attainment. It wa;s in America that he found himself as an ind!iividual, no:t only with civic responstbilites, but with personal rights as weH. As a full-fledged naturalized citizen of hi:s adopted country, he became acutely aware of his added dignity as a free man. This both satisfied him and aLso aroused in him the determination to emulate his fellow-citizens in the fullest a;ppreciation of his precious inheritance. Of course, there were some unfortunate exceptions to the general respon:se of the typical Slovak to his Ameriican surroundings; but on the whole, the great majority reacted favorably to the stimulating influences of a democratic way of life in the United States. Life's vicissitudes make human existence a constant struggle with obstacles strewn on the path that ,l eads to the ultimaJte goal. The SlovaJk lras never been without hardships and, therefore, he has never been afraid of the future. At home, all his efforts to overcome the handicaps of his lowly station in life were to no avail. He was doomed to remain in the same social caiste into which he was born. If he was born in poverty, he was destined to a lifelong struggle for a mere livelhood. There was no opportunity for him to rise above his station, being inextricably bound by ties of an outmoded feudal ,s ystem which kept him hopelessly mired in a bog of caste-privileged society. But his patient endurance and peritina;city, his indefatigable industry, which had helped him to survive under the most adverse conditions, served him well in the new land; and his ingrained habits of determination, dependability and native ingenuity were qualities which gave him the impetus to succeed when he was suddenly thrust into the fresh atmosphere of American free enterpr1se and democracy. The a;ma:zing discovery that he was on a plane of political and social equality with men of more than a score of nationa-lities, enjoy}ng freedom under one flag, the Stars and Stripes, made him feel that he had accomplished something worthwhile; and the consciousness of his abilities and achievements inspired him to work even harder to advance further on the road to Americanization, a process that �SLOVAKIA 5 brought out the native powers of the Slovak to adopt himself to new surroundings and to assimilate without losing his identity as a new American of Slovak ancestry. The immigrant Slovak's contacts with men of various races made him conscious of his own distinctness as a national figure, for he was unable to converse with them and he did not understand their ways. This factor affected him in two ways: 1) he was inclined to keep aloof from "strangers" and, 2) he was instinctively drawn to follow Slovaks who spoke his language and who knew his ways. Thus, it was but natural for him to draw closer to men of his own kind for companionship and understanding. All Slovak immigrants came together wherever they went, being drawn to each other by their common longing for the homes they had but recently left behind across the sea. Following the example of other nationalities, they organized societies and founded churches thaJt soon became the centers of their activities. This association kept them closely united and helped them to protect and enhance their common interests. Moreover, the feeling of national consciousness grew stronger among them as they sought refuge and comfort in these islands of Slovak memories and realities in the midst of a sea of representatives of every nation on earth. Slovaks in their homeland could not publicly express their national aspirations without reprisals, but here in America they were free to profess their patriotism and write about their ideals of nationhood. Every American of Slovak parentage could acknowledge his Slovak heritage publicly, and no one took it amiss, nobody was suspicious of his motives, no one insulted him for it. Moreover, his fellow-citizens of other national origins, in business and politics, accepted the new Americans as equals without regard to national origins. A Slovak immigrant who became a naturalized American citizen soon realized that he not only had civic responsibilities but personal rights, too, and the fact that 'he did · not have to renounce his Slovak heritage as such, while pledging loyalty to his new homeland, became the source �SLOVAKIA of his national pride of being a descendant of Slovak an~estors who had not been able to call their ancient hearths their own for many centuries. They cherished the national traditions of their forefathers and soon gave voice to them in this new land of freedom. In a comparatively short time, the Slovak in America · teaHzed that he, too, could voice his opinions freely, that he could have convictions wiithout fear of repression. Slovak organizations gave him ample opportunities to express himself; and hls newspapers were for him mediums of information, instruction and inspiration. These <:!orrstituted the keystone of Slovak unity for all fellow Americans of Slovak ancestry. From the stand,point of individual advancement, any Slovak, no matter how humble his origin, could ·air his views in his own newspapers. This was a veritable school for many simple, uneducated Slovaks who became well-informed and law-abiding citizens of their •a dopted -country, but who, nevertheless, spoke proudly of their native Slovakia, the land in which they had been born, the ·land of their forefathers. The Slovak immigrant found it impossible to forget the land of his birth; he fondly recalled the scenes of Ms childhood, and often spolke of the relatives and friends beyond the sea. This was perfectly natural, for despite 1:!he hard lot and misery •o f his oTiginal home, yet he longed to be with his parents and friends, if only for a little whHe. He could see the village church wit'h its cross uplifted to the sky, as an eternal sign of salvation, a symbol of the deep faith in God that was in his soul, a symbol at once of his own pain and suffering, of his strength and hope. The church, located in the center of Slovak village life, with spires rising high above the simple peasant huts in whose shadow they reclined, stood out in sharp relief in his memory, for religion was the keystone of his existence. The church was his fortress in time of danger, his solace in time of grief, his hope in time of despair. Without his qhurch, his village priest, without prayer, his life would, indeed, be empty and forelorn. The Slovak has been able to bear life's burdens because he staunchly believes in Di- �SLOVAKIA 7 vine Providence and because he seeks resources in prayer at all times. Abroad, in foreign lands, the church with its Slovak prayers and hymns, has been the bulwaTk of the Slovak immigrant. It has been his ,anchor on a foreign shore, a compass in an uncharted sea. Because the church is all hnportant in his life, the Slovak has invariably built a church, then school. With a ,s trong religious and social foundation, the Slovak in America maintained his national character and expanded his cultural endeavors as the years went by. It was his faith that kept him loyal to his sacred traditions, preserved his language, and made him cherish his nationality. On Sundays, he joined his fellow countrymen in Slovak prayers and hymns; this, perhaps, more than any ot'her single factor, perpetuated the most sacred and treasured memories of Slovakia. Imposing Slovak churches, modern parish and school buildings, and office building,s· of the Slovak societies are. concrete expressions of the deep religious convictions a:nd· cultural aspirations of the Slovak immigrant. They are monuments of self-sacrifice and devotion to time-honored institutions, permeated with the same fervent spirit of his forefathers who cherished their Christian traditions be·neath the Tatras since time immemorial. At home, unfortunately, genuine Slovaik societies and organizations did not exist, and the few that functioned were -p rimarily designed to serve elements and interests that were alien to the Slovak cause. Even ibhe churcih, in some instances, became an agency for these forces. But · in America, Slovak churches, organizations and schools became the centers of Slovak national culture. Moreover, the .spark of nationalism which was barely kept alight ait home, burst into a bright flame in the new Land of freedom. The Slovak immigrant caught t:Jhe spirit of American democracy whose blessings he had personally experienced in his daily life. He accepted these with a deep sense of gratitude. He was proud of his new status of citizenship, an'd now · tlia.t he was content, he yearned to have his folks back home· enjoy these self-same rights and advantages of the democratic way of life. �8 SLOVAKIA Slovak poets and writers, keenly aware of this stifling atmosphere in which their people were slowly expiring, made every effort to arouse the masses out of their lethargy. Although their voices were unheeded in their native land, where the people were submissive and demoralized, nevertheless, a small but determined minority of patriaticminded Slovaks organized political clubs to fight for their nation's inherent rights and to formulate a program for an active political movement. The Slovaks had leadership, but failed to support their leaders efficiently, and on various occasions some of their leaders joined the opposition to work against the best interests and welfare of their nat,ion. Before the first World War Slovakia's national life was caught in a nut-cracker net-wor'k of political and social intrigue and seemed doomed. National extinction was. indeed, a grave danger which had to be averted. The Slovaks were helpless in the fa:ce of the opposition whi•c h prevented them from developing their native culture and realizing their right to self-government and independence. Internally, the Slovak nation was vitally sound-physically, biologically and morally it was sound - and it possessed untapped natural resources, but needed an external force to set it free. And this dynamic force came from America. Actual statistics are not available to indicate to what extent the American Slovaks influenced various developments in their ancient homeland, but, perhaps, in the future this vital information will be gathered and compiled in order to determine approximately, if nat precisely, to what measure they affected the social and political progress of their native country. Even without this material, however, w~ are able to mention the beginnings of the movements that were inspired and inaugurated by the Slorvaks in America. Naturally, a considerable number of Slovak emigrants returned home after spending several years abroad. These had. fulfilled. their goal to attain sufficient funds for their particular needs; but a large number, the majority as a matter of fact, remained in America and made their permanent home in the land of their adoption. These had overcome the almost irresistable desire to return to their native land �SLOVAKIA 9 and, though they never returned, during their entire life-time they nevertheless maintained close contaet with their relatives and friends in Slovakia. Even those, who brdke their ties with Europe irrevoc~bly, sti'll remained in touch w.iith their fellow-countrymen and, consequently, ma.de some contribution to the S'lovak cause indirectly. Actual instances of individua1s who broke completely wi1:Jh their past and lost contact wii!h their fellow Slovaks in Amerka were so rare that they can be d1scounted in our attempts to evaluate the destiny of the Slovaks in America and to arrive at a realistic analysis of the influence of American Slovaks on Slovia'k life in the country of their birtJh. The American phase of Slovak life, with its democratic texture and blend, effected several significant changes on home life in their native land. S,i nce the impeUing force of ~heir emigration in many cases was economic, there is no doubt whatsoever that corresponding returns from their labors abroad became the direct and immediate source of a relatiivelly large national income in Slovakia. The amount of new capital that was brought in by returning , Slovak emigrants is, perhaps, impossible to determine even approximately, but the fact remains that it was a windfall which gave Slovakia a new lease on its economic life. Foremost among the effec,ts of this influx of new capital to Slova'kia, was the ability of the average Slovak to own his own land by redeeming it if he hia,d lost it, and to purchase the necessary equiipment and livestock to insure his future economically. This gave him a chance to live as a free man to a large degree, for he was no longer subject completely to the whims and caprice's of his overlords in a smaill country, where the steadily increasing population made it imperative for the native Slovak to have .his plot of land, if he hoped to survive. The emergence of a growing number of debt-free, well-equipped arrd wellstocked small landowners marked the estalblishment, imperceptrbly but none-the-less surely, of a sound well-balanced economic unit in Slovakia's clhanging social order, Sma!ll landowners formed the nucleus of Slovakia's national life, for now they not only inha;bited the land of their forefathers, but they aetually owned it. Economic power, though �10 SLOVAKIA lllodest, indeed, had nevertheless enabled them to effect their social emancipation. Their improved status i'S readily ~derstood and appreciaited if we realize to what extent it freed them from the dead-weight of an oppressive feudal system stHl in vogue throughout Hungary and its domination - a feudal inheritance that had put most of Slovakia's ;forests and ara!ble soil, its rivers and la:kes, a'S weH as its ,l)O\litica1 control, into the ha,nds of an exclusively foreigz:i aristocracy. Under this system the Slovaks were nothing more than servants in their own homes and the fruits of their labors were plucked by usur,peTS who had seized control of tlheiir household. Originally, Slovakia's nobility was largely Slovak by birth, but in the course of time it degenerated by wholesale pesertion to a foreign cause. In this · way, large tracts of Jand passed into the hand'S of those who no longer were Slovak by temperament or nature and, hence, their policies were not designed to benefit the Slovaks. Moreover, in modern times, many large estates came into the hands of fore1gners whose policies were injurious to Slovak interests and whose political al'ignment with ,parties hostile to the Slovaks constituted· a positive menace to the national ex,i stence of the Slovaks in their own country. There is no doubt that the loss of ownership by the majority of the Slovak gentry, which was the backbone of the nation, put the national destiny of Slovakia into a most precarious posit!i:on. Moreover, the necessity of brea:king up their smal>l estates, because of the increasing population, :I'65ttlted in reducing the land to such small units as to make them unprofitable. 'J.ihis inevitably forced the s·m all land-holders to go into debt whenever there was the least mi:sca}Jeulation in their p1ans, or when there was a crop fai-lure. Improvements, or an expansion of one's holdings, were out of the question, for there was seldom a:ny surplus which the Slovalk could use · as an investment in a new enterprise. As a matter of fact, iit often ha:rppened thiat a landpwner was unable to meet his interest, not to speak of reducing the principal on his loan. Eventually, therefore, mahy estates fell into the hands of receivers, arid ·1ater were �SLOVAKIA 11 1bought up by non-Slovaks. As a result, the Slovaks suffered. in a twofold manner: 1) native land-owners dmlinished greatly in numbers, and 2) many diispossessed Slovaks emigrated to o1!her lands where, having settled chiefly in industrial areas, they no longer cared to return to the land and, consequently, they and their children were lost to their country forever. The continual drain of human resources from the n_a ti.onal reservoi'I' of Slovakia weakened the country economica'1ly, morrully and poliitically, because non-Slovaks replaced. the original Slovaks in their native homeland. Under such conditions, Slovak life, as su~h, suffered a sharp decline. Without a doubt, the most essential unit of the Slovalk nation, w'hich gave it permanent character, solidarity and stability, was its independent gentry which had been close .to the sdil for centuries. It was imperative that this group be ,p reserved in its pristine strength and vigor if Slova'kia was to survive as a distinct race in its original niationrul domain. The land-holdings, instead of being sub_ject to di,visions, must be held intact - otherwise, a complete economic breakdown would result and national dissolution would inevitably follow. This was their fear, a well-founded one, of which the Slovaks were acutely aware. 1 America -came to the rescue in this national crisis. The many opportunities for work and good pay in the new world offered a solution to the problems of economic reihabili~ tion at home. Accordingly, t:Jhousands of debt-r:idden and almost destitute Slovaks departed. for American shores with high hopes for the future. And that they were not disillusioned is attested to by the fact that, in a few years, many returned home again with savings which reestablishe d their fortunes in thcir homeland. New homes a.ppeared, old ones were repaired, new equipment and livestock were purchased, old debts were liquidated and Slova'kia's national economy was once more in the hands of iits own native population. ParadoxicaUy enough, the emigration on a large scale from Slovakia which threatened to destroy the nation irre- �12 SLOVAKIA :voca;bly beyond revival, actually restored it to its rightful ownership and renewed vigor. The returning emigrants manifested remarkable energy and enthusiasm in this national restoration. Moreover, many former workers and tenants upon their return were a)ble to buy sufficient parcels pf land to insure a preponderantly Slovak ownership. Others, profiting from their varied experiences abroad, established some sort of business by buying a sawmill, a flour mill, a tavern, etc., and thereby reenforced Slovakia's eco-, nomy by their initiative in founding diversified enterprises. These manifold activities by a thoroughly-awakened Slovak populace were greeted with keen competition by alien interlopers who had established a monopoly in many fields, but the returning Slovaks, having had the advantages of rich experience in the new world, proved to be a match for them. Of tantamount importance was the need for wider education, so that their children might have the opportunity to acquire a high school and college training. The need was both soci'a.'l and political, for they needed Slovak leaders in public Hfe and industry. It was a serious menace, indeed, to have a large percentage of their sons desert to an alien camp and serve a foreign cause stmply because of their training in the anti-Slovak schools sponsored by chauvinistic Magyar regimes which produced countless renegades. Fortunately, not all the Slovak graduates of these schools turned against their Slovak nation. The blessings of American capital became aga,in apparent in the struggle of the Slovak nationalists to maintain the Slovak spirit of loyalty in their ~hildren by providing speciali>zed training for them. Thus, Slovak fathers in America secured the funds necessary for the task of educating their sons in Slovakia for the common welfare of their own countrymen. In homes that had an Ameri'c an background, the spirit of democracy and patriotism kept alive the national life of Slovakia. This is to be .attribulted to Amerka as her gift of freedom to a small nation which was struggling to emancipate itself from foreign domination. An essentia~ element in directing the destiny of a nation is undoubtedly the press, for newspapers, magazines �SLOVAKIA 13 and books provide an index for the spiritual condition of a people. In this respect, the situation in Slovakia was really ~ploralble, because. only a fow Slovak neiwspaipers were published, and these did not enjoy wide circulation. The masses, as yet, had:·not acquired the habit of reading, because they did not feel the need of it. Moreover, they were impoverished and, hence, bought few boolks. For a long time, the only reading they had at hand was limited to their praye:tibodks, religious .bulletins and an occasional publication of the Spalok sv. Vojtecha (St. Adalbert's Society). The average Slovak showed l.ittle or no interest in politics, for he had become accustomed to the view that this was a game, or hobby, exclusively reserved for the nobility. The Americanized Slovaik, however, adopted a different view, and even native-born Slovaks, who had never been outside the confines of their country, gradually cihanged their attitude by reading Slovak newspapers which were sent to them from across the sea. From their pages they learned for the first time how grave the situation was in reality in their own b'ac'k yards. It was truly paradoxical that they were informed of things that happened right at home by receiving newspapers, published in their own language and spirit, more than three thousand miles away. They learned to defend their rights by a unified public opinion which was being crysta1Uzed largely through the influence of publications from foreign lands. And returning emigi.·ants strengthened this movement by keeping up their subscriptions to American newspapers. Many of them kept in close touch with their brother Slovaks abroad by retaining their membership in American Slovak societies for several years after coming back to Slovakia. Perhaps the most precious gift that America presented to Slovakia were the Slovaks who returned to their na.tive country, not only because they brought their savings, but also because these men had learned much by their new experiences whirch had matured them in many ways and which were to help Slovakia on the way towards winning her national freedom. Men who had left their country, dejected and despirrited, now returned refreshed and revivified by the atmosphere of American democracy. �14 SLOVAKIA In America, the Slovak who became a naturalized citizen lost his inferiority complex and acquired a healthy selfconfidence. He felt important once more as an individual, for he was proud of his new staJtus as a full-fledged citi'zeri of a great, democratic country. He respected the rights of others, While his own rights were a'liso respected. Moreover, as a member of free Slovak organizations, he learned to work not only in his own, but also in other's !interests. In fulfilling his responsibilities, as well as in insisting on his own rights, he was doing his work well in the spirit of true democracy. Although he became a vital part of American democratic life, the new citizen of S'lovak ancestry did not forget his native counrtrymen who lived in the land of his fathers in the Slovaik hills and woodlands and fields that stretched from the Low Carpathians in the West to the High Carpathians in the East. The Slovak language became a golden bond by whkh he was united to his fellow-countrymen beyond the seas ; and the concept ·of a wider extention of these rights to his people back home inspired him to work for the realrization of that idea!. Thus America became the fertile soil for the growth of Siovak national consciousness and freedom. Every Slovak town and village felt the impact of American democracy. The returning emigrant did not remain aloof from affairs of public welfare, but plunged 'into the thick of thfogs. Polirt:fos was no longer the here noire of the common man, for, after learning the democratic technique of American life, the Slovak entered into the arena of political struggles for his rights. He had both the courage and confidence to carry on the fight for his country's freedom as well as for his rights as a free man. While tracing 1:he direct influence of American democratic elements on Slovakia, we ought to reca:11 tha,t there was a strong cross-current that was felt in Slovak circles in America. This mutual assistance was ruppreciaited by leading Slovaks on both sides of the Atlantic, and they tried to establish closer ties of rela1Jionshilp with ea:ch other in order to achieve their goal of freedom. Communications �SLOVAKIA 15 betw~n leading Slovak thinkers in Slovakia and America were mruintained through · personal messages, · writings in the mag~ines a,nd,_ newsipapers, annuals and almanacs in which the freedom-lov,ing Slovaks at home kept in touch with their brothers across the sea. Americans of Slovak descent, former immigrants from Slovakia, learned the iJ.esson of democracy and freedom well in Ameri'Ca. Freedom, they learned, is the natural birthright of all mankind. If and when the Slovak nation wins its fight for fireedom and complete pwitical independenrce, the Slovak people will have America to tJhank for it. Am~ rica was, and still is, a constant source of insipiration and hope for the Slovaks in their hom~land, despite what has happened in 1945. 'I1he Slovaks shall remain eternally grateful to Ameri'ca and Americans of Slo,va'k ancestry for the priceless contributions to their struggle for freedom and independence, for the many sacrifices made so that true democracy once may rule not only in Slovakia, butt in an countries of the world. The roots of democracy and freedom in .Slovalk,i a had their beginnings in America, and Slovaks everywhere, at home and aJbroad in foreign lands, firmly believe that America will not abandon Slovakia in her darkest hour. The Slovaks look longingly to America for liberat ion from the scourge of manlkind, the greatest enemy of the democratic way of life - Communism . 1 • • • WHO SAID IT? "We lay pa;roiooJar stress on ithe fadt that the few Slovaik rei:f.ugees wandering about in the we:sit, adwooating the idea of a Ozooh.os!lova!k State, do not r~resent the Slovalk people, who are today fanat~ca'lly anti-Czeoh. Ozeohoslovakia can only be restored against the wi:H of the S-loivaks. Concerning the Czeicihs, they s'hould wnderstand that onJy the federation suggested aJbQlVe (!the Da.nulbian federation) can protect theisr nation from new adventures." - (F. 0. Miksche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, p. 216 ; Faber and Faber Ltd .. London). � 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 1953, Vol. 3 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 6), April 1953.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 7), July 1953.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 8), September 1953.</li> <li>Issue 4 (No. 9), December 1953.</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 1953 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 DECEMBER, 1953 SLOVAKIA 1 INFLUENCE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY ON SWVAK LIFE Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Actual living conditions of the Slovak immigrants in the new warild, especially in the United States oif America, were very much different from those in hi1s homeland which was under the domination of Hungary until the end of the first world war. The natural temperament of the average Slovak was determined, to some degree, by the circumstances of his life in a land that had been under foreign nrle for centuries. Economically, the native of Slovakia found life hard and difficult; socially, his lot was unprogressive; politically, freedom and equality had no practical meaning for him. His energies were drained by the relentless struggle for survival. Not infrequently, he suffered from want; his entire life was spent in misery and poverty. The downtrodden Slovak peasant, though inwardly protesting against social inequality and injustice, had not suffi. cient strength and vitality to break the chains of his servitude. He resigned hims~lf to his misfortune, concluding that unkind fate decreed that misery was to be his n a tural lot on earth. Under such adverse circumstances, it was extremely difficult to arouse and maintain a feeling of Slovak national patriotism ; and it was doubly difficult to organize a Slovak society that would espouse the idea of Slovak nationalism, because the average Slovak was hampered at every step by his enemies who tenaciously held to the age-old concept of Magyar feudalism, a way of life that was contrary to the idea of Slovak nationalism. Every Slovak knew that he was not a Magyar but a Slovak; yet, this consciousness of nationalism was never allowed to develop freely. Patriotism and loyalty in the Hugarian State was only one: all had to acknowledge their adherence to the Crown of St. Stephen and Magyar hegemony. It is not surprising, therefore, that the peasant in Slovaikia had no clearcut understanding of the meaning of nationalism ; that he failed to aspire to national emancipation is manifestly an indication that he 2 SLOVA-IHA failed to grasp the glorious meaning of having one's own government in power and one's own native language as the official tongue of the land. And, hence, at first, the aver age Slovak was not inclined to partici,pate in political gatherings that were designe'd· to bring his own country ultimate freedom and democra;cy. Weighed . down ,b y the burdens of life as an oppressed human being, the Slovak's paJtience and endurance were truly remarkable. In the long succession of centuries of political servitude and 'tymnny, he had become resigned to his unchanging misery, injustice, humiliation and serfdom, for to him it seemed that this was decreed by fate, or a higher power. This was, then, the average Slova,k immigrant who came to America. Imagine how great was his amazement upon discovering that living an:d social conditions in the New World were so diametrically different from his life in the land of his birth, his Slova:kia beneath the Tatras. He was amazed by the vast difference between life at home in Slovakia and here in America and the unlimited opportunities offered the immigrant, provided he was willing to work. And since hard work was practica,lly s~cond nature to the Slovak immigra,nrt, he found his new home to his liking. At home, his sphere of activity ha,d been limited, while here, in his new home land, unlimited opportunities presented themselves on all sides, so that a man of inte1ligence, ingenuity and industry just could not fail to become a success in America. At hame, the Slovak could only hope to eke out a bare existence with hardly a chance for improvement; here in America he could look forward to a steady improvement of his social conditions. Here, in the new world, his .progress was not impeded by circumstances, on the contrary, the conditions for his advancement exceeded his fondest dreams. No doubt the primary motive for Slovak emigration was to seek a solution for financial difficulties; the Slovak went abroad chiefly to secure economic advantages which were lacking at home. He envisioned the day when he would rise above his lowly station in life with the help of his incr:eased earning power. Hence, there was no job, no matter SLOVAKIA 3 how strenuorus or dangerous, that he shirked S'O long as ft promised him immediate returns. There is little doubt that tlhe Slovak immigrant in America worked harder than he had ever worked at home, •b ut t:Jhis was a sacrifice well worthwhile, in his estimation, if it helped his loved one$ in the old country and improved his own condition. America attracted the simple peaJsant from the hills and villages throughout Slovakfa. He was uneducated, though generally not illiterate, but equirpped with the natural gifts of remarkahle stamina, courage, ingenuity, industry and native intelligence. Possessing unusual powers of observation, sound judgment and ability to assimilate new ways of life, as well as being blessed witJh a good moral training, the Slov,a k found America a fertile field for his endeavors. He learned much in the new land of freedom and opportunity; and though he received much from it, he ailso gave much in return. He put his heart and will in his work, employed his mind in developing new tech:. niques, spared no effort, time and energy to produce an unending stream of goods for human consumption and welfare. Thus, the Slovak, who had been held in political bondage and who had lapsed into a state of social and economic retrogression, suddenly found a dynamic release for his pent-up energies in a land that was forever dedicated to freedom and equality, a land which offered him constant inspiration for his enterprising spirit and proved to be a never-ending source of visions of a great destiny. The de_~ mocratic atmosphere of America was to him a tonic, an elixir of magical powers that turned him into a veritable giant who feared no undertaking, avoided no difficulty. Consequently, many of his kind, working doggedly and persistently with indomitable energy, achieved comparative success in America. The typical American immigr ant from Slovakia was confronted with the difficulties of language, strange cus~ toms and new surroundings, and the immedi•a te necessity of employment. After securing a job, he quickly adjusted · himself to his new emrironment, acquired vaJ1uaJble expe~ riences over a period of years, steadHy increased his earnings and saved his money. He soon perceived that he, too, 4 SLOVAKIA ·was a human being with natural aspirations, desires and ideals which he knew could be realized if he worked for their attainment. It wa;s in America that he found himself as an ind!iividual, no:t only with civic responstbilites, but with personal rights as weH. As a full-fledged naturalized citizen of hi:s adopted country, he became acutely aware of his added dignity as a free man. This both satisfied him and aLso aroused in him the determination to emulate his fellow-citizens in the fullest a;ppreciation of his precious inheritance. Of course, there were some unfortunate exceptions to the general respon:se of the typical Slovak to his Ameriican surroundings; but on the whole, the great majority reacted favorably to the stimulating influences of a democratic way of life in the United States. Life's vicissitudes make human existence a constant struggle with obstacles strewn on the path that ,l eads to the ultimaJte goal. The SlovaJk lras never been without hardships and, therefore, he has never been afraid of the future. At home, all his efforts to overcome the handicaps of his lowly station in life were to no avail. He was doomed to remain in the same social caiste into which he was born. If he was born in poverty, he was destined to a lifelong struggle for a mere livelhood. There was no opportunity for him to rise above his station, being inextricably bound by ties of an outmoded feudal ,s ystem which kept him hopelessly mired in a bog of caste-privileged society. But his patient endurance and peritina;city, his indefatigable industry, which had helped him to survive under the most adverse conditions, served him well in the new land; and his ingrained habits of determination, dependability and native ingenuity were qualities which gave him the impetus to succeed when he was suddenly thrust into the fresh atmosphere of American free enterpr1se and democracy. The a;ma:zing discovery that he was on a plane of political and social equality with men of more than a score of nationa-lities, enjoy}ng freedom under one flag, the Stars and Stripes, made him feel that he had accomplished something worthwhile; and the consciousness of his abilities and achievements inspired him to work even harder to advance further on the road to Americanization, a process that SLOVAKIA 5 brought out the native powers of the Slovak to adopt himself to new surroundings and to assimilate without losing his identity as a new American of Slovak ancestry. The immigrant Slovak's contacts with men of various races made him conscious of his own distinctness as a national figure, for he was unable to converse with them and he did not understand their ways. This factor affected him in two ways: 1) he was inclined to keep aloof from "strangers" and, 2) he was instinctively drawn to follow Slovaks who spoke his language and who knew his ways. Thus, it was but natural for him to draw closer to men of his own kind for companionship and understanding. All Slovak immigrants came together wherever they went, being drawn to each other by their common longing for the homes they had but recently left behind across the sea. Following the example of other nationalities, they organized societies and founded churches thaJt soon became the centers of their activities. This association kept them closely united and helped them to protect and enhance their common interests. Moreover, the feeling of national consciousness grew stronger among them as they sought refuge and comfort in these islands of Slovak memories and realities in the midst of a sea of representatives of every nation on earth. Slovaks in their homeland could not publicly express their national aspirations without reprisals, but here in America they were free to profess their patriotism and write about their ideals of nationhood. Every American of Slovak parentage could acknowledge his Slovak heritage publicly, and no one took it amiss, nobody was suspicious of his motives, no one insulted him for it. Moreover, his fellow-citizens of other national origins, in business and politics, accepted the new Americans as equals without regard to national origins. A Slovak immigrant who became a naturalized American citizen soon realized that he not only had civic responsibilities but personal rights, too, and the fact that 'he did · not have to renounce his Slovak heritage as such, while pledging loyalty to his new homeland, became the source SLOVAKIA of his national pride of being a descendant of Slovak an~estors who had not been able to call their ancient hearths their own for many centuries. They cherished the national traditions of their forefathers and soon gave voice to them in this new land of freedom. In a comparatively short time, the Slovak in America · teaHzed that he, too, could voice his opinions freely, that he could have convictions wiithout fear of repression. Slovak organizations gave him ample opportunities to express himself; and hls newspapers were for him mediums of information, instruction and inspiration. These <:!orrstituted the keystone of Slovak unity for all fellow Americans of Slovak ancestry. From the stand,point of individual advancement, any Slovak, no matter how humble his origin, could ·air his views in his own newspapers. This was a veritable school for many simple, uneducated Slovaks who became well-informed and law-abiding citizens of their •a dopted -country, but who, nevertheless, spoke proudly of their native Slovakia, the land in which they had been born, the ·land of their forefathers. The Slovak immigrant found it impossible to forget the land of his birth; he fondly recalled the scenes of Ms childhood, and often spolke of the relatives and friends beyond the sea. This was perfectly natural, for despite 1:!he hard lot and misery •o f his oTiginal home, yet he longed to be with his parents and friends, if only for a little whHe. He could see the village church wit'h its cross uplifted to the sky, as an eternal sign of salvation, a symbol of the deep faith in God that was in his soul, a symbol at once of his own pain and suffering, of his strength and hope. The church, located in the center of Slovak village life, with spires rising high above the simple peasant huts in whose shadow they reclined, stood out in sharp relief in his memory, for religion was the keystone of his existence. The church was his fortress in time of danger, his solace in time of grief, his hope in time of despair. Without his qhurch, his village priest, without prayer, his life would, indeed, be empty and forelorn. The Slovak has been able to bear life's burdens because he staunchly believes in Di- SLOVAKIA 7 vine Providence and because he seeks resources in prayer at all times. Abroad, in foreign lands, the church with its Slovak prayers and hymns, has been the bulwaTk of the Slovak immigrant. It has been his ,anchor on a foreign shore, a compass in an uncharted sea. Because the church is all hnportant in his life, the Slovak has invariably built a church, then school. With a ,s trong religious and social foundation, the Slovak in America maintained his national character and expanded his cultural endeavors as the years went by. It was his faith that kept him loyal to his sacred traditions, preserved his language, and made him cherish his nationality. On Sundays, he joined his fellow countrymen in Slovak prayers and hymns; this, perhaps, more than any ot'her single factor, perpetuated the most sacred and treasured memories of Slovakia. Imposing Slovak churches, modern parish and school buildings, and office building,s· of the Slovak societies are. concrete expressions of the deep religious convictions a:nd· cultural aspirations of the Slovak immigrant. They are monuments of self-sacrifice and devotion to time-honored institutions, permeated with the same fervent spirit of his forefathers who cherished their Christian traditions be·neath the Tatras since time immemorial. At home, unfortunately, genuine Slovaik societies and organizations did not exist, and the few that functioned were -p rimarily designed to serve elements and interests that were alien to the Slovak cause. Even ibhe churcih, in some instances, became an agency for these forces. But · in America, Slovak churches, organizations and schools became the centers of Slovak national culture. Moreover, the .spark of nationalism which was barely kept alight ait home, burst into a bright flame in the new Land of freedom. The Slovak immigrant caught t:Jhe spirit of American democracy whose blessings he had personally experienced in his daily life. He accepted these with a deep sense of gratitude. He was proud of his new status of citizenship, an'd now · tlia.t he was content, he yearned to have his folks back home· enjoy these self-same rights and advantages of the democratic way of life. 8 SLOVAKIA Slovak poets and writers, keenly aware of this stifling atmosphere in which their people were slowly expiring, made every effort to arouse the masses out of their lethargy. Although their voices were unheeded in their native land, where the people were submissive and demoralized, nevertheless, a small but determined minority of patriaticminded Slovaks organized political clubs to fight for their nation's inherent rights and to formulate a program for an active political movement. The Slovaks had leadership, but failed to support their leaders efficiently, and on various occasions some of their leaders joined the opposition to work against the best interests and welfare of their nat,ion. Before the first World War Slovakia's national life was caught in a nut-cracker net-wor'k of political and social intrigue and seemed doomed. National extinction was. indeed, a grave danger which had to be averted. The Slovaks were helpless in the fa:ce of the opposition whi•c h prevented them from developing their native culture and realizing their right to self-government and independence. Internally, the Slovak nation was vitally sound-physically, biologically and morally it was sound - and it possessed untapped natural resources, but needed an external force to set it free. And this dynamic force came from America. Actual statistics are not available to indicate to what extent the American Slovaks influenced various developments in their ancient homeland, but, perhaps, in the future this vital information will be gathered and compiled in order to determine approximately, if nat precisely, to what measure they affected the social and political progress of their native country. Even without this material, however, w~ are able to mention the beginnings of the movements that were inspired and inaugurated by the Slorvaks in America. Naturally, a considerable number of Slovak emigrants returned home after spending several years abroad. These had. fulfilled. their goal to attain sufficient funds for their particular needs; but a large number, the majority as a matter of fact, remained in America and made their permanent home in the land of their adoption. These had overcome the almost irresistable desire to return to their native land SLOVAKIA 9 and, though they never returned, during their entire life-time they nevertheless maintained close contaet with their relatives and friends in Slovakia. Even those, who brdke their ties with Europe irrevoc~bly, sti'll remained in touch w.iith their fellow-countrymen and, consequently, ma.de some contribution to the S'lovak cause indirectly. Actual instances of individua1s who broke completely wi1:Jh their past and lost contact wii!h their fellow Slovaks in Amerka were so rare that they can be d1scounted in our attempts to evaluate the destiny of the Slovaks in America and to arrive at a realistic analysis of the influence of American Slovaks on Slovia'k life in the country of their birtJh. The American phase of Slovak life, with its democratic texture and blend, effected several significant changes on home life in their native land. S,i nce the impeUing force of ~heir emigration in many cases was economic, there is no doubt whatsoever that corresponding returns from their labors abroad became the direct and immediate source of a relatiivelly large national income in Slovakia. The amount of new capital that was brought in by returning , Slovak emigrants is, perhaps, impossible to determine even approximately, but the fact remains that it was a windfall which gave Slovakia a new lease on its economic life. Foremost among the effec,ts of this influx of new capital to Slova'kia, was the ability of the average Slovak to own his own land by redeeming it if he hia,d lost it, and to purchase the necessary equiipment and livestock to insure his future economically. This gave him a chance to live as a free man to a large degree, for he was no longer subject completely to the whims and caprice's of his overlords in a smaill country, where the steadily increasing population made it imperative for the native Slovak to have .his plot of land, if he hoped to survive. The emergence of a growing number of debt-free, well-equipped arrd wellstocked small landowners marked the estalblishment, imperceptrbly but none-the-less surely, of a sound well-balanced economic unit in Slovakia's clhanging social order, Sma!ll landowners formed the nucleus of Slovakia's national life, for now they not only inha;bited the land of their forefathers, but they aetually owned it. Economic power, though 10 SLOVAKIA lllodest, indeed, had nevertheless enabled them to effect their social emancipation. Their improved status i'S readily ~derstood and appreciaited if we realize to what extent it freed them from the dead-weight of an oppressive feudal system stHl in vogue throughout Hungary and its domination - a feudal inheritance that had put most of Slovakia's ;forests and ara!ble soil, its rivers and la:kes, a'S weH as its ,l)O\litica1 control, into the ha,nds of an exclusively foreigz:i aristocracy. Under this system the Slovaks were nothing more than servants in their own homes and the fruits of their labors were plucked by usur,peTS who had seized control of tlheiir household. Originally, Slovakia's nobility was largely Slovak by birth, but in the course of time it degenerated by wholesale pesertion to a foreign cause. In this · way, large tracts of Jand passed into the hand'S of those who no longer were Slovak by temperament or nature and, hence, their policies were not designed to benefit the Slovaks. Moreover, in modern times, many large estates came into the hands of fore1gners whose policies were injurious to Slovak interests and whose political al'ignment with ,parties hostile to the Slovaks constituted· a positive menace to the national ex,i stence of the Slovaks in their own country. There is no doubt that the loss of ownership by the majority of the Slovak gentry, which was the backbone of the nation, put the national destiny of Slovakia into a most precarious posit!i:on. Moreover, the necessity of brea:king up their smal>l estates, because of the increasing population, :I'65ttlted in reducing the land to such small units as to make them unprofitable. 'J.ihis inevitably forced the s·m all land-holders to go into debt whenever there was the least mi:sca}Jeulation in their p1ans, or when there was a crop fai-lure. Improvements, or an expansion of one's holdings, were out of the question, for there was seldom a:ny surplus which the Slovalk could use · as an investment in a new enterprise. As a matter of fact, iit often ha:rppened thiat a landpwner was unable to meet his interest, not to speak of reducing the principal on his loan. Eventually, therefore, mahy estates fell into the hands of receivers, arid ·1ater were SLOVAKIA 11 1bought up by non-Slovaks. As a result, the Slovaks suffered. in a twofold manner: 1) native land-owners dmlinished greatly in numbers, and 2) many diispossessed Slovaks emigrated to o1!her lands where, having settled chiefly in industrial areas, they no longer cared to return to the land and, consequently, they and their children were lost to their country forever. The continual drain of human resources from the n_a ti.onal reservoi'I' of Slovakia weakened the country economica'1ly, morrully and poliitically, because non-Slovaks replaced. the original Slovaks in their native homeland. Under such conditions, Slovak life, as su~h, suffered a sharp decline. Without a doubt, the most essential unit of the Slovalk nation, w'hich gave it permanent character, solidarity and stability, was its independent gentry which had been close .to the sdil for centuries. It was imperative that this group be ,p reserved in its pristine strength and vigor if Slova'kia was to survive as a distinct race in its original niationrul domain. The land-holdings, instead of being sub_ject to di,visions, must be held intact - otherwise, a complete economic breakdown would result and national dissolution would inevitably follow. This was their fear, a well-founded one, of which the Slovaks were acutely aware. 1 America -came to the rescue in this national crisis. The many opportunities for work and good pay in the new world offered a solution to the problems of economic reihabili~ tion at home. Accordingly, t:Jhousands of debt-r:idden and almost destitute Slovaks departed. for American shores with high hopes for the future. And that they were not disillusioned is attested to by the fact that, in a few years, many returned home again with savings which reestablishe d their fortunes in thcir homeland. New homes a.ppeared, old ones were repaired, new equipment and livestock were purchased, old debts were liquidated and Slova'kia's national economy was once more in the hands of iits own native population. ParadoxicaUy enough, the emigration on a large scale from Slovakia which threatened to destroy the nation irre- 12 SLOVAKIA :voca;bly beyond revival, actually restored it to its rightful ownership and renewed vigor. The returning emigrants manifested remarkable energy and enthusiasm in this national restoration. Moreover, many former workers and tenants upon their return were a)ble to buy sufficient parcels pf land to insure a preponderantly Slovak ownership. Others, profiting from their varied experiences abroad, established some sort of business by buying a sawmill, a flour mill, a tavern, etc., and thereby reenforced Slovakia's eco-, nomy by their initiative in founding diversified enterprises. These manifold activities by a thoroughly-awakened Slovak populace were greeted with keen competition by alien interlopers who had established a monopoly in many fields, but the returning Slovaks, having had the advantages of rich experience in the new world, proved to be a match for them. Of tantamount importance was the need for wider education, so that their children might have the opportunity to acquire a high school and college training. The need was both soci'a.'l and political, for they needed Slovak leaders in public Hfe and industry. It was a serious menace, indeed, to have a large percentage of their sons desert to an alien camp and serve a foreign cause stmply because of their training in the anti-Slovak schools sponsored by chauvinistic Magyar regimes which produced countless renegades. Fortunately, not all the Slovak graduates of these schools turned against their Slovak nation. The blessings of American capital became aga,in apparent in the struggle of the Slovak nationalists to maintain the Slovak spirit of loyalty in their ~hildren by providing speciali>zed training for them. Thus, Slovak fathers in America secured the funds necessary for the task of educating their sons in Slovakia for the common welfare of their own countrymen. In homes that had an Ameri'c an background, the spirit of democracy and patriotism kept alive the national life of Slovakia. This is to be .attribulted to Amerka as her gift of freedom to a small nation which was struggling to emancipate itself from foreign domination. An essentia~ element in directing the destiny of a nation is undoubtedly the press, for newspapers, magazines SLOVAKIA 13 and books provide an index for the spiritual condition of a people. In this respect, the situation in Slovakia was really ~ploralble, because. only a fow Slovak neiwspaipers were published, and these did not enjoy wide circulation. The masses, as yet, had:·not acquired the habit of reading, because they did not feel the need of it. Moreover, they were impoverished and, hence, bought few boolks. For a long time, the only reading they had at hand was limited to their praye:tibodks, religious .bulletins and an occasional publication of the Spalok sv. Vojtecha (St. Adalbert's Society). The average Slovak showed l.ittle or no interest in politics, for he had become accustomed to the view that this was a game, or hobby, exclusively reserved for the nobility. The Americanized Slovaik, however, adopted a different view, and even native-born Slovaks, who had never been outside the confines of their country, gradually cihanged their attitude by reading Slovak newspapers which were sent to them from across the sea. From their pages they learned for the first time how grave the situation was in reality in their own b'ac'k yards. It was truly paradoxical that they were informed of things that happened right at home by receiving newspapers, published in their own language and spirit, more than three thousand miles away. They learned to defend their rights by a unified public opinion which was being crysta1Uzed largely through the influence of publications from foreign lands. And returning emigi.·ants strengthened this movement by keeping up their subscriptions to American newspapers. Many of them kept in close touch with their brother Slovaks abroad by retaining their membership in American Slovak societies for several years after coming back to Slovakia. Perhaps the most precious gift that America presented to Slovakia were the Slovaks who returned to their na.tive country, not only because they brought their savings, but also because these men had learned much by their new experiences whirch had matured them in many ways and which were to help Slovakia on the way towards winning her national freedom. Men who had left their country, dejected and despirrited, now returned refreshed and revivified by the atmosphere of American democracy. 14 SLOVAKIA In America, the Slovak who became a naturalized citizen lost his inferiority complex and acquired a healthy selfconfidence. He felt important once more as an individual, for he was proud of his new staJtus as a full-fledged citi'zeri of a great, democratic country. He respected the rights of others, While his own rights were a'liso respected. Moreover, as a member of free Slovak organizations, he learned to work not only in his own, but also in other's !interests. In fulfilling his responsibilities, as well as in insisting on his own rights, he was doing his work well in the spirit of true democracy. Although he became a vital part of American democratic life, the new citizen of S'lovak ancestry did not forget his native counrtrymen who lived in the land of his fathers in the Slovaik hills and woodlands and fields that stretched from the Low Carpathians in the West to the High Carpathians in the East. The Slovak language became a golden bond by whkh he was united to his fellow-countrymen beyond the seas ; and the concept ·of a wider extention of these rights to his people back home inspired him to work for the realrization of that idea!. Thus America became the fertile soil for the growth of Siovak national consciousness and freedom. Every Slovak town and village felt the impact of American democracy. The returning emigrant did not remain aloof from affairs of public welfare, but plunged 'into the thick of thfogs. Polirt:fos was no longer the here noire of the common man, for, after learning the democratic technique of American life, the Slovak entered into the arena of political struggles for his rights. He had both the courage and confidence to carry on the fight for his country's freedom as well as for his rights as a free man. While tracing 1:he direct influence of American democratic elements on Slovakia, we ought to reca:11 tha,t there was a strong cross-current that was felt in Slovak circles in America. This mutual assistance was ruppreciaited by leading Slovaks on both sides of the Atlantic, and they tried to establish closer ties of rela1Jionshilp with ea:ch other in order to achieve their goal of freedom. Communications SLOVAKIA 15 betw~n leading Slovak thinkers in Slovakia and America were mruintained through · personal messages, · writings in the mag~ines a,nd,_ newsipapers, annuals and almanacs in which the freedom-lov,ing Slovaks at home kept in touch with their brothers across the sea. Americans of Slovak descent, former immigrants from Slovakia, learned the iJ.esson of democracy and freedom well in Ameri'Ca. Freedom, they learned, is the natural birthright of all mankind. If and when the Slovak nation wins its fight for fireedom and complete pwitical independenrce, the Slovak people will have America to tJhank for it. Am~ rica was, and still is, a constant source of insipiration and hope for the Slovaks in their hom~land, despite what has happened in 1945. 'I1he Slovaks shall remain eternally grateful to Ameri'ca and Americans of Slo,va'k ancestry for the priceless contributions to their struggle for freedom and independence, for the many sacrifices made so that true democracy once may rule not only in Slovakia, butt in an countries of the world. The roots of democracy and freedom in .Slovalk,i a had their beginnings in America, and Slovaks everywhere, at home and aJbroad in foreign lands, firmly believe that America will not abandon Slovakia in her darkest hour. The Slovaks look longingly to America for liberat ion from the scourge of manlkind, the greatest enemy of the democratic way of life - Communism . 1 • • • WHO SAID IT? "We lay pa;roiooJar stress on ithe fadt that the few Slovaik rei:f.ugees wandering about in the we:sit, adwooating the idea of a Ozooh.os!lova!k State, do not r~resent the Slovalk people, who are today fanat~ca'lly anti-Czeoh. Ozeohoslovakia can only be restored against the wi:H of the S-loivaks. Concerning the Czeicihs, they s'hould wnderstand that onJy the federation suggested aJbQlVe (!the Da.nulbian federation) can protect theisr nation from new adventures." - (F. 0. Miksche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, p. 216 ; Faber and Faber Ltd .. London).  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 Influence of American Democracy on Slovak Life Description An account of the resource Dr. Francis Hrušovský Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 4 (9), December 1953 pp. 1-15 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrušovský, František, 1903-1956 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1953 LCNAF