4
50
763
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6e0e60bbf89ac23192966834393b8fe7.pdf
90f2698a568522dbb06c8615a60257e0
PDF Text
Text
50
SLOVAKIA
BRITISH POLICY AND SLOVAKIA -
1939-1945
J.M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
Diiploma,,tic recognition of the Slovak Republic by European Great Powers offers a student of modern political
history an interesting field of research. In the official and
semi-official memoranda and documents as well as in numerous works, published by political writers in America,
we read that the Slovak Republic was recognized and established diplomatic or consular relations merely with
"Germany and its satellites.; ' The fact that not only an
European states, including the Vatican, Switzerland, Sweden, but also the Soviet Union, established regular diplomatic relations, and that Great Britain exchanged consuls
with Slovakia, is as a rule overlooked (1). Why this glaring oversight on the part of practically all American writers on Czecho-Slovakia in the years 1939-1945, is a matter
of an easy guess. Most of the information on Slovakia was
supplied to the West by Czech exiles who under the leadership of Benes, labored for restoration of Czecho~Slovakia, and American historians and political writers did not
question the reliability of their sources of information.
A study of the international recognition of the Slovak
Republic by European and non-European nations is, therefore, an interesting matter. It shows how easily world
opinion can be fooled and how unreliable our "political
science" can be even while dealing with current or contemporary events.
Among the Great Powers, which never were mentioned in connection with Slovakia by American historians
and writers on international events, is, in the first place,
Great Britain. Readers of newspapers, periodicals, and
books during the war, and later readers of modern history,
were induced to believe that Great Britain firmly stood on
the side of the Czech politicians who desired to rule Slovakia, and that the British Government never recognized the
fact that the autonomous Slovak Diet within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia proclaimed Slovakia an independent State on March 14, 1939.
�SLOVAKIA
51
The truth about Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia is, of course, quite different.
The British Government instructed its Consul, Peter
Pares, to notify the Slovak Government that "His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom proposed to appoint him as Consul for Slovakia" on May 4, 1939, i.e., not
later than six weeks after Slovakia's declaration of independence took place (2). The British Parliament accepted
the proclamation of Slovakia's independence as a fait accompli against which Great Britain had no intention to
protest, even sooner, on March 15, 1939, when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain announced in the House of
Commons that the British Government did not feel bound
by the Agreement guaranteeing Czecho-Slovakia her frontiers "because, by the proclamation of the independence
of Slovakia by the Slovak Diet, Czecho-Slovakia disintegrated from the inside."
Lord Halifax expressed the attitude of the Foreign
Office to the events, which took place in Slovakia, in diplomatic terms but did not leave any doubt that he agreed
with his Prime Minister. On March 15, 1939, Lord Halifax
instructed the British Ambassador in Berlin, Sir Neville
Henderson, to inform the German Government that "His
Majesty's Government has no desire to interfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Govemments may be
more directly concerned than His Majesty's Government
in the United Kingdom ... " (3).
The German Ambassador to Great Britain, Dirksen,
interpreted the above statements and reported to Berlin
on March 14, 1939, that "aittitude of the British Government toward conflict between Czechia and Slovakia was
clarified by Halifax's speech, statements by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well as by attitudes
of press itself" and that "British Government regarded
constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and
Czechia as an internal concern of the Czecho~lovak State
in which Great Britain had no part." According to Dirksen ",the more the outward appearance of the right to selfdetermination of the people concerned was preserved, the
greater would be the understanding among the public (in
�52
SLOVAKIA
Great Britain) for a new and stable settlement, especially
as on all sides the desire existed to keep out of a remote
affair which did not affeot British interests ... " ( 4).
As a matter of fact, relations between Great Britain
and the Slovak Republic developed so favorably that not
later than July 4, 1939, the Slovak Government appointed,
with the the consent of the British Government, the first
Consul of Slovakia in Great Britain, Milan P. Harminc.
The British Consul in Slovakia, Peter Pares, on July 6,
1939, handed a letter to Consul Harminc in which he asked
the British authorities in Dover to grant the Slovak Consul "the usual facilities on landing which are customarily
given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on
their first arrival in the United Kingdom ... " (5).
The Slovak Consul, who actually was in charge of the
first Slovak Consulate General in the United Kingdom, notified the Foreign Office of his arrival and asked to be received
on July 18, 1939. The Foreign Office in return advised him
by letter of August 17, 1939, that there was "no objection on
the part of His Majesty's Government to his entering forthwith upon his functions as Consul of Slovakia in London" (6).
If we take into consideration the international situation in August 1939 and all possible demarches and intrigues of the former Czecho-Slovak politicians and diplomats, and especially of ex-president Dr. Edward Benes,
who after March 14, 1939, addressed al'l governments and
asked them not to recognize the Slovak Republic, the above
attitude of Great Britain certainly allows to arrive at a
conclusion that the British Government was certainly not on
the side of the adversaries of Slovakia's aspirations for
self~government and independence. International Law
knows many forms of international recognition of new
States, from de jure to de facto recognition, and to an exchange of diplomatic or consular representatives. Great
Britain granted its recognition to the Slovak Republic by
exchanging consuls within six weeks after proclamation of
Slovakia's independence by the Slovak Diet. There hardly
can be any doubt that an early normalization of diplomatic
relations would have followed, if the Second World War
�SLOVAKIA
53
had not started only six months after Slovakia decided to
apply its right to self-determination.
Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia after the
War broke out in Septem:ber 1939, offers according to
some documents, even more conclusive proof of the British Government's inclination to maintain relations with
the S'lovak Republic and not to commit itself prematurely
to some other solution of the Slovak problem.
Adversaries of Slovakia's independence were quite successful in spreading a general belief, when the Second
World started, Great Britain ceased to recognize the existence of the Slovak Republic and that the Slovak Government simply took cognizance of that fact.
Diplomatic documents, even those published from German archives, give some proof to the contrary. The first
Slovak Consul, M. R. Harminc, received a telegram, on
September 4, 1939, inviting him to Bratislava for consultation, but he understood that it was a move which the
Slovak foreign minister had to make and, therefore, Harmine did not follow the instructions and remained in London, since he saw that the Government of Great Britain
did not change its attitude towards Slovakia at the beginning or during the war against Poland. As a matter of
fact, Great Britain did not change its stand towards Slovakia even after Poland was divided among her attackers
- Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
The Foreign Office formally notified the Slovak Consul on October 12, 1939, that he "will continue to be recognized as the Slovak Consul in London" (7). For the
middle of October 1939, in view of the general situation in
Europe, this atitude of the British Government certainly
indicates that Great Britain still recognized the Slovak
Republic and did not intend to break relations with it.
Why this attitude of Great Britain was not efficiently used
either by the Slovak Consul or the Slovak Government,
would call for a lengthy explanation. Documents on German Foreign Policy offer some proof that there were some
attempts, on the side of Slovak diplomats, to maintain neutrality and to present Slovakia as a neutral State with regard to Great Britain. This is evident especially from the
�54
SLOVAKIA
document No. 205, published by the American and British Governments in "Series D" of the Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1845, in which we read that the
Slovak Minister to Italy, J. M. Zvrskovec, on March 28,
1940, submitted a note to the Italian Foreign Ministry in
which he stated that Slovakia was a neutral country. He
requested to convey this to His Majesty's Government "in
order that England may recognize Slovakia's neutrality
with all its consequences ... " (8).
Any attempt of the Slovak Government to keep Slovakia neutral was, of course, more an expression of feelings and desires of the Slovak people and its politicians
than a real possibility. Soon after Slovakia proclaimed its
independence, the territory of eastern Slovakia was attacked by Hungary and there were indications that also
some Polish circles were inclined to make a deal with Germany and Hungary at the expense of Slovakia. "Therefore,
in order to discourage Hungary," says a Special Report of
the U. S. House of Representatives, "in her armed attack
launched against eastern Slovakia, the Slovak Government
concluded with Germany a Treaty of Protection (Schllltzvertrag) on March 23, 1939." By this theaty Slovakia tried
to protect her independence an-d the integrity of her territory since, according to Article I of the Treaty, the Reich
"undertook to protect the political independence of the Slovak State and the integrity of its territory," and the Slovak
Government agreed in turn "to conduct its foreign policy in
close understanding with the German Government" (9).
This obligation prevented Slovakia from being formally neutral, and the Slovak diplomat who sent the a:bove
mentioned note on Slovakia's neutrality had to pay for
his step. So did also his Minister, Ferdinand :Durcansky.
Great Britain, however, remained cautious in dealing
with the Slovak problem even later. The British Government
remained for some time reluctant to recognize the Czech
group of exiled politicians led by Benes, who claimed that
they were the official representatives of Czecho-Slovakia
even though some of them previously resigned from their
positions, like Dr. E. Benes, for instance (on October 5,
1938), or never took part in any Prague governments. The
�SLOVAKIA
55
British Government "showed great caution in its attitude towards the Czecho-Slovak question," says C. A. Macartney, the British expert on Central Europe in the Foreign Office during the war. "It did not even recognize the
Czecho-Slovak Committee until January 6, 1940." On February 24, Mr. Chamberlain spoke of restoring Czech independence, but on March 7, 1940, the London correspondent of the Pester Lloyd was authorized to telegraph the
.following message:
"British war aims in fact include the restoration of the
independen<:e of Czechs and Slovaks. The British Government has, however, in no way committed itself with regard
to the constitutional form the extent and the frontiers of
the new State. As regards Slovakia, Britain leaves entirely
open the question whether the Slovak State shall enjoy its
independence in union with a Czech state, or in another
form. This question is to be decided by the Slovaks themselves. Beyond the declaration in principle of this war aim,
the British Government has entered into no obligations
which might give grounds to complaints ... " (10).
The Czecho-Slovak Committee, according to Macartney,
was "a wartime organization carrying out certain pragmatically necessary duties, and the recognition of it, in that
capacity, carried no implication about a future Czecho-Slovak State" (11).
Such a formulation of Great Britain's war aims allows
undoubtedly to assume that the Bdtish Government considered, even in 1940, further existence of the Slovak State
conforms with Great Britain's war aims. The Foreign Office
was quite explicit in this regard even in letters addressed
to Dr. Benes. When Dr. Benes, in his letter of July 18,
1940, to Lord Halifax, expressed his thanks to His Majesty's
Government for the stand which Great Britain took with
regard to the events of March 15, 1939, and implied that the
British Government "by so doing have solemnly emphasized
the political and legal continuity of the Czecho-Slovak Republic," the Foreign Of£ice did not fail to correct Dr. Benes' "li1beral" interpretation. Lord Halifax on behalf of
His Majesty's Government wrote emphatically to Dr. Benes
that "it cannot be presumed that His Majesty's Government
�56
SLOVAKIA
necessarily share your conclusion, drawn in your letter:
namely, that by their attitude after the events of March
15, 1939, His Majesty's Government have taken any particular attitude concerning the legal continuity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. The acts of His Majesty's Government
had the significance that they protested against the changes
brought about in Czecho-Slovakia by German military action, and that they stressed that in their opinion these
changes had no legal basis ... " (12).
In the same letter signed by Lord Halifax on July 18,
1940, there are also some other interesting points regarding
Slovakia. His Majesty's Government were, according to Halifax, in principle ready to recognize the Provisional Czecho-Slovak Government," but it was added that "this Provisional Government is to be a representative government
of the Czech and Slovak peoples and that it is intended
that also the Czecho-Slovak State Council will be of fully
representative character and will include the recognized
Czech and Slovak leaders abroad, as far as they have not
been included in the Provisional Government" (13).
We can say, therefore, that the British Government
paid, in view of the circumstances, unexpected attention
to the Slovak question by stressing that it was ready to
recognize Benes' exiled Provisional Government only on
the condition of full Slovak participation, and by making a
clear distinction between the Czechs and the Slovaks.
From Dr. Benes' acts against Slovaks who did not
share his political views and ambitions, we can conclude
that he was aware of possible dangers for his plans on
account of the above British attitude towards Slovakia
and the Slovaks. Benes used all means (denunciation, false
accusations, etc) to get rid of not only Slovaks advocating
Slovakia's right to self-determination (14), but also of
Slovaks like Dr. Milan Hod.fa and Dr. Stephen Osusky.
Dr. Benes did his utmost to discredit both in England and
in the U. S. A. simply because they did not share his views
as to the future of Slovakia. The first Consul of the Slovak
Republic, Milan P. Harminc, saved himself from vengeance
and trouble only by volunteering into the British Army
overseas thus abandoning all political activity.
�SLOVAKIA
57
All this allows us to believe, even on the basis of documents which are far from complete, that there was a fair
possibility to give Central Europe, and in it to the Slovak
question, quite a different organiZiation from that advocated by. Dr. Benes and imposed in the end by the Soviet
Union, had the British view prevailed. No doubt it would
also have required a much clearer stand and understanding of Slovak politicians in Great Britain (Hodza, Osusky,
Pauliny-Toth, etc.) who did not agree with Dr. Benes or
denounced his machinations, undemocratic procedures, and
utter disregard for Slovakia's aspirations (15), but did little
or nothing positively to influence the Western Powers and
to obtain a recognition of a Slovak exiled Committee or a
Provisional Government. The first Slovak Consul apparently failed to use, for his country's future, all the good will
and inclination of the British Government to recognize
him, even after Poland was defeated, as Consul of Slovakia in London, which he probably would have been able
to do, had the Slovak politicians in London supported him.
Favorable British attitude towards Slovakia found its
expression again before the end of the war when Dr. Benes travelled, in spite of clear hints of the British Government and Parliament, to Moscow and signed a treaty with
the Soviet Union, which treaty later helped the Soviet to
penetrate into Central Europe and to establish there Communist rule and statellite governments. The British Government allowed, in 1943, Slovak exiles, headed by Peter
Pridavok, to organize the Slovak National Council in London which opposed Dr. Benes' policy and advocated independence for Slovakia (16). Unfortunately, it was too late
for a change in the fate of Slovakia. Not only did international events help Dr. Benes to accomplish his plans of
subjugation of Slovakia but also some Slovak politicians in
London and in Slovakia gave a hand to Dr. Benes and Stalin in order to enslave the Slovak people and to rob them
of statehood and independence. A study of the British attitude towards Slovakia's aspirations for self-government
is, nevertheless, quite an interesting chapter in Slovakia's
history of the period 1938-1945 and deserves further research.
�58
SLOVAKIA
REFERENCES AND DOCUMENTS
(1) F'or information on the international recognition of the Slovak
Repwblic see: J . M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads
of Central Europe, Speller and Sons, New Yoii{, 1960; J. A. !Mikus:
/La Slavaquie dans le drame de l'Europe, Paris, '195.5; J. M. Kirschbaum: Nal boj j o samostatnost', Oleveland, :1958; Gi,]bert Oddo:
Slovakia and its People, Speller and Sons, New Ywk, 1960.
~2) See attached Document No. 'l.
(3) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, 119118-1941.5, Series
D; Vol. W, Document No. 234, attached ias Document No. 2.
{4) Jlbidem, Document No. 220, attached as Document No. 3.
(5) See attaohed Document No. 4.
(~ See attached Document No. 5.
{7) See attached Document No. 6.
{8) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, lJ!ll!M.945, Series
D; Document No. 205 or J. M. Kirschlbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the
Crossroads of Central Europe, Part IV, p. 280.281.
(9) !For full text see J . M. KiTschlbaum, QIP. cit., p. 265.
{ 10) C. A. Ma~rtney: October Fifteenth, A History of Modern
Hungary, Edinburgh University Press, 1957, Parit I, p. 376.
{ltl) ]bidem, p . 377.
r~l.12) !For foll text see Memoirs of Edward Bene!, London, 19.54,
p. •108. On March 15, 1939, the Germans occupied only BohemiaM<Yl'cWia and, therefore, the British protest could not refer to SlovaJcia's proclamation cxf •i ndependence.
-0:IJ3) Memoirs of Edward Benes, ,p. 1110.
,Cl4) iPeter Pridavok and several other Slovak!s were confined
or int erned in concentration camps on the denun:Cilation cxf Dr. Benes and his supporters of beiIJJg Nazi agents, which, of course, was a
malicious and false accusat ion which later was d,ismi ssed by British
authorities.
015) See Dr. Osusky's pamphlet "Bene! and Slovakia" and also
J. M. Kirschlbaum, op. cit., p. ,286.
q16) See memoranda of the Slovak National Council in J . M.
Ki~schlbaum's op. cit., pp. 289, 296, 298, 304. 309, etc.
DOOUIMENT NO. 1
His EX1Cellency
Mr. Ferdinand Durcansky
M!inister of Foreign Affairs
Bratis}ava
Your Excellency:
On the instruction Orf the Secretacy of St ate for Foreign .Afifairs
I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty's Governmen,t in
the United Kin gdom propose to appoint me as Consul for Slov-aki!a
with residence in Bratislava.
Pending preparation of my Commission I have the honour to
request promsional recognition •by the Slov.a!k Government as ms
Majesty's Consul for Slovakia.
I avail myself of thi s opporturuity to ex;press to yowr Excellency
the assurance of my highest consideration.
PE'IlER PAIR.ES, M. P., H. M. Con'sul.
1
�SLOVAKIA
59
DOOUIMEN.l' NO. 2
Documents on Ger,man Foreign Policy, 1918-J1945, Series D, Vol. IV
No. 2314'
1'94!].i/4{3'5217 "
Ambassador Henderson to Foreign Minister Rilbbenitrop
Berlin, Marc'h 15, 11939
Pol. 11V 1700
My Dear Reichminii,ster:
Lord Ibli1f.ax has instructed me to take the earliest 01PP<>rtunity
to convey the following message to the German Government:
His Majesty's G01Vernment have no desire to illlteinfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Governments may be more
dixe'c tly conlcerned than His Majesty's G01Vernrnelllt in the United
Kingdom. They are, however, -a s the German Go,vernment will surely aippreciJate, deeply concerned for t'he success of ahl efforts to restore coillfidence and a relaxat-ion of tension in Europe. This seems
to them more particularily des-iraible at a moment when a start is
being made with discussfoonis Oif economic swbjects to which His
Majesty's Government believe, the Gel'llllan Goverrnment attach not
less importance than they do themselves, and the fruitful development of which depends so directly upon a genel'al sta-te of confidence. From tha-t po.init of view t'hey would deplore any action in
Central Europe which would cause a setback to the growth of th-is
generial coillf,i dence on which all impro:vemerut in the economdc situation depends and to whic_h such imrprovement might i-n its turn contribute.
·
Yours sincere-ly,
NIEV'.l!LI.iE HlEN!DIE.RSON.
DOOlJlMENTI' NO. 3
Documents on Foreign Policy 191'8-ll945, Series D, Vol. IV
NO. 220
[40/76461:
The Ambassador in Great Britain to the Foreign Ministry
TELEGRAM
London, March 14, 1009
Urgent
No. fJ7 of Ma!I"ch 114
Attitude of British Government toward co•Illflict between Czeichia
and Slovaki:a was further clarified yesterday by HaJifax's speech,
statements 1by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well
as by attitudes of press itself. British Government regards constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and Czechii.a as an
internal concern of the Czechoslovak state in which Great Britain
has nio part. The guarantee of the frontier-s O!f the CzechoslOV1aik
State envisaged by Great Britain at Munich is reg-a rded as not yet
in force, as the uontier it's elf has not yet 'been 1finally fixed, and
the prerequisite for the Brutish ,g uarantee is the unde.rtaking of a
like guarantee by other signatories to the Munieh Agreemerut. However, even -iif such a guarantee already existed, it could come into
force, according to statements in the press, only "in the event of an
�60
SLOVAKIA
Ulllprovoked atta·ck" ~1). The mo.re the outward appearance of the
right to self-determination, of the people concerned is preserved,
the greater will be the understanding among the public here for a
new and stable s·e ttlement, especially as on aU sides the desire exri sts to keep out of a remote afifair which does not affect Br.itish interests.
D]RKSEN.
1
•~1 This attitude is confia-med hy Chamlberlain 1s reply to a
question by Attlee on the same day in the House of Common,s
(quoted in the GeI"man White Book, Document No. 257): "I am not
sure what the Right Honoralble Gentleman thinks that we should
do. I might remind him that the proposed ,g uarantee is one against
uniprovoked aggression on Czechoslov,akia. No such ,aggression has
yet taken place."
DOOUMJENT NO. 4
Letter of the British Consulate in Bratislarva to the Chief Customs
Officer in Do,v er, Great Britain
Bratislava Slovakia
July 6, 1939
Sir:
I have the honor to inform you that the 'b earer of this letter,
Mr. M. Paul Harminc, who is ,arriving by packet-'boat next week,
on Wednesday or Thursday, has been appointed Slovak Consul in
London to take up his duties there. No facilities exist here
for giving him a dipiomatic visa since there is no diplomatic representative at the capital of the Slovak State. But 'I am furnishing
Mr. Harminc with this letter ,as proof of his officiaJ position and
shall be most grateful if he caru be granted the usual facilities
on landing which are customarily given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on thek fiir,s t arI"ival in the United
Kingdom.
I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
:PARiES, H. M. Consul.
The Chief Customs Officer
Dover.
1)
DOCUMIENrf NO. 5
A letter of the Foreign Office to the Slovak Cornsul, regarding
his official status
Foreign Oiifice, S.W.I.
August 117, :1009
Sir:
With reference to your letter of August 9, I am directed by
¥iscount Halifax to inforun you that there is no objection on the
part of His Majesty's Government to your entering forthwith upon
your functions as Consul of Slovakia in London.
I am, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
R. DUNBAR.
M. P . Harminc, Esq.
Consul of Slovakia.
�61
SLOVAKIA
DOCUMiENT NO. 6
Great Britain reco_gnized the Slovak Oonsul even after the
Second World War started
No. C 1'5393/ 2875/ 12
Foreign O!fifice, S. W. I.
October J2, '1 009
Dear Monsieur Haruninc:
With referenice to ou:r conversation on September 28 regarding
y,o ur position in this countr y, I am no:w alble to inform you that
you will continue to be recognized as the Slorvak Consul in London.
Yours sincerely,
I. KI!RKPATRICK.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Czecho-Slovakia, as created by the Paris Peace Conference is then
a land of mino.rities, a country in which, in fact, there is no majority.
By one of the oldest and most ironical of necess ities, the statesmen
of Pa r is, who undertook to resolve the Hapsburg Monarchy info its
ethn ic fractions in accordance with the rights of peoples, found themselves in the end condemned to create a new state in which the racial
elements were as diverse and as irreconci lable as either the Austrian
or Hungarian states of the pre-war era." - ~Frank H. Simonds: Can
Europe Keep the Peace? - New York, London, '19311; p. 99) .
• • •
" . .. the Czechoslovak Republic was the least natural state created
afte.r world War I. Bohemia, Moravia, Slovakia and Ruthenia fo r med
the parts of a long, unnatural, composite area, with varied rel ief,
peoples, communicat ions and economic development." - (Ge·o rge W.
>Hoffman: A Geography of Eu rope, University oif Texas, [G53; p. 567) .
• • •
" If one considers the question of the viability of Czechoslovakia
from the strict point of view of geography and ethnography, there
would indeed seem to be little hope for the futur e of this curiously
composite state." (Herbert Adam Gibbons: Europe Since 1008;
p. 258).
•
• •
" From the beginning of the Republic the more e xt remist rulers in
Prague asserted that the Czech and Slovak languages we re identical ;
they argued that, in reality, the Slovak was only a d ialect of the Czech.
The Slovaks, however, rejected this theory, and declared that thefr
language, wh ile closely resembl ing the Czech, was a separate idiom."
- M. W. Fodor: Plot and Counterplot in Cen ral Eu rope, p. 36).
�
50
SLOVAKIA
BRITISH POLICY AND SLOVAKIA -
1939-1945
J.M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
Diiploma,,tic recognition of the Slovak Republic by European Great Powers offers a student of modern political
history an interesting field of research. In the official and
semi-official memoranda and documents as well as in numerous works, published by political writers in America,
we read that the Slovak Republic was recognized and established diplomatic or consular relations merely with
"Germany and its satellites.; ' The fact that not only an
European states, including the Vatican, Switzerland, Sweden, but also the Soviet Union, established regular diplomatic relations, and that Great Britain exchanged consuls
with Slovakia, is as a rule overlooked (1). Why this glaring oversight on the part of practically all American writers on Czecho-Slovakia in the years 1939-1945, is a matter
of an easy guess. Most of the information on Slovakia was
supplied to the West by Czech exiles who under the leadership of Benes, labored for restoration of Czecho~Slovakia, and American historians and political writers did not
question the reliability of their sources of information.
A study of the international recognition of the Slovak
Republic by European and non-European nations is, therefore, an interesting matter. It shows how easily world
opinion can be fooled and how unreliable our "political
science" can be even while dealing with current or contemporary events.
Among the Great Powers, which never were mentioned in connection with Slovakia by American historians
and writers on international events, is, in the first place,
Great Britain. Readers of newspapers, periodicals, and
books during the war, and later readers of modern history,
were induced to believe that Great Britain firmly stood on
the side of the Czech politicians who desired to rule Slovakia, and that the British Government never recognized the
fact that the autonomous Slovak Diet within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia proclaimed Slovakia an independent State on March 14, 1939.
�SLOVAKIA
51
The truth about Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia is, of course, quite different.
The British Government instructed its Consul, Peter
Pares, to notify the Slovak Government that "His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom proposed to appoint him as Consul for Slovakia" on May 4, 1939, i.e., not
later than six weeks after Slovakia's declaration of independence took place (2). The British Parliament accepted
the proclamation of Slovakia's independence as a fait accompli against which Great Britain had no intention to
protest, even sooner, on March 15, 1939, when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain announced in the House of
Commons that the British Government did not feel bound
by the Agreement guaranteeing Czecho-Slovakia her frontiers "because, by the proclamation of the independence
of Slovakia by the Slovak Diet, Czecho-Slovakia disintegrated from the inside."
Lord Halifax expressed the attitude of the Foreign
Office to the events, which took place in Slovakia, in diplomatic terms but did not leave any doubt that he agreed
with his Prime Minister. On March 15, 1939, Lord Halifax
instructed the British Ambassador in Berlin, Sir Neville
Henderson, to inform the German Government that "His
Majesty's Government has no desire to interfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Govemments may be
more directly concerned than His Majesty's Government
in the United Kingdom ... " (3).
The German Ambassador to Great Britain, Dirksen,
interpreted the above statements and reported to Berlin
on March 14, 1939, that "aittitude of the British Government toward conflict between Czechia and Slovakia was
clarified by Halifax's speech, statements by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well as by attitudes
of press itself" and that "British Government regarded
constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and
Czechia as an internal concern of the Czecho~lovak State
in which Great Britain had no part." According to Dirksen ",the more the outward appearance of the right to selfdetermination of the people concerned was preserved, the
greater would be the understanding among the public (in
�52
SLOVAKIA
Great Britain) for a new and stable settlement, especially
as on all sides the desire existed to keep out of a remote
affair which did not affeot British interests ... " ( 4).
As a matter of fact, relations between Great Britain
and the Slovak Republic developed so favorably that not
later than July 4, 1939, the Slovak Government appointed,
with the the consent of the British Government, the first
Consul of Slovakia in Great Britain, Milan P. Harminc.
The British Consul in Slovakia, Peter Pares, on July 6,
1939, handed a letter to Consul Harminc in which he asked
the British authorities in Dover to grant the Slovak Consul "the usual facilities on landing which are customarily
given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on
their first arrival in the United Kingdom ... " (5).
The Slovak Consul, who actually was in charge of the
first Slovak Consulate General in the United Kingdom, notified the Foreign Office of his arrival and asked to be received
on July 18, 1939. The Foreign Office in return advised him
by letter of August 17, 1939, that there was "no objection on
the part of His Majesty's Government to his entering forthwith upon his functions as Consul of Slovakia in London" (6).
If we take into consideration the international situation in August 1939 and all possible demarches and intrigues of the former Czecho-Slovak politicians and diplomats, and especially of ex-president Dr. Edward Benes,
who after March 14, 1939, addressed al'l governments and
asked them not to recognize the Slovak Republic, the above
attitude of Great Britain certainly allows to arrive at a
conclusion that the British Government was certainly not on
the side of the adversaries of Slovakia's aspirations for
self~government and independence. International Law
knows many forms of international recognition of new
States, from de jure to de facto recognition, and to an exchange of diplomatic or consular representatives. Great
Britain granted its recognition to the Slovak Republic by
exchanging consuls within six weeks after proclamation of
Slovakia's independence by the Slovak Diet. There hardly
can be any doubt that an early normalization of diplomatic
relations would have followed, if the Second World War
�SLOVAKIA
53
had not started only six months after Slovakia decided to
apply its right to self-determination.
Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia after the
War broke out in Septem:ber 1939, offers according to
some documents, even more conclusive proof of the British Government's inclination to maintain relations with
the S'lovak Republic and not to commit itself prematurely
to some other solution of the Slovak problem.
Adversaries of Slovakia's independence were quite successful in spreading a general belief, when the Second
World started, Great Britain ceased to recognize the existence of the Slovak Republic and that the Slovak Government simply took cognizance of that fact.
Diplomatic documents, even those published from German archives, give some proof to the contrary. The first
Slovak Consul, M. R. Harminc, received a telegram, on
September 4, 1939, inviting him to Bratislava for consultation, but he understood that it was a move which the
Slovak foreign minister had to make and, therefore, Harmine did not follow the instructions and remained in London, since he saw that the Government of Great Britain
did not change its attitude towards Slovakia at the beginning or during the war against Poland. As a matter of
fact, Great Britain did not change its stand towards Slovakia even after Poland was divided among her attackers
- Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
The Foreign Office formally notified the Slovak Consul on October 12, 1939, that he "will continue to be recognized as the Slovak Consul in London" (7). For the
middle of October 1939, in view of the general situation in
Europe, this atitude of the British Government certainly
indicates that Great Britain still recognized the Slovak
Republic and did not intend to break relations with it.
Why this attitude of Great Britain was not efficiently used
either by the Slovak Consul or the Slovak Government,
would call for a lengthy explanation. Documents on German Foreign Policy offer some proof that there were some
attempts, on the side of Slovak diplomats, to maintain neutrality and to present Slovakia as a neutral State with regard to Great Britain. This is evident especially from the
�54
SLOVAKIA
document No. 205, published by the American and British Governments in "Series D" of the Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1845, in which we read that the
Slovak Minister to Italy, J. M. Zvrskovec, on March 28,
1940, submitted a note to the Italian Foreign Ministry in
which he stated that Slovakia was a neutral country. He
requested to convey this to His Majesty's Government "in
order that England may recognize Slovakia's neutrality
with all its consequences ... " (8).
Any attempt of the Slovak Government to keep Slovakia neutral was, of course, more an expression of feelings and desires of the Slovak people and its politicians
than a real possibility. Soon after Slovakia proclaimed its
independence, the territory of eastern Slovakia was attacked by Hungary and there were indications that also
some Polish circles were inclined to make a deal with Germany and Hungary at the expense of Slovakia. "Therefore,
in order to discourage Hungary," says a Special Report of
the U. S. House of Representatives, "in her armed attack
launched against eastern Slovakia, the Slovak Government
concluded with Germany a Treaty of Protection (Schllltzvertrag) on March 23, 1939." By this theaty Slovakia tried
to protect her independence an-d the integrity of her territory since, according to Article I of the Treaty, the Reich
"undertook to protect the political independence of the Slovak State and the integrity of its territory," and the Slovak
Government agreed in turn "to conduct its foreign policy in
close understanding with the German Government" (9).
This obligation prevented Slovakia from being formally neutral, and the Slovak diplomat who sent the a:bove
mentioned note on Slovakia's neutrality had to pay for
his step. So did also his Minister, Ferdinand :Durcansky.
Great Britain, however, remained cautious in dealing
with the Slovak problem even later. The British Government
remained for some time reluctant to recognize the Czech
group of exiled politicians led by Benes, who claimed that
they were the official representatives of Czecho-Slovakia
even though some of them previously resigned from their
positions, like Dr. E. Benes, for instance (on October 5,
1938), or never took part in any Prague governments. The
�SLOVAKIA
55
British Government "showed great caution in its attitude towards the Czecho-Slovak question," says C. A. Macartney, the British expert on Central Europe in the Foreign Office during the war. "It did not even recognize the
Czecho-Slovak Committee until January 6, 1940." On February 24, Mr. Chamberlain spoke of restoring Czech independence, but on March 7, 1940, the London correspondent of the Pester Lloyd was authorized to telegraph the
.following message:
"British war aims in fact include the restoration of the
independen<:e of Czechs and Slovaks. The British Government has, however, in no way committed itself with regard
to the constitutional form the extent and the frontiers of
the new State. As regards Slovakia, Britain leaves entirely
open the question whether the Slovak State shall enjoy its
independence in union with a Czech state, or in another
form. This question is to be decided by the Slovaks themselves. Beyond the declaration in principle of this war aim,
the British Government has entered into no obligations
which might give grounds to complaints ... " (10).
The Czecho-Slovak Committee, according to Macartney,
was "a wartime organization carrying out certain pragmatically necessary duties, and the recognition of it, in that
capacity, carried no implication about a future Czecho-Slovak State" (11).
Such a formulation of Great Britain's war aims allows
undoubtedly to assume that the Bdtish Government considered, even in 1940, further existence of the Slovak State
conforms with Great Britain's war aims. The Foreign Office
was quite explicit in this regard even in letters addressed
to Dr. Benes. When Dr. Benes, in his letter of July 18,
1940, to Lord Halifax, expressed his thanks to His Majesty's
Government for the stand which Great Britain took with
regard to the events of March 15, 1939, and implied that the
British Government "by so doing have solemnly emphasized
the political and legal continuity of the Czecho-Slovak Republic," the Foreign Of£ice did not fail to correct Dr. Benes' "li1beral" interpretation. Lord Halifax on behalf of
His Majesty's Government wrote emphatically to Dr. Benes
that "it cannot be presumed that His Majesty's Government
�56
SLOVAKIA
necessarily share your conclusion, drawn in your letter:
namely, that by their attitude after the events of March
15, 1939, His Majesty's Government have taken any particular attitude concerning the legal continuity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. The acts of His Majesty's Government
had the significance that they protested against the changes
brought about in Czecho-Slovakia by German military action, and that they stressed that in their opinion these
changes had no legal basis ... " (12).
In the same letter signed by Lord Halifax on July 18,
1940, there are also some other interesting points regarding
Slovakia. His Majesty's Government were, according to Halifax, in principle ready to recognize the Provisional Czecho-Slovak Government," but it was added that "this Provisional Government is to be a representative government
of the Czech and Slovak peoples and that it is intended
that also the Czecho-Slovak State Council will be of fully
representative character and will include the recognized
Czech and Slovak leaders abroad, as far as they have not
been included in the Provisional Government" (13).
We can say, therefore, that the British Government
paid, in view of the circumstances, unexpected attention
to the Slovak question by stressing that it was ready to
recognize Benes' exiled Provisional Government only on
the condition of full Slovak participation, and by making a
clear distinction between the Czechs and the Slovaks.
From Dr. Benes' acts against Slovaks who did not
share his political views and ambitions, we can conclude
that he was aware of possible dangers for his plans on
account of the above British attitude towards Slovakia
and the Slovaks. Benes used all means (denunciation, false
accusations, etc) to get rid of not only Slovaks advocating
Slovakia's right to self-determination (14), but also of
Slovaks like Dr. Milan Hod.fa and Dr. Stephen Osusky.
Dr. Benes did his utmost to discredit both in England and
in the U. S. A. simply because they did not share his views
as to the future of Slovakia. The first Consul of the Slovak
Republic, Milan P. Harminc, saved himself from vengeance
and trouble only by volunteering into the British Army
overseas thus abandoning all political activity.
�SLOVAKIA
57
All this allows us to believe, even on the basis of documents which are far from complete, that there was a fair
possibility to give Central Europe, and in it to the Slovak
question, quite a different organiZiation from that advocated by. Dr. Benes and imposed in the end by the Soviet
Union, had the British view prevailed. No doubt it would
also have required a much clearer stand and understanding of Slovak politicians in Great Britain (Hodza, Osusky,
Pauliny-Toth, etc.) who did not agree with Dr. Benes or
denounced his machinations, undemocratic procedures, and
utter disregard for Slovakia's aspirations (15), but did little
or nothing positively to influence the Western Powers and
to obtain a recognition of a Slovak exiled Committee or a
Provisional Government. The first Slovak Consul apparently failed to use, for his country's future, all the good will
and inclination of the British Government to recognize
him, even after Poland was defeated, as Consul of Slovakia in London, which he probably would have been able
to do, had the Slovak politicians in London supported him.
Favorable British attitude towards Slovakia found its
expression again before the end of the war when Dr. Benes travelled, in spite of clear hints of the British Government and Parliament, to Moscow and signed a treaty with
the Soviet Union, which treaty later helped the Soviet to
penetrate into Central Europe and to establish there Communist rule and statellite governments. The British Government allowed, in 1943, Slovak exiles, headed by Peter
Pridavok, to organize the Slovak National Council in London which opposed Dr. Benes' policy and advocated independence for Slovakia (16). Unfortunately, it was too late
for a change in the fate of Slovakia. Not only did international events help Dr. Benes to accomplish his plans of
subjugation of Slovakia but also some Slovak politicians in
London and in Slovakia gave a hand to Dr. Benes and Stalin in order to enslave the Slovak people and to rob them
of statehood and independence. A study of the British attitude towards Slovakia's aspirations for self-government
is, nevertheless, quite an interesting chapter in Slovakia's
history of the period 1938-1945 and deserves further research.
�58
SLOVAKIA
REFERENCES AND DOCUMENTS
(1) F'or information on the international recognition of the Slovak
Repwblic see: J . M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads
of Central Europe, Speller and Sons, New Yoii{, 1960; J. A. !Mikus:
/La Slavaquie dans le drame de l'Europe, Paris, '195.5; J. M. Kirschbaum: Nal boj j o samostatnost', Oleveland, :1958; Gi,]bert Oddo:
Slovakia and its People, Speller and Sons, New Ywk, 1960.
~2) See attached Document No. 'l.
(3) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, 119118-1941.5, Series
D; Vol. W, Document No. 234, attached ias Document No. 2.
{4) Jlbidem, Document No. 220, attached as Document No. 3.
(5) See attaohed Document No. 4.
(~ See attached Document No. 5.
{7) See attached Document No. 6.
{8) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, lJ!ll!M.945, Series
D; Document No. 205 or J. M. Kirschlbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the
Crossroads of Central Europe, Part IV, p. 280.281.
(9) !For full text see J . M. KiTschlbaum, QIP. cit., p. 265.
{ 10) C. A. Ma~rtney: October Fifteenth, A History of Modern
Hungary, Edinburgh University Press, 1957, Parit I, p. 376.
{ltl) ]bidem, p . 377.
r~l.12) !For foll text see Memoirs of Edward Bene!, London, 19.54,
p. •108. On March 15, 1939, the Germans occupied only BohemiaM<Yl'cWia and, therefore, the British protest could not refer to SlovaJcia's proclamation cxf •i ndependence.
-0:IJ3) Memoirs of Edward Benes, ,p. 1110.
,Cl4) iPeter Pridavok and several other Slovak!s were confined
or int erned in concentration camps on the denun:Cilation cxf Dr. Benes and his supporters of beiIJJg Nazi agents, which, of course, was a
malicious and false accusat ion which later was d,ismi ssed by British
authorities.
015) See Dr. Osusky's pamphlet "Bene! and Slovakia" and also
J. M. Kirschlbaum, op. cit., p. ,286.
q16) See memoranda of the Slovak National Council in J . M.
Ki~schlbaum's op. cit., pp. 289, 296, 298, 304. 309, etc.
DOOUIMENT NO. 1
His EX1Cellency
Mr. Ferdinand Durcansky
M!inister of Foreign Affairs
Bratis}ava
Your Excellency:
On the instruction Orf the Secretacy of St ate for Foreign .Afifairs
I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty's Governmen,t in
the United Kin gdom propose to appoint me as Consul for Slov-aki!a
with residence in Bratislava.
Pending preparation of my Commission I have the honour to
request promsional recognition •by the Slov.a!k Government as ms
Majesty's Consul for Slovakia.
I avail myself of thi s opporturuity to ex;press to yowr Excellency
the assurance of my highest consideration.
PE'IlER PAIR.ES, M. P., H. M. Con'sul.
1
�SLOVAKIA
59
DOOUIMEN.l' NO. 2
Documents on Ger,man Foreign Policy, 1918-J1945, Series D, Vol. IV
No. 2314'
1'94!].i/4{3'5217 "
Ambassador Henderson to Foreign Minister Rilbbenitrop
Berlin, Marc'h 15, 11939
Pol. 11V 1700
My Dear Reichminii,ster:
Lord Ibli1f.ax has instructed me to take the earliest 01PP<>rtunity
to convey the following message to the German Government:
His Majesty's G01Vernment have no desire to illlteinfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Governments may be more
dixe'c tly conlcerned than His Majesty's G01Vernrnelllt in the United
Kingdom. They are, however, -a s the German Go,vernment will surely aippreciJate, deeply concerned for t'he success of ahl efforts to restore coillfidence and a relaxat-ion of tension in Europe. This seems
to them more particularily des-iraible at a moment when a start is
being made with discussfoonis Oif economic swbjects to which His
Majesty's Government believe, the Gel'llllan Goverrnment attach not
less importance than they do themselves, and the fruitful development of which depends so directly upon a genel'al sta-te of confidence. From tha-t po.init of view t'hey would deplore any action in
Central Europe which would cause a setback to the growth of th-is
generial coillf,i dence on which all impro:vemerut in the economdc situation depends and to whic_h such imrprovement might i-n its turn contribute.
·
Yours sincere-ly,
NIEV'.l!LI.iE HlEN!DIE.RSON.
DOOlJlMENTI' NO. 3
Documents on Foreign Policy 191'8-ll945, Series D, Vol. IV
NO. 220
[40/76461:
The Ambassador in Great Britain to the Foreign Ministry
TELEGRAM
London, March 14, 1009
Urgent
No. fJ7 of Ma!I"ch 114
Attitude of British Government toward co•Illflict between Czeichia
and Slovaki:a was further clarified yesterday by HaJifax's speech,
statements 1by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well
as by attitudes of press itself. British Government regards constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and Czechii.a as an
internal concern of the Czechoslovak state in which Great Britain
has nio part. The guarantee of the frontier-s O!f the CzechoslOV1aik
State envisaged by Great Britain at Munich is reg-a rded as not yet
in force, as the uontier it's elf has not yet 'been 1finally fixed, and
the prerequisite for the Brutish ,g uarantee is the unde.rtaking of a
like guarantee by other signatories to the Munieh Agreemerut. However, even -iif such a guarantee already existed, it could come into
force, according to statements in the press, only "in the event of an
�60
SLOVAKIA
Ulllprovoked atta·ck" ~1). The mo.re the outward appearance of the
right to self-determination, of the people concerned is preserved,
the greater will be the understanding among the public here for a
new and stable s·e ttlement, especially as on aU sides the desire exri sts to keep out of a remote afifair which does not affect Br.itish interests.
D]RKSEN.
1
•~1 This attitude is confia-med hy Chamlberlain 1s reply to a
question by Attlee on the same day in the House of Common,s
(quoted in the GeI"man White Book, Document No. 257): "I am not
sure what the Right Honoralble Gentleman thinks that we should
do. I might remind him that the proposed ,g uarantee is one against
uniprovoked aggression on Czechoslov,akia. No such ,aggression has
yet taken place."
DOOUMJENT NO. 4
Letter of the British Consulate in Bratislarva to the Chief Customs
Officer in Do,v er, Great Britain
Bratislava Slovakia
July 6, 1939
Sir:
I have the honor to inform you that the 'b earer of this letter,
Mr. M. Paul Harminc, who is ,arriving by packet-'boat next week,
on Wednesday or Thursday, has been appointed Slovak Consul in
London to take up his duties there. No facilities exist here
for giving him a dipiomatic visa since there is no diplomatic representative at the capital of the Slovak State. But 'I am furnishing
Mr. Harminc with this letter ,as proof of his officiaJ position and
shall be most grateful if he caru be granted the usual facilities
on landing which are customarily given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on thek fiir,s t arI"ival in the United
Kingdom.
I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
:PARiES, H. M. Consul.
The Chief Customs Officer
Dover.
1)
DOCUMIENrf NO. 5
A letter of the Foreign Office to the Slovak Cornsul, regarding
his official status
Foreign Oiifice, S.W.I.
August 117, :1009
Sir:
With reference to your letter of August 9, I am directed by
¥iscount Halifax to inforun you that there is no objection on the
part of His Majesty's Government to your entering forthwith upon
your functions as Consul of Slovakia in London.
I am, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
R. DUNBAR.
M. P . Harminc, Esq.
Consul of Slovakia.
�61
SLOVAKIA
DOCUMiENT NO. 6
Great Britain reco_gnized the Slovak Oonsul even after the
Second World War started
No. C 1'5393/ 2875/ 12
Foreign O!fifice, S. W. I.
October J2, '1 009
Dear Monsieur Haruninc:
With referenice to ou:r conversation on September 28 regarding
y,o ur position in this countr y, I am no:w alble to inform you that
you will continue to be recognized as the Slorvak Consul in London.
Yours sincerely,
I. KI!RKPATRICK.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Czecho-Slovakia, as created by the Paris Peace Conference is then
a land of mino.rities, a country in which, in fact, there is no majority.
By one of the oldest and most ironical of necess ities, the statesmen
of Pa r is, who undertook to resolve the Hapsburg Monarchy info its
ethn ic fractions in accordance with the rights of peoples, found themselves in the end condemned to create a new state in which the racial
elements were as diverse and as irreconci lable as either the Austrian
or Hungarian states of the pre-war era." - ~Frank H. Simonds: Can
Europe Keep the Peace? - New York, London, '19311; p. 99) .
• • •
" . .. the Czechoslovak Republic was the least natural state created
afte.r world War I. Bohemia, Moravia, Slovakia and Ruthenia fo r med
the parts of a long, unnatural, composite area, with varied rel ief,
peoples, communicat ions and economic development." - (Ge·o rge W.
>Hoffman: A Geography of Eu rope, University oif Texas, [G53; p. 567) .
• • •
" If one considers the question of the viability of Czechoslovakia
from the strict point of view of geography and ethnography, there
would indeed seem to be little hope for the futur e of this curiously
composite state." (Herbert Adam Gibbons: Europe Since 1008;
p. 258).
•
• •
" From the beginning of the Republic the more e xt remist rulers in
Prague asserted that the Czech and Slovak languages we re identical ;
they argued that, in reality, the Slovak was only a d ialect of the Czech.
The Slovaks, however, rejected this theory, and declared that thefr
language, wh ile closely resembl ing the Czech, was a separate idiom."
- M. W. Fodor: Plot and Counterplot in Cen ral Eu rope, p. 36).
�
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
50
SLOVAKIA
BRITISH POLICY AND SLOVAKIA -
1939-1945
J.M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
Diiploma,,tic recognition of the Slovak Republic by European Great Powers offers a student of modern political
history an interesting field of research. In the official and
semi-official memoranda and documents as well as in numerous works, published by political writers in America,
we read that the Slovak Republic was recognized and established diplomatic or consular relations merely with
"Germany and its satellites.; ' The fact that not only an
European states, including the Vatican, Switzerland, Sweden, but also the Soviet Union, established regular diplomatic relations, and that Great Britain exchanged consuls
with Slovakia, is as a rule overlooked (1). Why this glaring oversight on the part of practically all American writers on Czecho-Slovakia in the years 1939-1945, is a matter
of an easy guess. Most of the information on Slovakia was
supplied to the West by Czech exiles who under the leadership of Benes, labored for restoration of Czecho~Slovakia, and American historians and political writers did not
question the reliability of their sources of information.
A study of the international recognition of the Slovak
Republic by European and non-European nations is, therefore, an interesting matter. It shows how easily world
opinion can be fooled and how unreliable our "political
science" can be even while dealing with current or contemporary events.
Among the Great Powers, which never were mentioned in connection with Slovakia by American historians
and writers on international events, is, in the first place,
Great Britain. Readers of newspapers, periodicals, and
books during the war, and later readers of modern history,
were induced to believe that Great Britain firmly stood on
the side of the Czech politicians who desired to rule Slovakia, and that the British Government never recognized the
fact that the autonomous Slovak Diet within the framework of Czecho-Slovakia proclaimed Slovakia an independent State on March 14, 1939.
SLOVAKIA
51
The truth about Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia is, of course, quite different.
The British Government instructed its Consul, Peter
Pares, to notify the Slovak Government that "His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom proposed to appoint him as Consul for Slovakia" on May 4, 1939, i.e., not
later than six weeks after Slovakia's declaration of independence took place (2). The British Parliament accepted
the proclamation of Slovakia's independence as a fait accompli against which Great Britain had no intention to
protest, even sooner, on March 15, 1939, when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain announced in the House of
Commons that the British Government did not feel bound
by the Agreement guaranteeing Czecho-Slovakia her frontiers "because, by the proclamation of the independence
of Slovakia by the Slovak Diet, Czecho-Slovakia disintegrated from the inside."
Lord Halifax expressed the attitude of the Foreign
Office to the events, which took place in Slovakia, in diplomatic terms but did not leave any doubt that he agreed
with his Prime Minister. On March 15, 1939, Lord Halifax
instructed the British Ambassador in Berlin, Sir Neville
Henderson, to inform the German Government that "His
Majesty's Government has no desire to interfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Govemments may be
more directly concerned than His Majesty's Government
in the United Kingdom ... " (3).
The German Ambassador to Great Britain, Dirksen,
interpreted the above statements and reported to Berlin
on March 14, 1939, that "aittitude of the British Government toward conflict between Czechia and Slovakia was
clarified by Halifax's speech, statements by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well as by attitudes
of press itself" and that "British Government regarded
constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and
Czechia as an internal concern of the Czecho~lovak State
in which Great Britain had no part." According to Dirksen ",the more the outward appearance of the right to selfdetermination of the people concerned was preserved, the
greater would be the understanding among the public (in
52
SLOVAKIA
Great Britain) for a new and stable settlement, especially
as on all sides the desire existed to keep out of a remote
affair which did not affeot British interests ... " ( 4).
As a matter of fact, relations between Great Britain
and the Slovak Republic developed so favorably that not
later than July 4, 1939, the Slovak Government appointed,
with the the consent of the British Government, the first
Consul of Slovakia in Great Britain, Milan P. Harminc.
The British Consul in Slovakia, Peter Pares, on July 6,
1939, handed a letter to Consul Harminc in which he asked
the British authorities in Dover to grant the Slovak Consul "the usual facilities on landing which are customarily
given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on
their first arrival in the United Kingdom ... " (5).
The Slovak Consul, who actually was in charge of the
first Slovak Consulate General in the United Kingdom, notified the Foreign Office of his arrival and asked to be received
on July 18, 1939. The Foreign Office in return advised him
by letter of August 17, 1939, that there was "no objection on
the part of His Majesty's Government to his entering forthwith upon his functions as Consul of Slovakia in London" (6).
If we take into consideration the international situation in August 1939 and all possible demarches and intrigues of the former Czecho-Slovak politicians and diplomats, and especially of ex-president Dr. Edward Benes,
who after March 14, 1939, addressed al'l governments and
asked them not to recognize the Slovak Republic, the above
attitude of Great Britain certainly allows to arrive at a
conclusion that the British Government was certainly not on
the side of the adversaries of Slovakia's aspirations for
self~government and independence. International Law
knows many forms of international recognition of new
States, from de jure to de facto recognition, and to an exchange of diplomatic or consular representatives. Great
Britain granted its recognition to the Slovak Republic by
exchanging consuls within six weeks after proclamation of
Slovakia's independence by the Slovak Diet. There hardly
can be any doubt that an early normalization of diplomatic
relations would have followed, if the Second World War
SLOVAKIA
53
had not started only six months after Slovakia decided to
apply its right to self-determination.
Great Britain's attitude towards Slovakia after the
War broke out in Septem:ber 1939, offers according to
some documents, even more conclusive proof of the British Government's inclination to maintain relations with
the S'lovak Republic and not to commit itself prematurely
to some other solution of the Slovak problem.
Adversaries of Slovakia's independence were quite successful in spreading a general belief, when the Second
World started, Great Britain ceased to recognize the existence of the Slovak Republic and that the Slovak Government simply took cognizance of that fact.
Diplomatic documents, even those published from German archives, give some proof to the contrary. The first
Slovak Consul, M. R. Harminc, received a telegram, on
September 4, 1939, inviting him to Bratislava for consultation, but he understood that it was a move which the
Slovak foreign minister had to make and, therefore, Harmine did not follow the instructions and remained in London, since he saw that the Government of Great Britain
did not change its attitude towards Slovakia at the beginning or during the war against Poland. As a matter of
fact, Great Britain did not change its stand towards Slovakia even after Poland was divided among her attackers
- Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
The Foreign Office formally notified the Slovak Consul on October 12, 1939, that he "will continue to be recognized as the Slovak Consul in London" (7). For the
middle of October 1939, in view of the general situation in
Europe, this atitude of the British Government certainly
indicates that Great Britain still recognized the Slovak
Republic and did not intend to break relations with it.
Why this attitude of Great Britain was not efficiently used
either by the Slovak Consul or the Slovak Government,
would call for a lengthy explanation. Documents on German Foreign Policy offer some proof that there were some
attempts, on the side of Slovak diplomats, to maintain neutrality and to present Slovakia as a neutral State with regard to Great Britain. This is evident especially from the
54
SLOVAKIA
document No. 205, published by the American and British Governments in "Series D" of the Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1845, in which we read that the
Slovak Minister to Italy, J. M. Zvrskovec, on March 28,
1940, submitted a note to the Italian Foreign Ministry in
which he stated that Slovakia was a neutral country. He
requested to convey this to His Majesty's Government "in
order that England may recognize Slovakia's neutrality
with all its consequences ... " (8).
Any attempt of the Slovak Government to keep Slovakia neutral was, of course, more an expression of feelings and desires of the Slovak people and its politicians
than a real possibility. Soon after Slovakia proclaimed its
independence, the territory of eastern Slovakia was attacked by Hungary and there were indications that also
some Polish circles were inclined to make a deal with Germany and Hungary at the expense of Slovakia. "Therefore,
in order to discourage Hungary," says a Special Report of
the U. S. House of Representatives, "in her armed attack
launched against eastern Slovakia, the Slovak Government
concluded with Germany a Treaty of Protection (Schllltzvertrag) on March 23, 1939." By this theaty Slovakia tried
to protect her independence an-d the integrity of her territory since, according to Article I of the Treaty, the Reich
"undertook to protect the political independence of the Slovak State and the integrity of its territory," and the Slovak
Government agreed in turn "to conduct its foreign policy in
close understanding with the German Government" (9).
This obligation prevented Slovakia from being formally neutral, and the Slovak diplomat who sent the a:bove
mentioned note on Slovakia's neutrality had to pay for
his step. So did also his Minister, Ferdinand :Durcansky.
Great Britain, however, remained cautious in dealing
with the Slovak problem even later. The British Government
remained for some time reluctant to recognize the Czech
group of exiled politicians led by Benes, who claimed that
they were the official representatives of Czecho-Slovakia
even though some of them previously resigned from their
positions, like Dr. E. Benes, for instance (on October 5,
1938), or never took part in any Prague governments. The
SLOVAKIA
55
British Government "showed great caution in its attitude towards the Czecho-Slovak question," says C. A. Macartney, the British expert on Central Europe in the Foreign Office during the war. "It did not even recognize the
Czecho-Slovak Committee until January 6, 1940." On February 24, Mr. Chamberlain spoke of restoring Czech independence, but on March 7, 1940, the London correspondent of the Pester Lloyd was authorized to telegraph the
.following message:
"British war aims in fact include the restoration of the
independen<:e of Czechs and Slovaks. The British Government has, however, in no way committed itself with regard
to the constitutional form the extent and the frontiers of
the new State. As regards Slovakia, Britain leaves entirely
open the question whether the Slovak State shall enjoy its
independence in union with a Czech state, or in another
form. This question is to be decided by the Slovaks themselves. Beyond the declaration in principle of this war aim,
the British Government has entered into no obligations
which might give grounds to complaints ... " (10).
The Czecho-Slovak Committee, according to Macartney,
was "a wartime organization carrying out certain pragmatically necessary duties, and the recognition of it, in that
capacity, carried no implication about a future Czecho-Slovak State" (11).
Such a formulation of Great Britain's war aims allows
undoubtedly to assume that the Bdtish Government considered, even in 1940, further existence of the Slovak State
conforms with Great Britain's war aims. The Foreign Office
was quite explicit in this regard even in letters addressed
to Dr. Benes. When Dr. Benes, in his letter of July 18,
1940, to Lord Halifax, expressed his thanks to His Majesty's
Government for the stand which Great Britain took with
regard to the events of March 15, 1939, and implied that the
British Government "by so doing have solemnly emphasized
the political and legal continuity of the Czecho-Slovak Republic," the Foreign Of£ice did not fail to correct Dr. Benes' "li1beral" interpretation. Lord Halifax on behalf of
His Majesty's Government wrote emphatically to Dr. Benes
that "it cannot be presumed that His Majesty's Government
56
SLOVAKIA
necessarily share your conclusion, drawn in your letter:
namely, that by their attitude after the events of March
15, 1939, His Majesty's Government have taken any particular attitude concerning the legal continuity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. The acts of His Majesty's Government
had the significance that they protested against the changes
brought about in Czecho-Slovakia by German military action, and that they stressed that in their opinion these
changes had no legal basis ... " (12).
In the same letter signed by Lord Halifax on July 18,
1940, there are also some other interesting points regarding
Slovakia. His Majesty's Government were, according to Halifax, in principle ready to recognize the Provisional Czecho-Slovak Government," but it was added that "this Provisional Government is to be a representative government
of the Czech and Slovak peoples and that it is intended
that also the Czecho-Slovak State Council will be of fully
representative character and will include the recognized
Czech and Slovak leaders abroad, as far as they have not
been included in the Provisional Government" (13).
We can say, therefore, that the British Government
paid, in view of the circumstances, unexpected attention
to the Slovak question by stressing that it was ready to
recognize Benes' exiled Provisional Government only on
the condition of full Slovak participation, and by making a
clear distinction between the Czechs and the Slovaks.
From Dr. Benes' acts against Slovaks who did not
share his political views and ambitions, we can conclude
that he was aware of possible dangers for his plans on
account of the above British attitude towards Slovakia
and the Slovaks. Benes used all means (denunciation, false
accusations, etc) to get rid of not only Slovaks advocating
Slovakia's right to self-determination (14), but also of
Slovaks like Dr. Milan Hod.fa and Dr. Stephen Osusky.
Dr. Benes did his utmost to discredit both in England and
in the U. S. A. simply because they did not share his views
as to the future of Slovakia. The first Consul of the Slovak
Republic, Milan P. Harminc, saved himself from vengeance
and trouble only by volunteering into the British Army
overseas thus abandoning all political activity.
SLOVAKIA
57
All this allows us to believe, even on the basis of documents which are far from complete, that there was a fair
possibility to give Central Europe, and in it to the Slovak
question, quite a different organiZiation from that advocated by. Dr. Benes and imposed in the end by the Soviet
Union, had the British view prevailed. No doubt it would
also have required a much clearer stand and understanding of Slovak politicians in Great Britain (Hodza, Osusky,
Pauliny-Toth, etc.) who did not agree with Dr. Benes or
denounced his machinations, undemocratic procedures, and
utter disregard for Slovakia's aspirations (15), but did little
or nothing positively to influence the Western Powers and
to obtain a recognition of a Slovak exiled Committee or a
Provisional Government. The first Slovak Consul apparently failed to use, for his country's future, all the good will
and inclination of the British Government to recognize
him, even after Poland was defeated, as Consul of Slovakia in London, which he probably would have been able
to do, had the Slovak politicians in London supported him.
Favorable British attitude towards Slovakia found its
expression again before the end of the war when Dr. Benes travelled, in spite of clear hints of the British Government and Parliament, to Moscow and signed a treaty with
the Soviet Union, which treaty later helped the Soviet to
penetrate into Central Europe and to establish there Communist rule and statellite governments. The British Government allowed, in 1943, Slovak exiles, headed by Peter
Pridavok, to organize the Slovak National Council in London which opposed Dr. Benes' policy and advocated independence for Slovakia (16). Unfortunately, it was too late
for a change in the fate of Slovakia. Not only did international events help Dr. Benes to accomplish his plans of
subjugation of Slovakia but also some Slovak politicians in
London and in Slovakia gave a hand to Dr. Benes and Stalin in order to enslave the Slovak people and to rob them
of statehood and independence. A study of the British attitude towards Slovakia's aspirations for self-government
is, nevertheless, quite an interesting chapter in Slovakia's
history of the period 1938-1945 and deserves further research.
58
SLOVAKIA
REFERENCES AND DOCUMENTS
(1) F'or information on the international recognition of the Slovak
Repwblic see: J . M. Kirschbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the Crossroads
of Central Europe, Speller and Sons, New Yoii{, 1960; J. A. !Mikus:
/La Slavaquie dans le drame de l'Europe, Paris, '195.5; J. M. Kirschbaum: Nal boj j o samostatnost', Oleveland, :1958; Gi,]bert Oddo:
Slovakia and its People, Speller and Sons, New Ywk, 1960.
~2) See attached Document No. 'l.
(3) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, 119118-1941.5, Series
D; Vol. W, Document No. 234, attached ias Document No. 2.
{4) Jlbidem, Document No. 220, attached as Document No. 3.
(5) See attaohed Document No. 4.
(~ See attached Document No. 5.
{7) See attached Document No. 6.
{8) See Documents on German Foreign Policy, lJ!ll!M.945, Series
D; Document No. 205 or J. M. Kirschlbaum: Slovakia - Nation at the
Crossroads of Central Europe, Part IV, p. 280.281.
(9) !For full text see J . M. KiTschlbaum, QIP. cit., p. 265.
{ 10) C. A. Ma~rtney: October Fifteenth, A History of Modern
Hungary, Edinburgh University Press, 1957, Parit I, p. 376.
{ltl) ]bidem, p . 377.
r~l.12) !For foll text see Memoirs of Edward Bene!, London, 19.54,
p. •108. On March 15, 1939, the Germans occupied only BohemiaM<Yl'cWia and, therefore, the British protest could not refer to SlovaJcia's proclamation cxf •i ndependence.
-0:IJ3) Memoirs of Edward Benes, ,p. 1110.
,Cl4) iPeter Pridavok and several other Slovak!s were confined
or int erned in concentration camps on the denun:Cilation cxf Dr. Benes and his supporters of beiIJJg Nazi agents, which, of course, was a
malicious and false accusat ion which later was d,ismi ssed by British
authorities.
015) See Dr. Osusky's pamphlet "Bene! and Slovakia" and also
J. M. Kirschlbaum, op. cit., p. ,286.
q16) See memoranda of the Slovak National Council in J . M.
Ki~schlbaum's op. cit., pp. 289, 296, 298, 304. 309, etc.
DOOUIMENT NO. 1
His EX1Cellency
Mr. Ferdinand Durcansky
M!inister of Foreign Affairs
Bratis}ava
Your Excellency:
On the instruction Orf the Secretacy of St ate for Foreign .Afifairs
I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty's Governmen,t in
the United Kin gdom propose to appoint me as Consul for Slov-aki!a
with residence in Bratislava.
Pending preparation of my Commission I have the honour to
request promsional recognition •by the Slov.a!k Government as ms
Majesty's Consul for Slovakia.
I avail myself of thi s opporturuity to ex;press to yowr Excellency
the assurance of my highest consideration.
PE'IlER PAIR.ES, M. P., H. M. Con'sul.
1
SLOVAKIA
59
DOOUIMEN.l' NO. 2
Documents on Ger,man Foreign Policy, 1918-J1945, Series D, Vol. IV
No. 2314'
1'94!].i/4{3'5217 "
Ambassador Henderson to Foreign Minister Rilbbenitrop
Berlin, Marc'h 15, 11939
Pol. 11V 1700
My Dear Reichminii,ster:
Lord Ibli1f.ax has instructed me to take the earliest 01PP<>rtunity
to convey the following message to the German Government:
His Majesty's G01Vernment have no desire to illlteinfere unnecessarily in a matter with which other Governments may be more
dixe'c tly conlcerned than His Majesty's G01Vernrnelllt in the United
Kingdom. They are, however, -a s the German Go,vernment will surely aippreciJate, deeply concerned for t'he success of ahl efforts to restore coillfidence and a relaxat-ion of tension in Europe. This seems
to them more particularily des-iraible at a moment when a start is
being made with discussfoonis Oif economic swbjects to which His
Majesty's Government believe, the Gel'llllan Goverrnment attach not
less importance than they do themselves, and the fruitful development of which depends so directly upon a genel'al sta-te of confidence. From tha-t po.init of view t'hey would deplore any action in
Central Europe which would cause a setback to the growth of th-is
generial coillf,i dence on which all impro:vemerut in the economdc situation depends and to whic_h such imrprovement might i-n its turn contribute.
·
Yours sincere-ly,
NIEV'.l!LI.iE HlEN!DIE.RSON.
DOOlJlMENTI' NO. 3
Documents on Foreign Policy 191'8-ll945, Series D, Vol. IV
NO. 220
[40/76461:
The Ambassador in Great Britain to the Foreign Ministry
TELEGRAM
London, March 14, 1009
Urgent
No. fJ7 of Ma!I"ch 114
Attitude of British Government toward co•Illflict between Czeichia
and Slovaki:a was further clarified yesterday by HaJifax's speech,
statements 1by the new Department of the Foreign Office, as well
as by attitudes of press itself. British Government regards constitutional settlement of relations between Slovakia and Czechii.a as an
internal concern of the Czechoslovak state in which Great Britain
has nio part. The guarantee of the frontier-s O!f the CzechoslOV1aik
State envisaged by Great Britain at Munich is reg-a rded as not yet
in force, as the uontier it's elf has not yet 'been 1finally fixed, and
the prerequisite for the Brutish ,g uarantee is the unde.rtaking of a
like guarantee by other signatories to the Munieh Agreemerut. However, even -iif such a guarantee already existed, it could come into
force, according to statements in the press, only "in the event of an
60
SLOVAKIA
Ulllprovoked atta·ck" ~1). The mo.re the outward appearance of the
right to self-determination, of the people concerned is preserved,
the greater will be the understanding among the public here for a
new and stable s·e ttlement, especially as on aU sides the desire exri sts to keep out of a remote afifair which does not affect Br.itish interests.
D]RKSEN.
1
•~1 This attitude is confia-med hy Chamlberlain 1s reply to a
question by Attlee on the same day in the House of Common,s
(quoted in the GeI"man White Book, Document No. 257): "I am not
sure what the Right Honoralble Gentleman thinks that we should
do. I might remind him that the proposed ,g uarantee is one against
uniprovoked aggression on Czechoslov,akia. No such ,aggression has
yet taken place."
DOOUMJENT NO. 4
Letter of the British Consulate in Bratislarva to the Chief Customs
Officer in Do,v er, Great Britain
Bratislava Slovakia
July 6, 1939
Sir:
I have the honor to inform you that the 'b earer of this letter,
Mr. M. Paul Harminc, who is ,arriving by packet-'boat next week,
on Wednesday or Thursday, has been appointed Slovak Consul in
London to take up his duties there. No facilities exist here
for giving him a dipiomatic visa since there is no diplomatic representative at the capital of the Slovak State. But 'I am furnishing
Mr. Harminc with this letter ,as proof of his officiaJ position and
shall be most grateful if he caru be granted the usual facilities
on landing which are customarily given to the consular representatives of a foreign state on thek fiir,s t arI"ival in the United
Kingdom.
I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
:PARiES, H. M. Consul.
The Chief Customs Officer
Dover.
1)
DOCUMIENrf NO. 5
A letter of the Foreign Office to the Slovak Cornsul, regarding
his official status
Foreign Oiifice, S.W.I.
August 117, :1009
Sir:
With reference to your letter of August 9, I am directed by
¥iscount Halifax to inforun you that there is no objection on the
part of His Majesty's Government to your entering forthwith upon
your functions as Consul of Slovakia in London.
I am, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
R. DUNBAR.
M. P . Harminc, Esq.
Consul of Slovakia.
61
SLOVAKIA
DOCUMiENT NO. 6
Great Britain reco_gnized the Slovak Oonsul even after the
Second World War started
No. C 1'5393/ 2875/ 12
Foreign O!fifice, S. W. I.
October J2, '1 009
Dear Monsieur Haruninc:
With referenice to ou:r conversation on September 28 regarding
y,o ur position in this countr y, I am no:w alble to inform you that
you will continue to be recognized as the Slorvak Consul in London.
Yours sincerely,
I. KI!RKPATRICK.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Czecho-Slovakia, as created by the Paris Peace Conference is then
a land of mino.rities, a country in which, in fact, there is no majority.
By one of the oldest and most ironical of necess ities, the statesmen
of Pa r is, who undertook to resolve the Hapsburg Monarchy info its
ethn ic fractions in accordance with the rights of peoples, found themselves in the end condemned to create a new state in which the racial
elements were as diverse and as irreconci lable as either the Austrian
or Hungarian states of the pre-war era." - ~Frank H. Simonds: Can
Europe Keep the Peace? - New York, London, '19311; p. 99) .
• • •
" . .. the Czechoslovak Republic was the least natural state created
afte.r world War I. Bohemia, Moravia, Slovakia and Ruthenia fo r med
the parts of a long, unnatural, composite area, with varied rel ief,
peoples, communicat ions and economic development." - (Ge·o rge W.
>Hoffman: A Geography of Eu rope, University oif Texas, [G53; p. 567) .
• • •
" If one considers the question of the viability of Czechoslovakia
from the strict point of view of geography and ethnography, there
would indeed seem to be little hope for the futur e of this curiously
composite state." (Herbert Adam Gibbons: Europe Since 1008;
p. 258).
•
• •
" From the beginning of the Republic the more e xt remist rulers in
Prague asserted that the Czech and Slovak languages we re identical ;
they argued that, in reality, the Slovak was only a d ialect of the Czech.
The Slovaks, however, rejected this theory, and declared that thefr
language, wh ile closely resembl ing the Czech, was a separate idiom."
- M. W. Fodor: Plot and Counterplot in Cen ral Eu rope, p. 36).
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
British Policy and Slovakia - 1939-1945
Description
An account of the resource
J. M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 6 (31), March-June 1960
pp. 50-61
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March-June 1960
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cb665c54899f47f05f37ef860ea5effe.pdf
6eb41d4c74957911d3a1dacb3983faae
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
107
Broken Line
Carol Towarnicky
The day she found out her great-grandmother had died was the
day she found out her great-grandmother had lived. It was when her
father came from Chevy, and he always came home at exactly quarterto-four. She and her little brother Jeffie were watching '' American Bandstand . " Ali the girls in the sixth grade watched it , and Frankie Avalon
was supposed to be on. Her mother was upstairs somewhere . When she
and Jeffie had come home from school , they had found two slices of rye
bread and a stick of butter on the kitchen table. The butter was hard.
Jackie could hear her father stomping snow off his shoes. Daddy
never wore rubbers, like fathers in her readers in school, but there were
so many differences between her father and those in the books that she
had long ago stopped wondering about them. The fathers in the readers
wore suits and ties, and when they came home they put their briefcases
on the table. Sometimes, on television, they had a drink. A martini .
But Daddy wore gray pants and a gray suit, and he had this metal lunchbox that looked like a small black barn. Her mother spent a lot of time
cooking chicken and ham for it. Daddy hated sandwiches. Sometimes
Jackie would ask for peanut butter and jelly for lunch , but they always
had soup and meat.
When her father came home from work, the first thing he always
did was wash his hands with cleanser. He would scrape under his nails
with a nail file and wash again. But his hands never seemed really clean .
Sometimes, like the day before her First Holy Communion, he washed
and washed, and they looked better . But for everyday, he just did his
best and let it go.
But this day , Daddy did not stop to wash his hands. When he came
into the living room, a strange expression was on his face, like the time
Jackie had run into the street and you could hear the brakes screech
all over the neighborhood, and Daddy had spanked her for the only time .
"Where's your mother?"
Jackie pointed upstairs.
�SLOVAKIA
"Hey, Marge," he called loudly, "you sick or something?" There
was a muffled reply and a wail. Baby Janet was up.
Her mother came down the steps quickly, without the baby. She
had her coat on, which was strange because she usually kept it with the
others in the downstairs closet. Her coat wouldn't button all the way.
They were going to have a new baby around Valentine 's Day , and Jackie
hoped it would be a boy.
" My grandmother died," Mommy said softly .
"Your grandmother? The one in the old country?"
Mommy talked almost without opening her mouth. "Ktoru inu
Babku mam? Mama dostala dnes dopis."
Standing on the third stair from the bottom, Mommy looked much
bigger than Daddy . Upstairs , Janet began to rock the crib.
"You going over there?"
"Well, Ma's real upset," her mother said. "She keeps saying that
she should have known, that she should have felt it or something. She
says she knew when her father died, but she didn't know when her mother
died , I don't know.''
When Mommy got to the bottom step, Daddy put his arm around
her shoulder and she leaned against him.
"You want a ride?"
"No, I don't want to bundle them up for just a block . Just fix them
supper, okay? I couldn't do anything after Ma called."
Daddy's voice was gentle . "Listen, tell your mom I'm sorry . "
They stood at the front door . Mommy's hand was on the knob.
"What did she die of?" Daddy asked.
"Myslim, ze mala rakovinu ."
Jackie hated it when her parents talked Slovak. Most of the
grownups started talking it when they didn't want kids to hear. First
Mommy would talk in English, and then, right in the middle, she would
talk in Slovak . They always talked to Baba in Slovak, of course, because
Baba didn't speak English very well at all. Baba had come to America
with Mommy and Uncle John a long time ago from Slovakia, which
was part of Czechoslovakia and behind the Iron Curtain. Right around
Russia, which had Sputnik. Jackie had wanted to learn Slovak, so that
she could really talk to Baba, but Daddy had said that it would be better to learn English good first. "Do you want people to think you're
a D .P. ?"
�SLOVAKIA
109
D.P. 's were funny-looking people who didn't talk right. Sometimes
the little girls cried in school. They had gold earrings in their ears, even
in the first grade. Jackie's friend Sandy said that they used needles to
poke the holes.
Daddy ' s mother had come to Cleveland from Slovakia, too, but
she was dead now . Daddy knew Slovak , and French from the war, and
Polish and Ukrainian and Russian because of all the people in his old
neighborhood . He even spoke Jewish a little. But it made him mad that
some people didn't speak English. He would make fun of Mister Hudak
and Mister Zahradnik ; sometimes he would even make fun of Baba.
" Been in this country how long," he would say to Mommy, "twentyfive years, and still can't speak the language."
Daddy opened the refrigerator . He pulled out some wonderful big
hot dogs, strung together like the beads on a necklace. Daddy never
bought hot dogs in plastic packages.
" How about hot dogs and pork and beans? Whaddya think?"
" Oh, but Daddy it's Friday," Jackie said. "You know we can't
eat meat on Friday . It's a mortal sin."
Her father sighed . "Well, I guess we'll just have to have some Sister
Imelde eggs.''
Daddy didn ' t eat meat on Fridays ever since the time in the second grade when he had been eating ham and Jackie had cried that Sister
Imelde said that anybody who ate meat on Friday was going to hell and
she didn't want Daddy to go to hell. But he always called it Sister Imelde
eggs or Sister Imelde fish . It made Jackie feel funny, because she didn't
know whether it was a sin to make fun of Sister Imelde and she couldn't
ask anybody about it.
When Jackie and Jeffie set the table, they put extra, smaller forks
on the left side of the salad , and Jackie poured the milk for their tea
into a small pitcher . Daddy had shown them the new way after he started
being a handyman on Saturdays at Doctor Elliott's house, which was
across from Lake Erie. Daddy and Mommy sometimes laughed at Doctor
Elliott , who helped Mommy have babies but paid Daddy to put together
hi s little boy's bicycle. Doctor Elliott's little boy's name was Carter.
The eggs tasted different when they were scrambled by themselves
with butter. She liked them better with little bits of bacon .
" Daddy, why didn't Mommy's Baba come to America, too?"
" Mommy's Baba?"
�110
SLOVAKIA
'' You know, the one who died.''
" C ' mon Jeffie, let's finish those eggs. Only two more bites."
Jackie pushed her empty plate away. "I mean, why didn ' t she just
come here to live with everybody else?"
Her father sighed. "I don't know, honey . Maybe she was just too
old. Maybe she didn't want to move ."
"Do you think they have Requiem Masses in Slovakia like we
have?" They sang Requiem Masses when the sixth grade was in choir.
Jackie liked it. It gave her shivers. Re-e-qui-em Ae-e-te-e-e-er-na-am.
Jeffie swallowed his eggs with a grimace .
"Are they gonna put her in a coffin and bury her ?"
"Now, let's now worry about that," Daddy said as he got up and
nearly tripped on the way to the refrigerator. "How about some peaches
for dessert?' '
Jackie felt that something had to be said . "I would never go real
far away from you and Mommy , and I would never go to another country
to live . I think America is the best country in the world ."
Daddy smiled. "Here we are, nice cold peaches. My favorite."
Jeffie speared an entire peach half with his fork and nibbled on it
as if it were an ice cream bar. "What was her name?" he asked.
"Her first name? I don't really know. It was probably Margaret.
That's Baba's name and your mother's name. Margaret. That's probably it."
*
*
*
Since the pear tree fell down in the tornado last summer, Jackie
could see the stars through her bedroom window much easier . She could
tell Big Dipper and Orion 's Belt.
"But you don't understand?" Her mother 's voice carried down
the hall."She was my grandmother and I didn't know her. She lived
a whole life and I lived a whole life and we didn't know each other.
I can't even remember what she looked like. Ma never had a picture.
All I remember was that she had a white babushka and a black apron.
That's all. Johnny says he remembers her eyes. Brown eyes, like mine."
"Listen, Marge, lots of people grow up not knowin g their grandmothe rs. She could have died when you were three, it would be the
same.''
" But she didn 't die . Don 't you see? She was th ere all the time."
�111
SLOVAKIA
*
*
*
In the morning , Mommy said they couldn't turn on cartoons. " You
and J effi e a nd I are going to eight o'clock Mass, and we are going to
pray for Baba 's mother , my Baba, who died. She lived in Slovakia, in
Europe."
" Right near Russia , where they've got Sputnik," Jackie toldJeffie .
J effi e buttoned his jacket , but when he finished he had a button
hole left over on top and a button left over on the bottom. Mommy bent
down to redo it.
" Do they have kids in Slo-vak-i-a?"
" W ell , sure they do . Sure they have kids. Some of them are your
cousins , just like Monica and Ricky."
Jackie pulled on her left boot . " Do the little girls have earrings?"
Mommy's lower lip seemed to move a little . " I don't know ," she
said, and put on her gloves.
Only old Mister Hudak had shoveled his walk this early. Mommy
held on to Jeffie's hand and steadied herself on Jackie 's shoulder.Jackie
wondered if it was snowing on top of her cousins in Slovakia, and if
it looked the same, piled precariously on the bare trees.
��
SLOVAKIA
107
Broken Line
Carol Towarnicky
The day she found out her great-grandmother had died was the
day she found out her great-grandmother had lived. It was when her
father came from Chevy, and he always came home at exactly quarterto-four. She and her little brother Jeffie were watching '' American Bandstand . " Ali the girls in the sixth grade watched it , and Frankie Avalon
was supposed to be on. Her mother was upstairs somewhere . When she
and Jeffie had come home from school , they had found two slices of rye
bread and a stick of butter on the kitchen table. The butter was hard.
Jackie could hear her father stomping snow off his shoes. Daddy
never wore rubbers, like fathers in her readers in school, but there were
so many differences between her father and those in the books that she
had long ago stopped wondering about them. The fathers in the readers
wore suits and ties, and when they came home they put their briefcases
on the table. Sometimes, on television, they had a drink. A martini .
But Daddy wore gray pants and a gray suit, and he had this metal lunchbox that looked like a small black barn. Her mother spent a lot of time
cooking chicken and ham for it. Daddy hated sandwiches. Sometimes
Jackie would ask for peanut butter and jelly for lunch , but they always
had soup and meat.
When her father came home from work, the first thing he always
did was wash his hands with cleanser. He would scrape under his nails
with a nail file and wash again. But his hands never seemed really clean .
Sometimes, like the day before her First Holy Communion, he washed
and washed, and they looked better . But for everyday, he just did his
best and let it go.
But this day , Daddy did not stop to wash his hands. When he came
into the living room, a strange expression was on his face, like the time
Jackie had run into the street and you could hear the brakes screech
all over the neighborhood, and Daddy had spanked her for the only time .
"Where's your mother?"
Jackie pointed upstairs.
�SLOVAKIA
"Hey, Marge," he called loudly, "you sick or something?" There
was a muffled reply and a wail. Baby Janet was up.
Her mother came down the steps quickly, without the baby. She
had her coat on, which was strange because she usually kept it with the
others in the downstairs closet. Her coat wouldn't button all the way.
They were going to have a new baby around Valentine 's Day , and Jackie
hoped it would be a boy.
" My grandmother died," Mommy said softly .
"Your grandmother? The one in the old country?"
Mommy talked almost without opening her mouth. "Ktoru inu
Babku mam? Mama dostala dnes dopis."
Standing on the third stair from the bottom, Mommy looked much
bigger than Daddy . Upstairs , Janet began to rock the crib.
"You going over there?"
"Well, Ma's real upset," her mother said. "She keeps saying that
she should have known, that she should have felt it or something. She
says she knew when her father died, but she didn't know when her mother
died , I don't know.''
When Mommy got to the bottom step, Daddy put his arm around
her shoulder and she leaned against him.
"You want a ride?"
"No, I don't want to bundle them up for just a block . Just fix them
supper, okay? I couldn't do anything after Ma called."
Daddy's voice was gentle . "Listen, tell your mom I'm sorry . "
They stood at the front door . Mommy's hand was on the knob.
"What did she die of?" Daddy asked.
"Myslim, ze mala rakovinu ."
Jackie hated it when her parents talked Slovak. Most of the
grownups started talking it when they didn't want kids to hear. First
Mommy would talk in English, and then, right in the middle, she would
talk in Slovak . They always talked to Baba in Slovak, of course, because
Baba didn't speak English very well at all. Baba had come to America
with Mommy and Uncle John a long time ago from Slovakia, which
was part of Czechoslovakia and behind the Iron Curtain. Right around
Russia, which had Sputnik. Jackie had wanted to learn Slovak, so that
she could really talk to Baba, but Daddy had said that it would be better to learn English good first. "Do you want people to think you're
a D .P. ?"
�SLOVAKIA
109
D.P. 's were funny-looking people who didn't talk right. Sometimes
the little girls cried in school. They had gold earrings in their ears, even
in the first grade. Jackie's friend Sandy said that they used needles to
poke the holes.
Daddy ' s mother had come to Cleveland from Slovakia, too, but
she was dead now . Daddy knew Slovak , and French from the war, and
Polish and Ukrainian and Russian because of all the people in his old
neighborhood . He even spoke Jewish a little. But it made him mad that
some people didn't speak English. He would make fun of Mister Hudak
and Mister Zahradnik ; sometimes he would even make fun of Baba.
" Been in this country how long," he would say to Mommy, "twentyfive years, and still can't speak the language."
Daddy opened the refrigerator . He pulled out some wonderful big
hot dogs, strung together like the beads on a necklace. Daddy never
bought hot dogs in plastic packages.
" How about hot dogs and pork and beans? Whaddya think?"
" Oh, but Daddy it's Friday," Jackie said. "You know we can't
eat meat on Friday . It's a mortal sin."
Her father sighed . "Well, I guess we'll just have to have some Sister
Imelde eggs.''
Daddy didn ' t eat meat on Fridays ever since the time in the second grade when he had been eating ham and Jackie had cried that Sister
Imelde said that anybody who ate meat on Friday was going to hell and
she didn't want Daddy to go to hell. But he always called it Sister Imelde
eggs or Sister Imelde fish . It made Jackie feel funny, because she didn't
know whether it was a sin to make fun of Sister Imelde and she couldn't
ask anybody about it.
When Jackie and Jeffie set the table, they put extra, smaller forks
on the left side of the salad , and Jackie poured the milk for their tea
into a small pitcher . Daddy had shown them the new way after he started
being a handyman on Saturdays at Doctor Elliott's house, which was
across from Lake Erie. Daddy and Mommy sometimes laughed at Doctor
Elliott , who helped Mommy have babies but paid Daddy to put together
hi s little boy's bicycle. Doctor Elliott's little boy's name was Carter.
The eggs tasted different when they were scrambled by themselves
with butter. She liked them better with little bits of bacon .
" Daddy, why didn't Mommy's Baba come to America, too?"
" Mommy's Baba?"
�110
SLOVAKIA
'' You know, the one who died.''
" C ' mon Jeffie, let's finish those eggs. Only two more bites."
Jackie pushed her empty plate away. "I mean, why didn ' t she just
come here to live with everybody else?"
Her father sighed. "I don't know, honey . Maybe she was just too
old. Maybe she didn't want to move ."
"Do you think they have Requiem Masses in Slovakia like we
have?" They sang Requiem Masses when the sixth grade was in choir.
Jackie liked it. It gave her shivers. Re-e-qui-em Ae-e-te-e-e-er-na-am.
Jeffie swallowed his eggs with a grimace .
"Are they gonna put her in a coffin and bury her ?"
"Now, let's now worry about that," Daddy said as he got up and
nearly tripped on the way to the refrigerator. "How about some peaches
for dessert?' '
Jackie felt that something had to be said . "I would never go real
far away from you and Mommy , and I would never go to another country
to live . I think America is the best country in the world ."
Daddy smiled. "Here we are, nice cold peaches. My favorite."
Jeffie speared an entire peach half with his fork and nibbled on it
as if it were an ice cream bar. "What was her name?" he asked.
"Her first name? I don't really know. It was probably Margaret.
That's Baba's name and your mother's name. Margaret. That's probably it."
*
*
*
Since the pear tree fell down in the tornado last summer, Jackie
could see the stars through her bedroom window much easier . She could
tell Big Dipper and Orion 's Belt.
"But you don't understand?" Her mother 's voice carried down
the hall."She was my grandmother and I didn't know her. She lived
a whole life and I lived a whole life and we didn't know each other.
I can't even remember what she looked like. Ma never had a picture.
All I remember was that she had a white babushka and a black apron.
That's all. Johnny says he remembers her eyes. Brown eyes, like mine."
"Listen, Marge, lots of people grow up not knowin g their grandmothe rs. She could have died when you were three, it would be the
same.''
" But she didn 't die . Don 't you see? She was th ere all the time."
�111
SLOVAKIA
*
*
*
In the morning , Mommy said they couldn't turn on cartoons. " You
and J effi e a nd I are going to eight o'clock Mass, and we are going to
pray for Baba 's mother , my Baba, who died. She lived in Slovakia, in
Europe."
" Right near Russia , where they've got Sputnik," Jackie toldJeffie .
J effi e buttoned his jacket , but when he finished he had a button
hole left over on top and a button left over on the bottom. Mommy bent
down to redo it.
" Do they have kids in Slo-vak-i-a?"
" W ell , sure they do . Sure they have kids. Some of them are your
cousins , just like Monica and Ricky."
Jackie pulled on her left boot . " Do the little girls have earrings?"
Mommy's lower lip seemed to move a little . " I don't know ," she
said, and put on her gloves.
Only old Mister Hudak had shoveled his walk this early. Mommy
held on to Jeffie's hand and steadied herself on Jackie 's shoulder.Jackie
wondered if it was snowing on top of her cousins in Slovakia, and if
it looked the same, piled precariously on the bare trees.
��
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
1984, Vol. 31
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 31 (No. 57), 1984.
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
1984
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
107
Broken Line
Carol Towarnicky
The day she found out her great-grandmother had died was the
day she found out her great-grandmother had lived. It was when her
father came from Chevy, and he always came home at exactly quarterto-four. She and her little brother Jeffie were watching '' American Bandstand . " Ali the girls in the sixth grade watched it , and Frankie Avalon
was supposed to be on. Her mother was upstairs somewhere . When she
and Jeffie had come home from school , they had found two slices of rye
bread and a stick of butter on the kitchen table. The butter was hard.
Jackie could hear her father stomping snow off his shoes. Daddy
never wore rubbers, like fathers in her readers in school, but there were
so many differences between her father and those in the books that she
had long ago stopped wondering about them. The fathers in the readers
wore suits and ties, and when they came home they put their briefcases
on the table. Sometimes, on television, they had a drink. A martini .
But Daddy wore gray pants and a gray suit, and he had this metal lunchbox that looked like a small black barn. Her mother spent a lot of time
cooking chicken and ham for it. Daddy hated sandwiches. Sometimes
Jackie would ask for peanut butter and jelly for lunch , but they always
had soup and meat.
When her father came home from work, the first thing he always
did was wash his hands with cleanser. He would scrape under his nails
with a nail file and wash again. But his hands never seemed really clean .
Sometimes, like the day before her First Holy Communion, he washed
and washed, and they looked better . But for everyday, he just did his
best and let it go.
But this day , Daddy did not stop to wash his hands. When he came
into the living room, a strange expression was on his face, like the time
Jackie had run into the street and you could hear the brakes screech
all over the neighborhood, and Daddy had spanked her for the only time .
"Where's your mother?"
Jackie pointed upstairs.
SLOVAKIA
"Hey, Marge," he called loudly, "you sick or something?" There
was a muffled reply and a wail. Baby Janet was up.
Her mother came down the steps quickly, without the baby. She
had her coat on, which was strange because she usually kept it with the
others in the downstairs closet. Her coat wouldn't button all the way.
They were going to have a new baby around Valentine 's Day , and Jackie
hoped it would be a boy.
" My grandmother died," Mommy said softly .
"Your grandmother? The one in the old country?"
Mommy talked almost without opening her mouth. "Ktoru inu
Babku mam? Mama dostala dnes dopis."
Standing on the third stair from the bottom, Mommy looked much
bigger than Daddy . Upstairs , Janet began to rock the crib.
"You going over there?"
"Well, Ma's real upset," her mother said. "She keeps saying that
she should have known, that she should have felt it or something. She
says she knew when her father died, but she didn't know when her mother
died , I don't know.''
When Mommy got to the bottom step, Daddy put his arm around
her shoulder and she leaned against him.
"You want a ride?"
"No, I don't want to bundle them up for just a block . Just fix them
supper, okay? I couldn't do anything after Ma called."
Daddy's voice was gentle . "Listen, tell your mom I'm sorry . "
They stood at the front door . Mommy's hand was on the knob.
"What did she die of?" Daddy asked.
"Myslim, ze mala rakovinu ."
Jackie hated it when her parents talked Slovak. Most of the
grownups started talking it when they didn't want kids to hear. First
Mommy would talk in English, and then, right in the middle, she would
talk in Slovak . They always talked to Baba in Slovak, of course, because
Baba didn't speak English very well at all. Baba had come to America
with Mommy and Uncle John a long time ago from Slovakia, which
was part of Czechoslovakia and behind the Iron Curtain. Right around
Russia, which had Sputnik. Jackie had wanted to learn Slovak, so that
she could really talk to Baba, but Daddy had said that it would be better to learn English good first. "Do you want people to think you're
a D .P. ?"
SLOVAKIA
109
D.P. 's were funny-looking people who didn't talk right. Sometimes
the little girls cried in school. They had gold earrings in their ears, even
in the first grade. Jackie's friend Sandy said that they used needles to
poke the holes.
Daddy ' s mother had come to Cleveland from Slovakia, too, but
she was dead now . Daddy knew Slovak , and French from the war, and
Polish and Ukrainian and Russian because of all the people in his old
neighborhood . He even spoke Jewish a little. But it made him mad that
some people didn't speak English. He would make fun of Mister Hudak
and Mister Zahradnik ; sometimes he would even make fun of Baba.
" Been in this country how long," he would say to Mommy, "twentyfive years, and still can't speak the language."
Daddy opened the refrigerator . He pulled out some wonderful big
hot dogs, strung together like the beads on a necklace. Daddy never
bought hot dogs in plastic packages.
" How about hot dogs and pork and beans? Whaddya think?"
" Oh, but Daddy it's Friday," Jackie said. "You know we can't
eat meat on Friday . It's a mortal sin."
Her father sighed . "Well, I guess we'll just have to have some Sister
Imelde eggs.''
Daddy didn ' t eat meat on Fridays ever since the time in the second grade when he had been eating ham and Jackie had cried that Sister
Imelde said that anybody who ate meat on Friday was going to hell and
she didn't want Daddy to go to hell. But he always called it Sister Imelde
eggs or Sister Imelde fish . It made Jackie feel funny, because she didn't
know whether it was a sin to make fun of Sister Imelde and she couldn't
ask anybody about it.
When Jackie and Jeffie set the table, they put extra, smaller forks
on the left side of the salad , and Jackie poured the milk for their tea
into a small pitcher . Daddy had shown them the new way after he started
being a handyman on Saturdays at Doctor Elliott's house, which was
across from Lake Erie. Daddy and Mommy sometimes laughed at Doctor
Elliott , who helped Mommy have babies but paid Daddy to put together
hi s little boy's bicycle. Doctor Elliott's little boy's name was Carter.
The eggs tasted different when they were scrambled by themselves
with butter. She liked them better with little bits of bacon .
" Daddy, why didn't Mommy's Baba come to America, too?"
" Mommy's Baba?"
110
SLOVAKIA
'' You know, the one who died.''
" C ' mon Jeffie, let's finish those eggs. Only two more bites."
Jackie pushed her empty plate away. "I mean, why didn ' t she just
come here to live with everybody else?"
Her father sighed. "I don't know, honey . Maybe she was just too
old. Maybe she didn't want to move ."
"Do you think they have Requiem Masses in Slovakia like we
have?" They sang Requiem Masses when the sixth grade was in choir.
Jackie liked it. It gave her shivers. Re-e-qui-em Ae-e-te-e-e-er-na-am.
Jeffie swallowed his eggs with a grimace .
"Are they gonna put her in a coffin and bury her ?"
"Now, let's now worry about that," Daddy said as he got up and
nearly tripped on the way to the refrigerator. "How about some peaches
for dessert?' '
Jackie felt that something had to be said . "I would never go real
far away from you and Mommy , and I would never go to another country
to live . I think America is the best country in the world ."
Daddy smiled. "Here we are, nice cold peaches. My favorite."
Jeffie speared an entire peach half with his fork and nibbled on it
as if it were an ice cream bar. "What was her name?" he asked.
"Her first name? I don't really know. It was probably Margaret.
That's Baba's name and your mother's name. Margaret. That's probably it."
*
*
*
Since the pear tree fell down in the tornado last summer, Jackie
could see the stars through her bedroom window much easier . She could
tell Big Dipper and Orion 's Belt.
"But you don't understand?" Her mother 's voice carried down
the hall."She was my grandmother and I didn't know her. She lived
a whole life and I lived a whole life and we didn't know each other.
I can't even remember what she looked like. Ma never had a picture.
All I remember was that she had a white babushka and a black apron.
That's all. Johnny says he remembers her eyes. Brown eyes, like mine."
"Listen, Marge, lots of people grow up not knowin g their grandmothe rs. She could have died when you were three, it would be the
same.''
" But she didn 't die . Don 't you see? She was th ere all the time."
111
SLOVAKIA
*
*
*
In the morning , Mommy said they couldn't turn on cartoons. " You
and J effi e a nd I are going to eight o'clock Mass, and we are going to
pray for Baba 's mother , my Baba, who died. She lived in Slovakia, in
Europe."
" Right near Russia , where they've got Sputnik," Jackie toldJeffie .
J effi e buttoned his jacket , but when he finished he had a button
hole left over on top and a button left over on the bottom. Mommy bent
down to redo it.
" Do they have kids in Slo-vak-i-a?"
" W ell , sure they do . Sure they have kids. Some of them are your
cousins , just like Monica and Ricky."
Jackie pulled on her left boot . " Do the little girls have earrings?"
Mommy's lower lip seemed to move a little . " I don't know ," she
said, and put on her gloves.
Only old Mister Hudak had shoveled his walk this early. Mommy
held on to Jeffie's hand and steadied herself on Jackie 's shoulder.Jackie
wondered if it was snowing on top of her cousins in Slovakia, and if
it looked the same, piled precariously on the bare trees.
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
Broken Line
Description
An account of the resource
Carol Towarnicky
Slovakia, Vol. 31 (No. 57), 1984
pp. 107-111
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Towarnicky, Carol
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1984
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2c82a300fcc80b3010544178ccc6c9e4.pdf
57656682930c6a62eefb3d76cdf36399
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
9
BUILDING ANOTHER BRIDGE?
Genera,l Lev :PIIX:'ha'la, head of the Czech Nationa'l Committee in London, broke ,wiltfh lli. Edwaxd Benes /When he
could no longer ,surfifer in silenice ,his dildtatorial, :imperiom;
and pro-lSOVliet 1po1'icy. ]t hruppened in London during the
wair. Prchala fost .his lave for Benes in 1938, when he oapitullarted to the M1.midh Alg;reemen't witlhourt 1the consent of
the 0zecho~Slovruk Prurliarrnent, .then resigned ifrom :the Presidency, thus surrendering his coll!Iltry, lodk, stock and ba,rrel, :to HiltJler w.iithout -Olffering tJhe slightest physical resistance, and then cowardly fled rto London.
From thrut time on, Prchwla re.gamded Benes and his
political clii.que - .the Czech NaJtional Socialists, or Ozedh
N aizis, as they axe .referred to - as hypocrites and frauds
who h elched forth volumes of democratic slogans and
S'peeches, bwt kept idiri'Vliing Czooho-iSlovrukia and tlhe who-le of
Erurope inito ,t he dultldhe:s af -Moscow.
In the Fcllruacy . 9, 19153, ,i ssue of the "<Ceske Listy"
(Ozech News), .t he oflfilcial organ of ,B rehala's ·giroll!p, the
General .reilates ,a nother inciderut to ,p rove the ,hy;pocrisy of
the (in)lfamous ,bridge-ib-ui[der, Dr. Edward Benes, who
brought Communism into Ozecho-Slovakia and Centrail Eu•r ope to threaJten ,tJhe secudty and democraitlic ,l:tfe of the entire Euiropean contilllerut. 'Dhe i'Il!ci:dent goes baok to ,tfue time
of the :presidenltial elec'tlionlS in 1935.
Uncertam of the swpport of ,the Caitholics in the various
par.ties, especially ,t he support of tlhe Slovalks, ibecause Dr.
Edwar.d Benes dlid cOiilltrilbute many articles to "f.ree-thinkriillg" iperiodica!lis and iwas a Freemason even before World
War I, lri's followers (,rut his 1b ehest) suddenly ,d iscovered
that Benes was a "loyall SOIIl of the Roman Catholic Ohurdh
since the dlay he was lbarn." Monsignor John Sraimek',s caiptains in his 0zech People's Party tooik up the cry, even
though Sramek .knew 1betlter, and used every me·a ns to convince the Vatican that Benes •reruJily was a "loyal son" of the
Catholic Church.
Prc,hal-a -clai.!ffis thaJt eventll!ally the Sramek Czechs put
their: story across and Rome urgently requested the CaJt!ho-
�10
SLOVAKIA
l:i!c members of the Ozecho-'SlovaJk National Assemlbly to
vote and wonk for !the election of Dr. Edward iBenes. We
know thalt Benes ,was eleclted. lwen the Sfova'ks 'Voted for
brim wilthout a dissenlt!ing vote, · !beoamse Dr. Joseph Tiso
had cornrinced them ito do so on the stTeng:th of the piromise
m'ade iby Benes that :Slovruk!ia wowld ibe granted full au'tonom~
wiitihin a yerur. We :know ,tlhaJt Benes never fulfilled it!hat ipromi'se, or eiven meant to fulifiM ilt. And he ireipaid iDr. J ·O'Seplh
Ti:so in 1947 by senldling him to .the igallows. That's the kind
of man Benes was.
W:hat hruppened after ,t he elections of 1935, aJs told lby
Prchala, wfillJ. oorlou\btedily •s hook €/Ven the most ardent admiireirs of Benes, General Lev Prcha.O.a says:
"Alflter ithe presidential elections, jjt was by sheer
a.ocidenit that tlhe edge of the curtain, which had hid'den
the 1rea;lrity, was rai!sed. Alf1teir the elootion of Benes as
'Presidenlt, I wa·s just leaving the Vladis1av Hill in the
Brag,ue Castle, when suddenllY I overheard a very familiar voiice sing olllt in open •rrupture: 'Well, we put it
across, didn't we? !' The senltenice wais spoken in godd
Russian. I was right - it .rea:Hy was A lexandrovsky,
the Russian ambassadw, who was joyously swinging
his amns. The inlto~ication over the sU1CCeSIS was
stronger than the diplom!atic resei,ve for wlhich I had
previiously known him. Those Russian words opened
my eyes.
"When I iresigned .firom the .:£unction of Vke-Commander of ithe Czed'no-Sl'ovak General Staff in 1933 and
went to eastern SlovaJkia, I was quft.te a di stan1Ce from
eveirything that was 1::a.king jplace in P,r ague I wrus a soldier and not a poilitician; I did not belong to any panty,
bl.lit inlterna1 and foreign. deve'loipments. did interest me.
AB I traveled by tra:in :frrom Kosi'Ce to Praigue, I met
the Slova'k depulties and senaJtors. I learned that Hlinka's party probaJbly woulltl ivote for Benes in the presidentia:1 elections. This su!I1prised rme a:nd, therefore, after my arrival in Brague I soug1ht the .reason for ffiinka''S turning over to the Castle and to Benes. I found
ouJt tih at tJhe V:aJt~can had recommended Benes to Hlinlka.
1
1
�SLOVAKIA
11
"However, after accidentally oivezfuearing the words
of .Am'baJSador Afex:andirovsky, it was c[ear to me ,t hat
· Benes was Sta'1in's candidaite ! I was aware that the
V a,tJican knowin,gJy ,coll!ld nOlt recommend a candidate
of the Bolshewks. '.Dhe exp1anaitioin was simple: tlhe V:atican wias a vtl.dtim of an unheard af hoax!"
It is very mudh ;possi!ble tha;t even now some of the
Benes "Ozechosloviaik!s" rure lbrying rto dece'i!ve tJhe Vatican.
'llhe .puiblfuhers of i'bhe "Tribuna" (The Tribune), the official
organ of itlhe •~Ozeclloslovalk Foreign Institute in Exile" pub:J.ished in .Paris, do nolt say so directly, but their articles
tend in thaJt di-rect_ion. The socialists writing for the '":Dribuna" keep on bringmg Ulp T. G. Masaryk and hils statement
that tihe proiblem of the sigmficance of Czech hristory is a
religfoUJS qu~on. Of course, they oonvenientliy forget to
mention that T. G. MasaJr!Ylk ,had ,1!he Ozeoh Reifonmaation ,in
mind ·a nd tJhat ait ,t he time he :had sai'd those words, he was
the Jeader of tJhe mti-Caitholic firght in Czedho-!SlovaJlda.
Ag:ain it is evident ltJhaJt the Benes sociaAi'sts thriive on
frauds, deceiits and initmig!ll'e. Referring to the itrend lin the
"Tri!bU111a," General P'lrohala says:
"By means of this ,t rick, however, the 'Dribuna is
endeavoring to realize a muich greater firaJUd. It is try.
ing to evdke in the high Roman Caitlholic Hierarclhy
a faJVOraJble impression for itself and iits cmn political
ends. 'Jlhis time, however, uninformed .readers and tlh.e
'Czechoslovak' exi:les in genera;! are ·swppo.sed to bre inspked to ~buikl a 1brid!ge' to Rome. It wi!H not sw-prise
me ,i f this is being done by atlteimpting a f1raudlulent explanaJtion Olf Masary1k's thesis, becM1se every one knows
that the peopl'e in t:Jh.e 'Councii of Free ~echo-SIJ.01Vakiiia.'
are not interested m princi~es, hut only in tactics, aJltoget'her an:ording to the reci,pe of old MachiavelJi anrl
his modern a<lmilrer'S."
We rure inclined to lbelieve General .Brohala. Enough
damage and suffering has been inflidted by the lfoHowers of
Benes and his ruinous poHcy of "CzechOislovaklism" and pro.
SO'V'ietism on the Czech and Slovak nations, nay, on the
�12
SLOVAKIA
whcle of tJhe EU1ropean conrtinent. '.Dhe former Ozecll National !Socialists - all memlbers of the Communist-dominated
"Naltional F1ront" ,go;vernmenlt of Benes and Gottwald s'hou[(i not 1b e tir:u1sted, 1b ut releg.aJted ,to the po[iibi.cal rubbish
herup. Today theli,r ,l eaders (Zenkll, Rilpka) a.re disc:redi1ted
and disowned ,b y the Ozecihs at home and aJbroad and represenlt no one hut themselves and their mercenrury clique. The
saime may be said for lthe "Wlindow-dressin,g " Slovak renegades in tile ,servJce am:l 1pay of t;he Benes CzecihlS. (Leittricli,
Sla:vilk, OsUJSky, Kocivara), ,w ho spealk for and represent oniy
themseilves and not tlhe Slovaik nation. Under the leadership
of Dr EdwaTd Benes they lb uilt the "lb;rM1ge" between the
Ewst and the West, over wlhiich oame ,S talin's h-011des into
Central Europe. They must not be given the chance to build
S'lllc:h "bridges" to Rome, or ,b etween the USA and Moscow.
•
•
•
"The story of the gradual adoption by ·the
Allies of the (Czechoslovak) theses of Mas aryk and his group cannot
and need not be retold h ere. By patient and lndefatiga.ble propaganda
they Implanted their major postulates - the existence of a 'CzechoSlovak nation ' and the desire of the Slovak branch of it to form a
part of a Czechoslovak State - so firmly in the minds of the Allies
that they were never seriously questioned at the Peace Conference.
The 'Czecho-Slovak' Govern ment h ad b een recognized by all the
Principal Allied a nd Ass o ciated Powers even BEFORE the peace
negotiations began - an act which implied that the Slovak question
was in principle already settled - while when the moment arrived
for settling all questions of de tail, including the drafting of a frontier,
it found the Czecho-Slovak Government firmly established as a :negotiating party; Indeed, in something like a privileged position." ~A . Mac a rtney: HUNGA'RY AND HER SUCCESSORS, London, 1937,
page 98) .
WHO SAID IT? -
•
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
" If a single dynasty h ad 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 ft ···a Czechoslovak lang uage any minor dialectal differences
which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen;
and w hil e t he Slavs of Bohemia developed the Czech nationality and
language, to which the intermediate dialects of Moravia graiitated,
the Slovaks, under l,lungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the ·czechs, but were not even able to form a single
literary language with them." (C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY AND
HER SUCCESSORS.::..:_ London, 1937).
�
SLOVAKIA
9
BUILDING ANOTHER BRIDGE?
Genera,l Lev :PIIX:'ha'la, head of the Czech Nationa'l Committee in London, broke ,wiltfh lli. Edwaxd Benes /When he
could no longer ,surfifer in silenice ,his dildtatorial, :imperiom;
and pro-lSOVliet 1po1'icy. ]t hruppened in London during the
wair. Prchala fost .his lave for Benes in 1938, when he oapitullarted to the M1.midh Alg;reemen't witlhourt 1the consent of
the 0zecho~Slovruk Prurliarrnent, .then resigned ifrom :the Presidency, thus surrendering his coll!Iltry, lodk, stock and ba,rrel, :to HiltJler w.iithout -Olffering tJhe slightest physical resistance, and then cowardly fled rto London.
From thrut time on, Prchwla re.gamded Benes and his
political clii.que - .the Czech NaJtional Socialists, or Ozedh
N aizis, as they axe .referred to - as hypocrites and frauds
who h elched forth volumes of democratic slogans and
S'peeches, bwt kept idiri'Vliing Czooho-iSlovrukia and tlhe who-le of
Erurope inito ,t he dultldhe:s af -Moscow.
In the Fcllruacy . 9, 19153, ,i ssue of the "<Ceske Listy"
(Ozech News), .t he oflfilcial organ of ,B rehala's ·giroll!p, the
General .reilates ,a nother inciderut to ,p rove the ,hy;pocrisy of
the (in)lfamous ,bridge-ib-ui[der, Dr. Edward Benes, who
brought Communism into Ozecho-Slovakia and Centrail Eu•r ope to threaJten ,tJhe secudty and democraitlic ,l:tfe of the entire Euiropean contilllerut. 'Dhe i'Il!ci:dent goes baok to ,tfue time
of the :presidenltial elec'tlionlS in 1935.
Uncertam of the swpport of ,the Caitholics in the various
par.ties, especially ,t he support of tlhe Slovalks, ibecause Dr.
Edwar.d Benes dlid cOiilltrilbute many articles to "f.ree-thinkriillg" iperiodica!lis and iwas a Freemason even before World
War I, lri's followers (,rut his 1b ehest) suddenly ,d iscovered
that Benes was a "loyall SOIIl of the Roman Catholic Ohurdh
since the dlay he was lbarn." Monsignor John Sraimek',s caiptains in his 0zech People's Party tooik up the cry, even
though Sramek .knew 1betlter, and used every me·a ns to convince the Vatican that Benes •reruJily was a "loyal son" of the
Catholic Church.
Prc,hal-a -clai.!ffis thaJt eventll!ally the Sramek Czechs put
their: story across and Rome urgently requested the CaJt!ho-
�10
SLOVAKIA
l:i!c members of the Ozecho-'SlovaJk National Assemlbly to
vote and wonk for !the election of Dr. Edward iBenes. We
know thalt Benes ,was eleclted. lwen the Sfova'ks 'Voted for
brim wilthout a dissenlt!ing vote, · !beoamse Dr. Joseph Tiso
had cornrinced them ito do so on the stTeng:th of the piromise
m'ade iby Benes that :Slovruk!ia wowld ibe granted full au'tonom~
wiitihin a yerur. We :know ,tlhaJt Benes never fulfilled it!hat ipromi'se, or eiven meant to fulifiM ilt. And he ireipaid iDr. J ·O'Seplh
Ti:so in 1947 by senldling him to .the igallows. That's the kind
of man Benes was.
W:hat hruppened after ,t he elections of 1935, aJs told lby
Prchala, wfillJ. oorlou\btedily •s hook €/Ven the most ardent admiireirs of Benes, General Lev Prcha.O.a says:
"Alflter ithe presidential elections, jjt was by sheer
a.ocidenit that tlhe edge of the curtain, which had hid'den
the 1rea;lrity, was rai!sed. Alf1teir the elootion of Benes as
'Presidenlt, I wa·s just leaving the Vladis1av Hill in the
Brag,ue Castle, when suddenllY I overheard a very familiar voiice sing olllt in open •rrupture: 'Well, we put it
across, didn't we? !' The senltenice wais spoken in godd
Russian. I was right - it .rea:Hy was A lexandrovsky,
the Russian ambassadw, who was joyously swinging
his amns. The inlto~ication over the sU1CCeSIS was
stronger than the diplom!atic resei,ve for wlhich I had
previiously known him. Those Russian words opened
my eyes.
"When I iresigned .firom the .:£unction of Vke-Commander of ithe Czed'no-Sl'ovak General Staff in 1933 and
went to eastern SlovaJkia, I was quft.te a di stan1Ce from
eveirything that was 1::a.king jplace in P,r ague I wrus a soldier and not a poilitician; I did not belong to any panty,
bl.lit inlterna1 and foreign. deve'loipments. did interest me.
AB I traveled by tra:in :frrom Kosi'Ce to Praigue, I met
the Slova'k depulties and senaJtors. I learned that Hlinka's party probaJbly woulltl ivote for Benes in the presidentia:1 elections. This su!I1prised rme a:nd, therefore, after my arrival in Brague I soug1ht the .reason for ffiinka''S turning over to the Castle and to Benes. I found
ouJt tih at tJhe V:aJt~can had recommended Benes to Hlinlka.
1
1
�SLOVAKIA
11
"However, after accidentally oivezfuearing the words
of .Am'baJSador Afex:andirovsky, it was c[ear to me ,t hat
· Benes was Sta'1in's candidaite ! I was aware that the
V a,tJican knowin,gJy ,coll!ld nOlt recommend a candidate
of the Bolshewks. '.Dhe exp1anaitioin was simple: tlhe V:atican wias a vtl.dtim of an unheard af hoax!"
It is very mudh ;possi!ble tha;t even now some of the
Benes "Ozechosloviaik!s" rure lbrying rto dece'i!ve tJhe Vatican.
'llhe .puiblfuhers of i'bhe "Tribuna" (The Tribune), the official
organ of itlhe •~Ozeclloslovalk Foreign Institute in Exile" pub:J.ished in .Paris, do nolt say so directly, but their articles
tend in thaJt di-rect_ion. The socialists writing for the '":Dribuna" keep on bringmg Ulp T. G. Masaryk and hils statement
that tihe proiblem of the sigmficance of Czech hristory is a
religfoUJS qu~on. Of course, they oonvenientliy forget to
mention that T. G. MasaJr!Ylk ,had ,1!he Ozeoh Reifonmaation ,in
mind ·a nd tJhat ait ,t he time he :had sai'd those words, he was
the Jeader of tJhe mti-Caitholic firght in Czedho-!SlovaJlda.
Ag:ain it is evident ltJhaJt the Benes sociaAi'sts thriive on
frauds, deceiits and initmig!ll'e. Referring to the itrend lin the
"Tri!bU111a," General P'lrohala says:
"By means of this ,t rick, however, the 'Dribuna is
endeavoring to realize a muich greater firaJUd. It is try.
ing to evdke in the high Roman Caitlholic Hierarclhy
a faJVOraJble impression for itself and iits cmn political
ends. 'Jlhis time, however, uninformed .readers and tlh.e
'Czechoslovak' exi:les in genera;! are ·swppo.sed to bre inspked to ~buikl a 1brid!ge' to Rome. It wi!H not sw-prise
me ,i f this is being done by atlteimpting a f1raudlulent explanaJtion Olf Masary1k's thesis, becM1se every one knows
that the peopl'e in t:Jh.e 'Councii of Free ~echo-SIJ.01Vakiiia.'
are not interested m princi~es, hut only in tactics, aJltoget'her an:ording to the reci,pe of old MachiavelJi anrl
his modern a<lmilrer'S."
We rure inclined to lbelieve General .Brohala. Enough
damage and suffering has been inflidted by the lfoHowers of
Benes and his ruinous poHcy of "CzechOislovaklism" and pro.
SO'V'ietism on the Czech and Slovak nations, nay, on the
�12
SLOVAKIA
whcle of tJhe EU1ropean conrtinent. '.Dhe former Ozecll National !Socialists - all memlbers of the Communist-dominated
"Naltional F1ront" ,go;vernmenlt of Benes and Gottwald s'hou[(i not 1b e tir:u1sted, 1b ut releg.aJted ,to the po[iibi.cal rubbish
herup. Today theli,r ,l eaders (Zenkll, Rilpka) a.re disc:redi1ted
and disowned ,b y the Ozecihs at home and aJbroad and represenlt no one hut themselves and their mercenrury clique. The
saime may be said for lthe "Wlindow-dressin,g " Slovak renegades in tile ,servJce am:l 1pay of t;he Benes CzecihlS. (Leittricli,
Sla:vilk, OsUJSky, Kocivara), ,w ho spealk for and represent oniy
themseilves and not tlhe Slovaik nation. Under the leadership
of Dr EdwaTd Benes they lb uilt the "lb;rM1ge" between the
Ewst and the West, over wlhiich oame ,S talin's h-011des into
Central Europe. They must not be given the chance to build
S'lllc:h "bridges" to Rome, or ,b etween the USA and Moscow.
•
•
•
"The story of the gradual adoption by ·the
Allies of the (Czechoslovak) theses of Mas aryk and his group cannot
and need not be retold h ere. By patient and lndefatiga.ble propaganda
they Implanted their major postulates - the existence of a 'CzechoSlovak nation ' and the desire of the Slovak branch of it to form a
part of a Czechoslovak State - so firmly in the minds of the Allies
that they were never seriously questioned at the Peace Conference.
The 'Czecho-Slovak' Govern ment h ad b een recognized by all the
Principal Allied a nd Ass o ciated Powers even BEFORE the peace
negotiations began - an act which implied that the Slovak question
was in principle already settled - while when the moment arrived
for settling all questions of de tail, including the drafting of a frontier,
it found the Czecho-Slovak Government firmly established as a :negotiating party; Indeed, in something like a privileged position." ~A . Mac a rtney: HUNGA'RY AND HER SUCCESSORS, London, 1937,
page 98) .
WHO SAID IT? -
•
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
" If a single dynasty h ad 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 ft ···a Czechoslovak lang uage any minor dialectal differences
which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen;
and w hil e t he Slavs of Bohemia developed the Czech nationality and
language, to which the intermediate dialects of Moravia graiitated,
the Slovaks, under l,lungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the ·czechs, but were not even able to form a single
literary language with them." (C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY AND
HER SUCCESSORS.::..:_ 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
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
SLOVAKIA
9
BUILDING ANOTHER BRIDGE?
Genera,l Lev :PIIX:'ha'la, head of the Czech Nationa'l Committee in London, broke ,wiltfh lli. Edwaxd Benes /When he
could no longer ,surfifer in silenice ,his dildtatorial, :imperiom;
and pro-lSOVliet 1po1'icy. ]t hruppened in London during the
wair. Prchala fost .his lave for Benes in 1938, when he oapitullarted to the M1.midh Alg;reemen't witlhourt 1the consent of
the 0zecho~Slovruk Prurliarrnent, .then resigned ifrom :the Presidency, thus surrendering his coll!Iltry, lodk, stock and ba,rrel, :to HiltJler w.iithout -Olffering tJhe slightest physical resistance, and then cowardly fled rto London.
From thrut time on, Prchwla re.gamded Benes and his
political clii.que - .the Czech NaJtional Socialists, or Ozedh
N aizis, as they axe .referred to - as hypocrites and frauds
who h elched forth volumes of democratic slogans and
S'peeches, bwt kept idiri'Vliing Czooho-iSlovrukia and tlhe who-le of
Erurope inito ,t he dultldhe:s af -Moscow.
In the Fcllruacy . 9, 19153, ,i ssue of the "<Ceske Listy"
(Ozech News), .t he oflfilcial organ of ,B rehala's ·giroll!p, the
General .reilates ,a nother inciderut to ,p rove the ,hy;pocrisy of
the (in)lfamous ,bridge-ib-ui[der, Dr. Edward Benes, who
brought Communism into Ozecho-Slovakia and Centrail Eu•r ope to threaJten ,tJhe secudty and democraitlic ,l:tfe of the entire Euiropean contilllerut. 'Dhe i'Il!ci:dent goes baok to ,tfue time
of the :presidenltial elec'tlionlS in 1935.
Uncertam of the swpport of ,the Caitholics in the various
par.ties, especially ,t he support of tlhe Slovalks, ibecause Dr.
Edwar.d Benes dlid cOiilltrilbute many articles to "f.ree-thinkriillg" iperiodica!lis and iwas a Freemason even before World
War I, lri's followers (,rut his 1b ehest) suddenly ,d iscovered
that Benes was a "loyall SOIIl of the Roman Catholic Ohurdh
since the dlay he was lbarn." Monsignor John Sraimek',s caiptains in his 0zech People's Party tooik up the cry, even
though Sramek .knew 1betlter, and used every me·a ns to convince the Vatican that Benes •reruJily was a "loyal son" of the
Catholic Church.
Prc,hal-a -clai.!ffis thaJt eventll!ally the Sramek Czechs put
their: story across and Rome urgently requested the CaJt!ho-
10
SLOVAKIA
l:i!c members of the Ozecho-'SlovaJk National Assemlbly to
vote and wonk for !the election of Dr. Edward iBenes. We
know thalt Benes ,was eleclted. lwen the Sfova'ks 'Voted for
brim wilthout a dissenlt!ing vote, · !beoamse Dr. Joseph Tiso
had cornrinced them ito do so on the stTeng:th of the piromise
m'ade iby Benes that :Slovruk!ia wowld ibe granted full au'tonom~
wiitihin a yerur. We :know ,tlhaJt Benes never fulfilled it!hat ipromi'se, or eiven meant to fulifiM ilt. And he ireipaid iDr. J ·O'Seplh
Ti:so in 1947 by senldling him to .the igallows. That's the kind
of man Benes was.
W:hat hruppened after ,t he elections of 1935, aJs told lby
Prchala, wfillJ. oorlou\btedily •s hook €/Ven the most ardent admiireirs of Benes, General Lev Prcha.O.a says:
"Alflter ithe presidential elections, jjt was by sheer
a.ocidenit that tlhe edge of the curtain, which had hid'den
the 1rea;lrity, was rai!sed. Alf1teir the elootion of Benes as
'Presidenlt, I wa·s just leaving the Vladis1av Hill in the
Brag,ue Castle, when suddenllY I overheard a very familiar voiice sing olllt in open •rrupture: 'Well, we put it
across, didn't we? !' The senltenice wais spoken in godd
Russian. I was right - it .rea:Hy was A lexandrovsky,
the Russian ambassadw, who was joyously swinging
his amns. The inlto~ication over the sU1CCeSIS was
stronger than the diplom!atic resei,ve for wlhich I had
previiously known him. Those Russian words opened
my eyes.
"When I iresigned .firom the .:£unction of Vke-Commander of ithe Czed'no-Sl'ovak General Staff in 1933 and
went to eastern SlovaJkia, I was quft.te a di stan1Ce from
eveirything that was 1::a.king jplace in P,r ague I wrus a soldier and not a poilitician; I did not belong to any panty,
bl.lit inlterna1 and foreign. deve'loipments. did interest me.
AB I traveled by tra:in :frrom Kosi'Ce to Praigue, I met
the Slova'k depulties and senaJtors. I learned that Hlinka's party probaJbly woulltl ivote for Benes in the presidentia:1 elections. This su!I1prised rme a:nd, therefore, after my arrival in Brague I soug1ht the .reason for ffiinka''S turning over to the Castle and to Benes. I found
ouJt tih at tJhe V:aJt~can had recommended Benes to Hlinlka.
1
1
SLOVAKIA
11
"However, after accidentally oivezfuearing the words
of .Am'baJSador Afex:andirovsky, it was c[ear to me ,t hat
· Benes was Sta'1in's candidaite ! I was aware that the
V a,tJican knowin,gJy ,coll!ld nOlt recommend a candidate
of the Bolshewks. '.Dhe exp1anaitioin was simple: tlhe V:atican wias a vtl.dtim of an unheard af hoax!"
It is very mudh ;possi!ble tha;t even now some of the
Benes "Ozechosloviaik!s" rure lbrying rto dece'i!ve tJhe Vatican.
'llhe .puiblfuhers of i'bhe "Tribuna" (The Tribune), the official
organ of itlhe •~Ozeclloslovalk Foreign Institute in Exile" pub:J.ished in .Paris, do nolt say so directly, but their articles
tend in thaJt di-rect_ion. The socialists writing for the '":Dribuna" keep on bringmg Ulp T. G. Masaryk and hils statement
that tihe proiblem of the sigmficance of Czech hristory is a
religfoUJS qu~on. Of course, they oonvenientliy forget to
mention that T. G. MasaJr!Ylk ,had ,1!he Ozeoh Reifonmaation ,in
mind ·a nd tJhat ait ,t he time he :had sai'd those words, he was
the Jeader of tJhe mti-Caitholic firght in Czedho-!SlovaJlda.
Ag:ain it is evident ltJhaJt the Benes sociaAi'sts thriive on
frauds, deceiits and initmig!ll'e. Referring to the itrend lin the
"Tri!bU111a," General P'lrohala says:
"By means of this ,t rick, however, the 'Dribuna is
endeavoring to realize a muich greater firaJUd. It is try.
ing to evdke in the high Roman Caitlholic Hierarclhy
a faJVOraJble impression for itself and iits cmn political
ends. 'Jlhis time, however, uninformed .readers and tlh.e
'Czechoslovak' exi:les in genera;! are ·swppo.sed to bre inspked to ~buikl a 1brid!ge' to Rome. It wi!H not sw-prise
me ,i f this is being done by atlteimpting a f1raudlulent explanaJtion Olf Masary1k's thesis, becM1se every one knows
that the peopl'e in t:Jh.e 'Councii of Free ~echo-SIJ.01Vakiiia.'
are not interested m princi~es, hut only in tactics, aJltoget'her an:ording to the reci,pe of old MachiavelJi anrl
his modern a<lmilrer'S."
We rure inclined to lbelieve General .Brohala. Enough
damage and suffering has been inflidted by the lfoHowers of
Benes and his ruinous poHcy of "CzechOislovaklism" and pro.
SO'V'ietism on the Czech and Slovak nations, nay, on the
12
SLOVAKIA
whcle of tJhe EU1ropean conrtinent. '.Dhe former Ozecll National !Socialists - all memlbers of the Communist-dominated
"Naltional F1ront" ,go;vernmenlt of Benes and Gottwald s'hou[(i not 1b e tir:u1sted, 1b ut releg.aJted ,to the po[iibi.cal rubbish
herup. Today theli,r ,l eaders (Zenkll, Rilpka) a.re disc:redi1ted
and disowned ,b y the Ozecihs at home and aJbroad and represenlt no one hut themselves and their mercenrury clique. The
saime may be said for lthe "Wlindow-dressin,g " Slovak renegades in tile ,servJce am:l 1pay of t;he Benes CzecihlS. (Leittricli,
Sla:vilk, OsUJSky, Kocivara), ,w ho spealk for and represent oniy
themseilves and not tlhe Slovaik nation. Under the leadership
of Dr EdwaTd Benes they lb uilt the "lb;rM1ge" between the
Ewst and the West, over wlhiich oame ,S talin's h-011des into
Central Europe. They must not be given the chance to build
S'lllc:h "bridges" to Rome, or ,b etween the USA and Moscow.
•
•
•
"The story of the gradual adoption by ·the
Allies of the (Czechoslovak) theses of Mas aryk and his group cannot
and need not be retold h ere. By patient and lndefatiga.ble propaganda
they Implanted their major postulates - the existence of a 'CzechoSlovak nation ' and the desire of the Slovak branch of it to form a
part of a Czechoslovak State - so firmly in the minds of the Allies
that they were never seriously questioned at the Peace Conference.
The 'Czecho-Slovak' Govern ment h ad b een recognized by all the
Principal Allied a nd Ass o ciated Powers even BEFORE the peace
negotiations began - an act which implied that the Slovak question
was in principle already settled - while when the moment arrived
for settling all questions of de tail, including the drafting of a frontier,
it found the Czecho-Slovak Government firmly established as a :negotiating party; Indeed, in something like a privileged position." ~A . Mac a rtney: HUNGA'RY AND HER SUCCESSORS, London, 1937,
page 98) .
WHO SAID IT? -
•
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
" If a single dynasty h ad 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 ft ···a Czechoslovak lang uage any minor dialectal differences
which existed would have been smoothed out. This did not happen;
and w hil e t he Slavs of Bohemia developed the Czech nationality and
language, to which the intermediate dialects of Moravia graiitated,
the Slovaks, under l,lungarian rule, not only developed along different lines from the ·czechs, but were not even able to form a single
literary language with them." (C. A. Macartney: HUNGARY AND
HER SUCCESSORS.::..:_ 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
Building Another Bridge?
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 2 (7), July 1953
pp. 9-12
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
July 1953
-
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/ccf3149bab4bb1fa3a838b0d4f2b07bc.pdf
04634cd0fe24fe554006b522b5beac7d
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
9
.CANADIAN TRANSLATOR OF SLOVAK POETRY
PROFESSOR WATSON KIRKCONNELL
J.M. Kirschbaum
The American ~cholar R. A. Kann, writing on Slovak
-cultural development said that "at the turn of the nineteenth century Slovak nationalism, as evidenced by a rich
harvest of national culturail activities, came to .the fore
within an incredi<bly short time. In its intensity of national
emotion and fullness of cultural achievement ;it was se<!ond
to none of the other Slav nationalities in the Habsburg
empire" (1). Rare however were Western or American
scholara who took cognizance of the development in such
a positive way, and whose opinion on Slovak cultural life
was as favorable as that expressed by Prof. R. A. Kann.
For a long time it was merely a handful of Western
scholars who were interested in Slovakia's existence, and
.still lesser number of those who paid attention to Slowk
cultural achievements. The famous Norwegian B. Bjornson,
Scotus Viator (Prof. R. Seton-Watson), and Ernest Denis
of the Sorbonne exhaust the lii:.t of prominent Western
sdholars, and writers who, before 1918, drew the attention
of the European and English-speaking world to the Slovak
-culture.
Scotus Viator in his book Racial Problems in Hungary,
published several interesting essays on Slovak popular art
and poetry (2). E. Denis gave an account of the whole
Slovak cultural development before 1918, ,and found Slovak
poetry worthy of reading, not only as far as the period of
Romanticism is concerned, but also the classic epics and
lyrics of Jan Holly (1785-1849) who enriched Slovak
literature by his masterful translations from mainy Greek
and Latin poets, and by his own poetic works as well (3).
Nevertheless, we can s:ay that not earlier than after
the First and again after the Second World War, the
Western scholars made some sporadic and serious attempts
to become ,acquainted with and to evaluate Slovak literature
and its branch-poetry-in the context of Slavic or European literatures. We note with special interest that among
them was also a Canadian scholar and translator of poetry
of many European nations, Professor Watson Kirkcon-
�10
SLOVAKIA
nell ( 4) , who as early as in the first decade after the First
World War -published three translations from Slovak poets.
Professor Kirkconnell took a courageous attitude towards people immigrating to Canada and their cultural
heritage and became a sort of cultural ambassador for
European culture in Canada.
In 1935, in the Preface to his book Canadian Overtones, his credo and the reasons why he became interested
in the poetry and culture of other than Anglo-Saxon Canadians in the following lines :
"Our national attitude towards them (i.e., Europea,n
immigrants) has already passed through two ignorant and
discreditable phases. In the first phase, we tended to despise
them as European coolies, imported to do heavy work
for which our hands had already grown too delicate. In
the second and more recent phase, we have been patronizingly interested in their folk-costumes and folk-dances ,
picturesque incidentals which have about as much vital
share in their lives as the kilt and the Highland fling have
in that of the average Scotoh~Canadian. Their poetry, however, may help us to develop a third and much truer attitude towards them, as ~beings breathing tihoughtful breath',
men and women as capable as any amongst us of appreciating the beauties and tihe .phiilosophies of thls world (5).
"I foresee a further v,alue in this poetry," continues
Kirkconnell. "It should help to develop lin succeeding genera:ions a Canadianism nourished by pride in the individual's
racial past. There is nothing so shallow and sterile as the
man who denies his ancestry. The 'one hundred per cent'
American (or Canadian) is commonly one who has deliberately suppr essed an alien origin in order to reap the
material benefits of a well-advertised loy,alty. There can
be little hope of noble spiritual issues from such a prostituted patriotism. Unfortunately, it is abetted by the ignorant
assumption of ma,ny an English-speaking citizen that alien
origin is a natural mark of inferiority. He who thinks thus
is a mental hooligan- whether he be lawyer, militia colonel,
or bishop of the church. What we sorely need, on the contmry, is enough common intelligence to recognize both the
rich diversity of racial gifts on this earth and the strength
which racial roots can contribute to the individual" (6) .
�SLOVAKIA
11
Kirkconnell wrote an inspired warning to new Canadians and to his Anglo-Saxon countrymen . as well with
regard to hasty or forced integration and assimilation.
"Prophetic hopes" - he wrote in the same book "would envisage a future Canada in which every individual
would be thus inspired to fuller citizenship by his realization of h:s origin, whatever that might be. There is already,
however, grave danger of the third and even the second
generation of Swedish, Ukrainian, and other immigrant
groups turning their backs on the language and history
of their own people in a hasty act of renunciation. That
they should be speedily integrated into loyal co-operation
with our general Canadian population is, of course, of supreme national importance. But it would be tragic if there
should at the same time by a clumsy stripping-'away of
all those spiritual associations with the past which help to
give depth and beauty to life" (7).
To prov•e the righteousness of his convictions and conceptions, Prof. Kirkconnell published some 30 books, studies
and essays and several volumes of translations (8).
Dr. Kirkconnell's Translations of Slovak Poetry
In the preface to his volume European Elegies, Prof.
Kirkconnell wrote that his translations do not pretend to
be "adequately representative" of European elegy. "As a
matter of f:act," says Kirkconnell, "I have attempted "merely to translate those poems towards which I have felt the
strongest emotional r eaction." He also says that the "limitation of this method has been intensified by the narrow
range of my humble bookshelves" (9).
We humbly assume that we may apply 1:!he above confession also to the translations from Slovak poetry. The
three poems which Prof. Kirkconnell translated are certainly not "adequately representative" of Slovak poetry,
but their choice was not unfortunate. Hviezdosl-av is the
greatest of Slovak poets in many poetic genres and
Vajansky's manifold literary activities made of him an
outstanding represent•a tive Qf Slovak literature in prose
and verse (10) .
Literary historians or critics would certainly appreciate
to know how this distinguished Canadian scholar was translating European poetry from 50 languages, having in com-
�12
SLOVAKIA
mon only their Indo-European origin. Prof. Kirkconnell
answers this question in the following lines:
"My method of translation is comparatively simple.
First choosing some poem that had moved me in the
original, I keep that original before me, mumbling it aloud
and brooding over it until I have saturated my mind with
its emotion. Then I endeavour to reproduce its form and
spirit in English as accurately as possible, reserving only
the conviction that a literal translation is inherently criminal and that my verse rendering which sacrifices beauty
to philology is a blasphemous offence in its very existence" (11).
Prof. Kirkconnell also explained w'hy he undertook
the arduous task of translating from the poetry of so many
nations.
"Modern nations are unhappily isolated"-says Prof.
Kirkconnell-"and estranged by their very loyalties to
speech, kind, and faith. But in the presence of the ultimate
they may all join hands in community of spirit. Beyond
race and creed and language are the fundamental sanctities
of human life, love, tenderness, sorrow, fortitude." The
translations were done for the transla:tor at least, a Siloam
of these healing waters, flowing in from fifty linguistic
hillsides of human experience, and I gain strength from
them in the hope that they may contribute its stream to
the ocean of understanding that shall one day consummate
its cleansing, reconciling task of pure ablution round earth's
human shores" (12).
The translation of the three Slovak poems (13) rendered by Dr. Kirkconnell follows:
THE BLOODY SONNETS
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
Song has no place in these high days of pain:
Fate calls for blood, that, splashed from heart to hand.
Is cast a:broad to consecrate the land
And from dead stones draw golden ears of grain,
Blood brings the splendor of the sun again,
Lighting our darkness with a flashing brand;
Blood brings the dawn that men may understand;
Blood brings the bread of Freedom to sustain.
�SLOVAKIA
13
Only by blood, outpoured in rage and flame,
Oan we destroy the stubble and the taresSweeping away our slavery and shame
Like putrid flotsam that a swift stream bears.
And while that cleansing tide leaps on in flood,
Mer e song is silenced in the Song of Blood.
wss
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
The spring has gone. And I have lost the flowers
I might have gathered from its meadow-grass.
I merely marked t he sudden sprig aspire
Up through the turf in frost and golden fire ,
And, as I dallied, saw that glory pass
As swiftly ias the rainbow of June showers.
Ah, maiden beauty, fleeting are thy hours!
Summer has gone. And I have missed the gleaning
I might have gathered from its harvest-field.
I merely marked the flaming wheat-waves swaying
Across the leas where summer winds were playing;
But as I gazed, time seized that yellow yield
And fate forestalled by frantic interveningAh, love, at last I now thy tragic meaning!
Autumn has come. Bare stubbled prairies taunt me
In my sad brooding on what might have been.
Across the sky the haggard mists are weaving
A fog-shroud for the dying sun's receiving;
And fears of these dark days, bereavement's keen
Heart-hunger and deep thirst of spirit haunt me.
Alas, the terrors of love's winter daunt me!
HOPE
Svetozar Hurban Vajansky (14)
Snows are now deep in the valleys;
Drifts lie in mountains appalling.
What but the sunshine can slay them?
What but the rain in its falling?
Miseries cumber the nation,
Weight the chilled earth and outwear it.
�14
SLOVAKIA
Woe to my pitiful people
How are they able to bear it?
But with sun comes rejoicing,
Smiting the snows down with slaughter;
See, where the drifts lay in rancor,
Runnels of muddying water.
Freedom's bright sun is now dawning,
Wasting our woes with its glory;
See, where oppression once crushed us,
Vanish the murderous story!
Dr. Kirkconnell's Attitude Towards Slovakb
For one who knows that after 1918 the Prague government made great efforts and spent lots of money in order
to hide the fact that Slovaks were not Czechs and that
they were dissatisfied with the Czech rule and its assimilatory tendencies, Prof. Kirkconnell's interest in Slovakia will perhaps be surprising. But much more surprising,
at least for the atmosphere of 1939, is his courageous stand
with regard to the problem which pushed Slovaks and
Czechs apart, and with regard to the Slovak language and
Slovak national entity.
W1th the exception of C. A. Macartney (15), Prague
governments gained Anglo-Saxon writers, scholars and
journalists to their side in presenting the Slovak problem
to international public opinion. The differences between
Czechs iand Slovaks were belittled: the Slovaks were presented as an ungrateful and unruly people, politically par ochial and underdeveloped, who were led by a "clerical
clique" into an opposition towards ia government which
was depicted as an example of democracy, progress and
tolerance.
Prof. Kirkconnell did not buy this picture of CzechoSlovakia and courageously pointed to the facts which were
hidden by the clever propaganda of Prague governments.
He saw in the correct historical perspective the origin of
Czecho-Slovakia and the inherent differences between the
Czechs and Slovaks.
"There were two documents"-wrote Kirkconnell in
1939- " on the strength of which the Slovaks were included
�SLOVAKIA
15
in the new state. The first was a resolution supporting
union, drawn up by a private group of 106 men, meeting
in the little Slovak town of Turciansky sv. Martin. The
other was the so-called Pittsburgh Declaration, signed by
Czech and Slovak immigrants at Pitts'b urgh, U.S.A., in support of a federal union of the Czechs and Slovaks. In the
Slovak provinces, no plebiscite was ever t,aken; and a
Slovak delegation to Paris, seeking to state the other side
of the Slovak case, was arrested by the French police, on
the instigation of Benesh, and deported. Monsieur Andre
Tardieu, in his book LA PAIX, explains }aconically: "We
had to choose between a plebiscite and the creation of
Czecho-Slovakia" (16).
Prof. Kirkconnell had a different view from the majority of Anglo-Saxon scholars and writers also with regard to the official Czech theory that Czechs and Slovaks
were one ethnic unit and that the Slovak language was
merely a dialect of the Czech tongue.
"It cannot be too strongly emphasized"____.wrote Kirkconnell in the same book- "that the Slovaks are not
Czechs, and that there is no such creature as a "Czechoslovak. While they speak closely related Slavic languages,
Slovak is not a mere dialect of Czech. The differences are
about as great as those between the similarly related
languages, Dutch and German.- I have on my shelves Miroslav Kalal's Slovak-Czech dictionary (published 1924), in
which there are 35,000 Slovak words that were apparently
unintelligible to a Czech and hence required definition. As
a matter of fact, many Slovak philologists find the closest
relative of their language in the speech of the Slovenes,
laying to the southwest of Hungary" (17).
The reason of disagreement between the Czechs and
Slovaks were, according to Prof. Kirkconnell, more serious
than the Prague goverment or some scholars in the West
were ready to admit in 1939. He boldly pointed out that
Slovaks had serious reasons to be dissatisfied.
"When the treaty makers of Paris"-says Kirkconnell
-"linked Czechs and Slovaks together in a common state,
it was assumed that the ,a rrangement would prove an ideal
one; yet a visit to Middle Europe in 1938 found the Slovaks
one of the most discontented of the republic's minorities.
This is only intelligible if we realize the diverging past
�16
SLOVAKIA
histories of the Czechs and the SlovaJks, and the unfulfilled
conditions under which the latter entered the Czech-dominated state in 1919" (18).
Looking with scholarly objectivity at the origin and
at the 20 years of political existance of Czecho-Slovakia,
Prof. Kirkconnell could not but express different views
also on the disintegration of that coontry and on the
creation of the Slovak Republic. He wrote critically on
some aspects of the first steps of the Slovak government
,and on the Slovak constitution, but with full understanding
of the reasons which led the Slovak Parliament on March
14, 1939, to declare Slovakia's independence:
"The creation, in March 1939, of a separate Slovak
state under German auspices did not come as a surprise
to anyone familiar with the feeling existing between the
Slovaks and the Czechs, and aware also of the Nazi eagerness to intensify and exploit such a situation for the furtherance of their own programme. A measure of Slovak
autonomy had, it is true, been granted by Prague after
the Munich settlement, but the ubiquitous presence of an
intrenched Czech officialdom in state and school, backed
by the Czech army, together with the difficulty of even
gradually replacing them with Slov,ak officials and teachers,
made exasperated impatience on the part of the Slovak
nationalists inevitable" (19).
Since 1939 Prof. Kirkconnell paid attention to the
cultul"al activities of Canadians of Slovak origin and favorably commented in the University of Toronto Quarterly
on two publications: Eudovit Srur and His Place in the
Slavic World and Contemporary tende.ncies in Slovak
Philology (20), quoting from the latter publication a corroboration of his views on Slovak language. In a personal
letter he also congratulated the author of the book Slovakia
-Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, considering
it as "an imposing scholarly work on the subject."
All this allows us to conclude that Slovakia, Slovak
culture and poetry, as well as the Slovak struggle for freedom found in this outstanding Canadian-Slavist a keen
observer and stanch defender of historical truth and scholly objectivity, who did not conform with half-truths even
if they were fashionable.
�SLOVAKIA
17
RE·FE·RENCES
1.
Of R. A. Kann: The Multinational Empire, Rutgers University,
1950; p . 273.
2.
Scotus Viator: Racial Problems in Hungary, London, 1908, contributions by S. H. Vajanskt (Chapter XIX); Dusan JurkovH!~
On Slovak Popular Art (Chapter XWII); and Slovak Popular
Melodies (Chapter XX); ,p p. 362-392. In Vajanskt's contribution
we find several good translations or Slovak songs or poetry.
3.
Ernest Denis: Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917 ; p. 153-1'54; also J.
-M. Kirschbaum, Misconceptions of American Slavists about Slovak
Literature, in Slovakia, Vol. XI, Middletown, Pa., 1961; p. 22-42.
4.
The Encyclopedia Cana:diana gives Olll Prof. W. KirkcOI11I1e1l the
following account: Kirkconnell Watson, pr,o fessor a nd writer:
born -May 16, 1895, wt Port Hope, Ontario. Educ-ated at the Collegiate Institute, Lindsay; ·Q ueen's University (lM.A. 1916); the
Toronto Conservjj,tory df Music; and ; Lincoln College, Oxford.
Profes-sor of Ernglish at Wesley (la,ter United) College, Winnipeg,
1922-310; O'f c1,assics 1000-40; head of th·e English department at
MaoMas<ter University 1940-1948 ; became President oil' Acadia
University 1948. He pubJi.shed neal'ly 30 works, ranging from
learned treatises and poetry to short stories and children's tales.
His fkst book of verse was The Tide of Life (1930); Lyra Sacra
dates from 1939. An important scholarly work The Celestial
Cycle: The Theme of Paradise Lost in World Literature, with
Translations of the Major Analogues appeared in 1952.
His versability manifes'ted itseld' in an exceptional linguistic
ability: he pu,blished several collections of ve,r se translated
fr-om Icelandia, Polish and Hungarian sources. Collaborated with
,Seraphim Marion in The Quebec Tradition (1946) and with
A. S. P . Woodhouse in a survey, The Humanities in Canada
( 194 7) . Memlb er af many forei.gn learned societies; elected
F iR.S.C . 1936; awarded the Loren Pierce Medal, 1942 .
.5.
Preface to Canadian Overtones, Winnipeg, 1935, The Columbia
Press, Ltd.; p. 3-4.
-~.
Ibidem~ p. 4.
'l . Ibi(lem-p. 6.
8.
Under the Utle European Elegies, Prof. Kirkc_pnnen has published 100 poems w•h ich he translated f.rom 50 languages. In his
Canadian Overtones, he published translations from the Icelandic,
Swedish, Nor,wegian, Hung,arian, rtalian and Greek poetry.
9. •See Preface
10.
On Hviezdoslav, see Scatus Viator, op. cit., p. :!70-371; also W.
Lednicki (ed.), Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature; also this
w-r iter's contribution on "Two Slovak translators of Mickiewicz,"
p. 498-493. His "Bloody Sonets" were translated into English
by Jarosl1av Vajda; Hviezdoslav, on the other hand, translated
Shakespeare's Hamlet and Midsummer N!-ght's Dream into
Slovak.
�SLOVi\KI.,\ ,
18
11.
European Elegies.
12.
Ibidem
13.
All three translations were originally puibl!shed
Anthology of Czechoslovak Poetry, New
Press, 1929.
An
In
C. A. Manning,
York, Columbia
14.' · On ' s. ;H : Viaja~sky role b~ .Slovak lit-erature artd : 'n atio~~f !Jfe
. se,e . Scotu~ .Viator;, op. cjt., p. 362; . L. I. StrakhoV1Sky ,( ed.),
Cambrl!J'ge, ·. Mass., 1949, p: . 489;
and ·r. · J. Kramoris, Slovakia and Slovak Literature, In The
Catholic Encyclopedia, XVILiil, 1950. S. H. Vajansky was a poe t
as well as novelist and national lead-er.
His chief works are:' (a) Poetical: Tatry a more (The Tatras and
the ·s ea), a · collection o.f poems; Zpod jarma (From under the
<...:_ 1'oke); ·Besed.y .a ,,dumy ,. (Conv.ersa,tion ' and Mediations)';- (·IJ)
Novels: Sucha ratolesf (The Dry Branch), by which is meant
the Slovak nobles who had deserted -their nationality; Kotlfn;
(c) · Stories and Sketches: ~alia (The Lily); Svietace Tiene
(Glittering \Shadows); Husle (The Violin); Two Sisters; The
Young Mini'ster. Ge11man translations have appeared ()Cf "Der
Kandidat," "Der Nachltwacher," "Das Weib des Hol1shauers,"
Der sch,varze Idealist," "Das Heimatslied." May English translations soon follow! -,R.W JS-.W.
l', , ' W~ihtbo1>l< of . SlaVic : Studies,
Hi.
Hungary and her Successors, Ox,f ord University
and Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942.
16.
W. Kirkconnell: Canada, Europe and Hitler, Oxiford University
Press, 1939 ;· p. 44.
17.
lrbidem~p. 43.
18.
lbiciem- p.44.
19.
lbidem- p. 47.
20.
Press,
1937
University of Toronto Quarterly, July 1961, Letters in Canada.
"Publications in Forei,g n Languages," p. 514 ; also his comment
on "Misconceptions of American Slavists arbout Slovak Literature,"
in the same revue, July 1962, p. 582, wh.er-e · Prof. Kirkconnell
writes : "Dr. Joseph M. Kirschbaum, of the University od: Montreal,
has contributed to Slovakia (!March-June 1961, 22-42) a heavily
documented essay on '\Misconceptions of American Slavists .a:bout
Slovak Literature. Whereas Czech propaganda has refused to
adm_it tha_t there was any Slovak literaiture before 18·44. Marxist
scholarshiIJ, without any Czech inhibitions, has recognized over
one hundr ed Slovak authors in the eighteenth-century 'school'
of Anton Bernolak, and th ere is evidence of a Slovak tradition
going all the way back to the Great Moravian. Elmpire in the
ninth cent<ury. Dr. Iimrich Kotvan's Bibliography of the School
of Bernolak 11urns to some · four hundred pages."
�
SLOVAKIA
9
.CANADIAN TRANSLATOR OF SLOVAK POETRY
PROFESSOR WATSON KIRKCONNELL
J.M. Kirschbaum
The American ~cholar R. A. Kann, writing on Slovak
-cultural development said that "at the turn of the nineteenth century Slovak nationalism, as evidenced by a rich
harvest of national culturail activities, came to .the fore
within an incredi<bly short time. In its intensity of national
emotion and fullness of cultural achievement ;it was se<!ond
to none of the other Slav nationalities in the Habsburg
empire" (1). Rare however were Western or American
scholara who took cognizance of the development in such
a positive way, and whose opinion on Slovak cultural life
was as favorable as that expressed by Prof. R. A. Kann.
For a long time it was merely a handful of Western
scholars who were interested in Slovakia's existence, and
.still lesser number of those who paid attention to Slowk
cultural achievements. The famous Norwegian B. Bjornson,
Scotus Viator (Prof. R. Seton-Watson), and Ernest Denis
of the Sorbonne exhaust the lii:.t of prominent Western
sdholars, and writers who, before 1918, drew the attention
of the European and English-speaking world to the Slovak
-culture.
Scotus Viator in his book Racial Problems in Hungary,
published several interesting essays on Slovak popular art
and poetry (2). E. Denis gave an account of the whole
Slovak cultural development before 1918, ,and found Slovak
poetry worthy of reading, not only as far as the period of
Romanticism is concerned, but also the classic epics and
lyrics of Jan Holly (1785-1849) who enriched Slovak
literature by his masterful translations from mainy Greek
and Latin poets, and by his own poetic works as well (3).
Nevertheless, we can s:ay that not earlier than after
the First and again after the Second World War, the
Western scholars made some sporadic and serious attempts
to become ,acquainted with and to evaluate Slovak literature
and its branch-poetry-in the context of Slavic or European literatures. We note with special interest that among
them was also a Canadian scholar and translator of poetry
of many European nations, Professor Watson Kirkcon-
�10
SLOVAKIA
nell ( 4) , who as early as in the first decade after the First
World War -published three translations from Slovak poets.
Professor Kirkconnell took a courageous attitude towards people immigrating to Canada and their cultural
heritage and became a sort of cultural ambassador for
European culture in Canada.
In 1935, in the Preface to his book Canadian Overtones, his credo and the reasons why he became interested
in the poetry and culture of other than Anglo-Saxon Canadians in the following lines :
"Our national attitude towards them (i.e., Europea,n
immigrants) has already passed through two ignorant and
discreditable phases. In the first phase, we tended to despise
them as European coolies, imported to do heavy work
for which our hands had already grown too delicate. In
the second and more recent phase, we have been patronizingly interested in their folk-costumes and folk-dances ,
picturesque incidentals which have about as much vital
share in their lives as the kilt and the Highland fling have
in that of the average Scotoh~Canadian. Their poetry, however, may help us to develop a third and much truer attitude towards them, as ~beings breathing tihoughtful breath',
men and women as capable as any amongst us of appreciating the beauties and tihe .phiilosophies of thls world (5).
"I foresee a further v,alue in this poetry," continues
Kirkconnell. "It should help to develop lin succeeding genera:ions a Canadianism nourished by pride in the individual's
racial past. There is nothing so shallow and sterile as the
man who denies his ancestry. The 'one hundred per cent'
American (or Canadian) is commonly one who has deliberately suppr essed an alien origin in order to reap the
material benefits of a well-advertised loy,alty. There can
be little hope of noble spiritual issues from such a prostituted patriotism. Unfortunately, it is abetted by the ignorant
assumption of ma,ny an English-speaking citizen that alien
origin is a natural mark of inferiority. He who thinks thus
is a mental hooligan- whether he be lawyer, militia colonel,
or bishop of the church. What we sorely need, on the contmry, is enough common intelligence to recognize both the
rich diversity of racial gifts on this earth and the strength
which racial roots can contribute to the individual" (6) .
�SLOVAKIA
11
Kirkconnell wrote an inspired warning to new Canadians and to his Anglo-Saxon countrymen . as well with
regard to hasty or forced integration and assimilation.
"Prophetic hopes" - he wrote in the same book "would envisage a future Canada in which every individual
would be thus inspired to fuller citizenship by his realization of h:s origin, whatever that might be. There is already,
however, grave danger of the third and even the second
generation of Swedish, Ukrainian, and other immigrant
groups turning their backs on the language and history
of their own people in a hasty act of renunciation. That
they should be speedily integrated into loyal co-operation
with our general Canadian population is, of course, of supreme national importance. But it would be tragic if there
should at the same time by a clumsy stripping-'away of
all those spiritual associations with the past which help to
give depth and beauty to life" (7).
To prov•e the righteousness of his convictions and conceptions, Prof. Kirkconnell published some 30 books, studies
and essays and several volumes of translations (8).
Dr. Kirkconnell's Translations of Slovak Poetry
In the preface to his volume European Elegies, Prof.
Kirkconnell wrote that his translations do not pretend to
be "adequately representative" of European elegy. "As a
matter of f:act," says Kirkconnell, "I have attempted "merely to translate those poems towards which I have felt the
strongest emotional r eaction." He also says that the "limitation of this method has been intensified by the narrow
range of my humble bookshelves" (9).
We humbly assume that we may apply 1:!he above confession also to the translations from Slovak poetry. The
three poems which Prof. Kirkconnell translated are certainly not "adequately representative" of Slovak poetry,
but their choice was not unfortunate. Hviezdosl-av is the
greatest of Slovak poets in many poetic genres and
Vajansky's manifold literary activities made of him an
outstanding represent•a tive Qf Slovak literature in prose
and verse (10) .
Literary historians or critics would certainly appreciate
to know how this distinguished Canadian scholar was translating European poetry from 50 languages, having in com-
�12
SLOVAKIA
mon only their Indo-European origin. Prof. Kirkconnell
answers this question in the following lines:
"My method of translation is comparatively simple.
First choosing some poem that had moved me in the
original, I keep that original before me, mumbling it aloud
and brooding over it until I have saturated my mind with
its emotion. Then I endeavour to reproduce its form and
spirit in English as accurately as possible, reserving only
the conviction that a literal translation is inherently criminal and that my verse rendering which sacrifices beauty
to philology is a blasphemous offence in its very existence" (11).
Prof. Kirkconnell also explained w'hy he undertook
the arduous task of translating from the poetry of so many
nations.
"Modern nations are unhappily isolated"-says Prof.
Kirkconnell-"and estranged by their very loyalties to
speech, kind, and faith. But in the presence of the ultimate
they may all join hands in community of spirit. Beyond
race and creed and language are the fundamental sanctities
of human life, love, tenderness, sorrow, fortitude." The
translations were done for the transla:tor at least, a Siloam
of these healing waters, flowing in from fifty linguistic
hillsides of human experience, and I gain strength from
them in the hope that they may contribute its stream to
the ocean of understanding that shall one day consummate
its cleansing, reconciling task of pure ablution round earth's
human shores" (12).
The translation of the three Slovak poems (13) rendered by Dr. Kirkconnell follows:
THE BLOODY SONNETS
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
Song has no place in these high days of pain:
Fate calls for blood, that, splashed from heart to hand.
Is cast a:broad to consecrate the land
And from dead stones draw golden ears of grain,
Blood brings the splendor of the sun again,
Lighting our darkness with a flashing brand;
Blood brings the dawn that men may understand;
Blood brings the bread of Freedom to sustain.
�SLOVAKIA
13
Only by blood, outpoured in rage and flame,
Oan we destroy the stubble and the taresSweeping away our slavery and shame
Like putrid flotsam that a swift stream bears.
And while that cleansing tide leaps on in flood,
Mer e song is silenced in the Song of Blood.
wss
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
The spring has gone. And I have lost the flowers
I might have gathered from its meadow-grass.
I merely marked t he sudden sprig aspire
Up through the turf in frost and golden fire ,
And, as I dallied, saw that glory pass
As swiftly ias the rainbow of June showers.
Ah, maiden beauty, fleeting are thy hours!
Summer has gone. And I have missed the gleaning
I might have gathered from its harvest-field.
I merely marked the flaming wheat-waves swaying
Across the leas where summer winds were playing;
But as I gazed, time seized that yellow yield
And fate forestalled by frantic interveningAh, love, at last I now thy tragic meaning!
Autumn has come. Bare stubbled prairies taunt me
In my sad brooding on what might have been.
Across the sky the haggard mists are weaving
A fog-shroud for the dying sun's receiving;
And fears of these dark days, bereavement's keen
Heart-hunger and deep thirst of spirit haunt me.
Alas, the terrors of love's winter daunt me!
HOPE
Svetozar Hurban Vajansky (14)
Snows are now deep in the valleys;
Drifts lie in mountains appalling.
What but the sunshine can slay them?
What but the rain in its falling?
Miseries cumber the nation,
Weight the chilled earth and outwear it.
�14
SLOVAKIA
Woe to my pitiful people
How are they able to bear it?
But with sun comes rejoicing,
Smiting the snows down with slaughter;
See, where the drifts lay in rancor,
Runnels of muddying water.
Freedom's bright sun is now dawning,
Wasting our woes with its glory;
See, where oppression once crushed us,
Vanish the murderous story!
Dr. Kirkconnell's Attitude Towards Slovakb
For one who knows that after 1918 the Prague government made great efforts and spent lots of money in order
to hide the fact that Slovaks were not Czechs and that
they were dissatisfied with the Czech rule and its assimilatory tendencies, Prof. Kirkconnell's interest in Slovakia will perhaps be surprising. But much more surprising,
at least for the atmosphere of 1939, is his courageous stand
with regard to the problem which pushed Slovaks and
Czechs apart, and with regard to the Slovak language and
Slovak national entity.
W1th the exception of C. A. Macartney (15), Prague
governments gained Anglo-Saxon writers, scholars and
journalists to their side in presenting the Slovak problem
to international public opinion. The differences between
Czechs iand Slovaks were belittled: the Slovaks were presented as an ungrateful and unruly people, politically par ochial and underdeveloped, who were led by a "clerical
clique" into an opposition towards ia government which
was depicted as an example of democracy, progress and
tolerance.
Prof. Kirkconnell did not buy this picture of CzechoSlovakia and courageously pointed to the facts which were
hidden by the clever propaganda of Prague governments.
He saw in the correct historical perspective the origin of
Czecho-Slovakia and the inherent differences between the
Czechs and Slovaks.
"There were two documents"-wrote Kirkconnell in
1939- " on the strength of which the Slovaks were included
�SLOVAKIA
15
in the new state. The first was a resolution supporting
union, drawn up by a private group of 106 men, meeting
in the little Slovak town of Turciansky sv. Martin. The
other was the so-called Pittsburgh Declaration, signed by
Czech and Slovak immigrants at Pitts'b urgh, U.S.A., in support of a federal union of the Czechs and Slovaks. In the
Slovak provinces, no plebiscite was ever t,aken; and a
Slovak delegation to Paris, seeking to state the other side
of the Slovak case, was arrested by the French police, on
the instigation of Benesh, and deported. Monsieur Andre
Tardieu, in his book LA PAIX, explains }aconically: "We
had to choose between a plebiscite and the creation of
Czecho-Slovakia" (16).
Prof. Kirkconnell had a different view from the majority of Anglo-Saxon scholars and writers also with regard to the official Czech theory that Czechs and Slovaks
were one ethnic unit and that the Slovak language was
merely a dialect of the Czech tongue.
"It cannot be too strongly emphasized"____.wrote Kirkconnell in the same book- "that the Slovaks are not
Czechs, and that there is no such creature as a "Czechoslovak. While they speak closely related Slavic languages,
Slovak is not a mere dialect of Czech. The differences are
about as great as those between the similarly related
languages, Dutch and German.- I have on my shelves Miroslav Kalal's Slovak-Czech dictionary (published 1924), in
which there are 35,000 Slovak words that were apparently
unintelligible to a Czech and hence required definition. As
a matter of fact, many Slovak philologists find the closest
relative of their language in the speech of the Slovenes,
laying to the southwest of Hungary" (17).
The reason of disagreement between the Czechs and
Slovaks were, according to Prof. Kirkconnell, more serious
than the Prague goverment or some scholars in the West
were ready to admit in 1939. He boldly pointed out that
Slovaks had serious reasons to be dissatisfied.
"When the treaty makers of Paris"-says Kirkconnell
-"linked Czechs and Slovaks together in a common state,
it was assumed that the ,a rrangement would prove an ideal
one; yet a visit to Middle Europe in 1938 found the Slovaks
one of the most discontented of the republic's minorities.
This is only intelligible if we realize the diverging past
�16
SLOVAKIA
histories of the Czechs and the SlovaJks, and the unfulfilled
conditions under which the latter entered the Czech-dominated state in 1919" (18).
Looking with scholarly objectivity at the origin and
at the 20 years of political existance of Czecho-Slovakia,
Prof. Kirkconnell could not but express different views
also on the disintegration of that coontry and on the
creation of the Slovak Republic. He wrote critically on
some aspects of the first steps of the Slovak government
,and on the Slovak constitution, but with full understanding
of the reasons which led the Slovak Parliament on March
14, 1939, to declare Slovakia's independence:
"The creation, in March 1939, of a separate Slovak
state under German auspices did not come as a surprise
to anyone familiar with the feeling existing between the
Slovaks and the Czechs, and aware also of the Nazi eagerness to intensify and exploit such a situation for the furtherance of their own programme. A measure of Slovak
autonomy had, it is true, been granted by Prague after
the Munich settlement, but the ubiquitous presence of an
intrenched Czech officialdom in state and school, backed
by the Czech army, together with the difficulty of even
gradually replacing them with Slov,ak officials and teachers,
made exasperated impatience on the part of the Slovak
nationalists inevitable" (19).
Since 1939 Prof. Kirkconnell paid attention to the
cultul"al activities of Canadians of Slovak origin and favorably commented in the University of Toronto Quarterly
on two publications: Eudovit Srur and His Place in the
Slavic World and Contemporary tende.ncies in Slovak
Philology (20), quoting from the latter publication a corroboration of his views on Slovak language. In a personal
letter he also congratulated the author of the book Slovakia
-Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, considering
it as "an imposing scholarly work on the subject."
All this allows us to conclude that Slovakia, Slovak
culture and poetry, as well as the Slovak struggle for freedom found in this outstanding Canadian-Slavist a keen
observer and stanch defender of historical truth and scholly objectivity, who did not conform with half-truths even
if they were fashionable.
�SLOVAKIA
17
RE·FE·RENCES
1.
Of R. A. Kann: The Multinational Empire, Rutgers University,
1950; p . 273.
2.
Scotus Viator: Racial Problems in Hungary, London, 1908, contributions by S. H. Vajanskt (Chapter XIX); Dusan JurkovH!~
On Slovak Popular Art (Chapter XWII); and Slovak Popular
Melodies (Chapter XX); ,p p. 362-392. In Vajanskt's contribution
we find several good translations or Slovak songs or poetry.
3.
Ernest Denis: Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917 ; p. 153-1'54; also J.
-M. Kirschbaum, Misconceptions of American Slavists about Slovak
Literature, in Slovakia, Vol. XI, Middletown, Pa., 1961; p. 22-42.
4.
The Encyclopedia Cana:diana gives Olll Prof. W. KirkcOI11I1e1l the
following account: Kirkconnell Watson, pr,o fessor a nd writer:
born -May 16, 1895, wt Port Hope, Ontario. Educ-ated at the Collegiate Institute, Lindsay; ·Q ueen's University (lM.A. 1916); the
Toronto Conservjj,tory df Music; and ; Lincoln College, Oxford.
Profes-sor of Ernglish at Wesley (la,ter United) College, Winnipeg,
1922-310; O'f c1,assics 1000-40; head of th·e English department at
MaoMas<ter University 1940-1948 ; became President oil' Acadia
University 1948. He pubJi.shed neal'ly 30 works, ranging from
learned treatises and poetry to short stories and children's tales.
His fkst book of verse was The Tide of Life (1930); Lyra Sacra
dates from 1939. An important scholarly work The Celestial
Cycle: The Theme of Paradise Lost in World Literature, with
Translations of the Major Analogues appeared in 1952.
His versability manifes'ted itseld' in an exceptional linguistic
ability: he pu,blished several collections of ve,r se translated
fr-om Icelandia, Polish and Hungarian sources. Collaborated with
,Seraphim Marion in The Quebec Tradition (1946) and with
A. S. P . Woodhouse in a survey, The Humanities in Canada
( 194 7) . Memlb er af many forei.gn learned societies; elected
F iR.S.C . 1936; awarded the Loren Pierce Medal, 1942 .
.5.
Preface to Canadian Overtones, Winnipeg, 1935, The Columbia
Press, Ltd.; p. 3-4.
-~.
Ibidem~ p. 4.
'l . Ibi(lem-p. 6.
8.
Under the Utle European Elegies, Prof. Kirkc_pnnen has published 100 poems w•h ich he translated f.rom 50 languages. In his
Canadian Overtones, he published translations from the Icelandic,
Swedish, Nor,wegian, Hung,arian, rtalian and Greek poetry.
9. •See Preface
10.
On Hviezdoslav, see Scatus Viator, op. cit., p. :!70-371; also W.
Lednicki (ed.), Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature; also this
w-r iter's contribution on "Two Slovak translators of Mickiewicz,"
p. 498-493. His "Bloody Sonets" were translated into English
by Jarosl1av Vajda; Hviezdoslav, on the other hand, translated
Shakespeare's Hamlet and Midsummer N!-ght's Dream into
Slovak.
�SLOVi\KI.,\ ,
18
11.
European Elegies.
12.
Ibidem
13.
All three translations were originally puibl!shed
Anthology of Czechoslovak Poetry, New
Press, 1929.
An
In
C. A. Manning,
York, Columbia
14.' · On ' s. ;H : Viaja~sky role b~ .Slovak lit-erature artd : 'n atio~~f !Jfe
. se,e . Scotu~ .Viator;, op. cjt., p. 362; . L. I. StrakhoV1Sky ,( ed.),
Cambrl!J'ge, ·. Mass., 1949, p: . 489;
and ·r. · J. Kramoris, Slovakia and Slovak Literature, In The
Catholic Encyclopedia, XVILiil, 1950. S. H. Vajansky was a poe t
as well as novelist and national lead-er.
His chief works are:' (a) Poetical: Tatry a more (The Tatras and
the ·s ea), a · collection o.f poems; Zpod jarma (From under the
<...:_ 1'oke); ·Besed.y .a ,,dumy ,. (Conv.ersa,tion ' and Mediations)';- (·IJ)
Novels: Sucha ratolesf (The Dry Branch), by which is meant
the Slovak nobles who had deserted -their nationality; Kotlfn;
(c) · Stories and Sketches: ~alia (The Lily); Svietace Tiene
(Glittering \Shadows); Husle (The Violin); Two Sisters; The
Young Mini'ster. Ge11man translations have appeared ()Cf "Der
Kandidat," "Der Nachltwacher," "Das Weib des Hol1shauers,"
Der sch,varze Idealist," "Das Heimatslied." May English translations soon follow! -,R.W JS-.W.
l', , ' W~ihtbo1>l< of . SlaVic : Studies,
Hi.
Hungary and her Successors, Ox,f ord University
and Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942.
16.
W. Kirkconnell: Canada, Europe and Hitler, Oxiford University
Press, 1939 ;· p. 44.
17.
lrbidem~p. 43.
18.
lbiciem- p.44.
19.
lbidem- p. 47.
20.
Press,
1937
University of Toronto Quarterly, July 1961, Letters in Canada.
"Publications in Forei,g n Languages," p. 514 ; also his comment
on "Misconceptions of American Slavists arbout Slovak Literature,"
in the same revue, July 1962, p. 582, wh.er-e · Prof. Kirkconnell
writes : "Dr. Joseph M. Kirschbaum, of the University od: Montreal,
has contributed to Slovakia (!March-June 1961, 22-42) a heavily
documented essay on '\Misconceptions of American Slavists .a:bout
Slovak Literature. Whereas Czech propaganda has refused to
adm_it tha_t there was any Slovak literaiture before 18·44. Marxist
scholarshiIJ, without any Czech inhibitions, has recognized over
one hundr ed Slovak authors in the eighteenth-century 'school'
of Anton Bernolak, and th ere is evidence of a Slovak tradition
going all the way back to the Great Moravian. Elmpire in the
ninth cent<ury. Dr. Iimrich Kotvan's Bibliography of the School
of Bernolak 11urns to some · four hundred pages."
�
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
1964, Vol. 14
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 14 (No. 37), 1964.
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
1964
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
SLOVAKIA
9
.CANADIAN TRANSLATOR OF SLOVAK POETRY
PROFESSOR WATSON KIRKCONNELL
J.M. Kirschbaum
The American ~cholar R. A. Kann, writing on Slovak
-cultural development said that "at the turn of the nineteenth century Slovak nationalism, as evidenced by a rich
harvest of national culturail activities, came to .the fore
within an incredi<bly short time. In its intensity of national
emotion and fullness of cultural achievement ;it was se<!ond
to none of the other Slav nationalities in the Habsburg
empire" (1). Rare however were Western or American
scholara who took cognizance of the development in such
a positive way, and whose opinion on Slovak cultural life
was as favorable as that expressed by Prof. R. A. Kann.
For a long time it was merely a handful of Western
scholars who were interested in Slovakia's existence, and
.still lesser number of those who paid attention to Slowk
cultural achievements. The famous Norwegian B. Bjornson,
Scotus Viator (Prof. R. Seton-Watson), and Ernest Denis
of the Sorbonne exhaust the lii:.t of prominent Western
sdholars, and writers who, before 1918, drew the attention
of the European and English-speaking world to the Slovak
-culture.
Scotus Viator in his book Racial Problems in Hungary,
published several interesting essays on Slovak popular art
and poetry (2). E. Denis gave an account of the whole
Slovak cultural development before 1918, ,and found Slovak
poetry worthy of reading, not only as far as the period of
Romanticism is concerned, but also the classic epics and
lyrics of Jan Holly (1785-1849) who enriched Slovak
literature by his masterful translations from mainy Greek
and Latin poets, and by his own poetic works as well (3).
Nevertheless, we can s:ay that not earlier than after
the First and again after the Second World War, the
Western scholars made some sporadic and serious attempts
to become ,acquainted with and to evaluate Slovak literature
and its branch-poetry-in the context of Slavic or European literatures. We note with special interest that among
them was also a Canadian scholar and translator of poetry
of many European nations, Professor Watson Kirkcon-
10
SLOVAKIA
nell ( 4) , who as early as in the first decade after the First
World War -published three translations from Slovak poets.
Professor Kirkconnell took a courageous attitude towards people immigrating to Canada and their cultural
heritage and became a sort of cultural ambassador for
European culture in Canada.
In 1935, in the Preface to his book Canadian Overtones, his credo and the reasons why he became interested
in the poetry and culture of other than Anglo-Saxon Canadians in the following lines :
"Our national attitude towards them (i.e., Europea,n
immigrants) has already passed through two ignorant and
discreditable phases. In the first phase, we tended to despise
them as European coolies, imported to do heavy work
for which our hands had already grown too delicate. In
the second and more recent phase, we have been patronizingly interested in their folk-costumes and folk-dances ,
picturesque incidentals which have about as much vital
share in their lives as the kilt and the Highland fling have
in that of the average Scotoh~Canadian. Their poetry, however, may help us to develop a third and much truer attitude towards them, as ~beings breathing tihoughtful breath',
men and women as capable as any amongst us of appreciating the beauties and tihe .phiilosophies of thls world (5).
"I foresee a further v,alue in this poetry," continues
Kirkconnell. "It should help to develop lin succeeding genera:ions a Canadianism nourished by pride in the individual's
racial past. There is nothing so shallow and sterile as the
man who denies his ancestry. The 'one hundred per cent'
American (or Canadian) is commonly one who has deliberately suppr essed an alien origin in order to reap the
material benefits of a well-advertised loy,alty. There can
be little hope of noble spiritual issues from such a prostituted patriotism. Unfortunately, it is abetted by the ignorant
assumption of ma,ny an English-speaking citizen that alien
origin is a natural mark of inferiority. He who thinks thus
is a mental hooligan- whether he be lawyer, militia colonel,
or bishop of the church. What we sorely need, on the contmry, is enough common intelligence to recognize both the
rich diversity of racial gifts on this earth and the strength
which racial roots can contribute to the individual" (6) .
SLOVAKIA
11
Kirkconnell wrote an inspired warning to new Canadians and to his Anglo-Saxon countrymen . as well with
regard to hasty or forced integration and assimilation.
"Prophetic hopes" - he wrote in the same book "would envisage a future Canada in which every individual
would be thus inspired to fuller citizenship by his realization of h:s origin, whatever that might be. There is already,
however, grave danger of the third and even the second
generation of Swedish, Ukrainian, and other immigrant
groups turning their backs on the language and history
of their own people in a hasty act of renunciation. That
they should be speedily integrated into loyal co-operation
with our general Canadian population is, of course, of supreme national importance. But it would be tragic if there
should at the same time by a clumsy stripping-'away of
all those spiritual associations with the past which help to
give depth and beauty to life" (7).
To prov•e the righteousness of his convictions and conceptions, Prof. Kirkconnell published some 30 books, studies
and essays and several volumes of translations (8).
Dr. Kirkconnell's Translations of Slovak Poetry
In the preface to his volume European Elegies, Prof.
Kirkconnell wrote that his translations do not pretend to
be "adequately representative" of European elegy. "As a
matter of f:act," says Kirkconnell, "I have attempted "merely to translate those poems towards which I have felt the
strongest emotional r eaction." He also says that the "limitation of this method has been intensified by the narrow
range of my humble bookshelves" (9).
We humbly assume that we may apply 1:!he above confession also to the translations from Slovak poetry. The
three poems which Prof. Kirkconnell translated are certainly not "adequately representative" of Slovak poetry,
but their choice was not unfortunate. Hviezdosl-av is the
greatest of Slovak poets in many poetic genres and
Vajansky's manifold literary activities made of him an
outstanding represent•a tive Qf Slovak literature in prose
and verse (10) .
Literary historians or critics would certainly appreciate
to know how this distinguished Canadian scholar was translating European poetry from 50 languages, having in com-
12
SLOVAKIA
mon only their Indo-European origin. Prof. Kirkconnell
answers this question in the following lines:
"My method of translation is comparatively simple.
First choosing some poem that had moved me in the
original, I keep that original before me, mumbling it aloud
and brooding over it until I have saturated my mind with
its emotion. Then I endeavour to reproduce its form and
spirit in English as accurately as possible, reserving only
the conviction that a literal translation is inherently criminal and that my verse rendering which sacrifices beauty
to philology is a blasphemous offence in its very existence" (11).
Prof. Kirkconnell also explained w'hy he undertook
the arduous task of translating from the poetry of so many
nations.
"Modern nations are unhappily isolated"-says Prof.
Kirkconnell-"and estranged by their very loyalties to
speech, kind, and faith. But in the presence of the ultimate
they may all join hands in community of spirit. Beyond
race and creed and language are the fundamental sanctities
of human life, love, tenderness, sorrow, fortitude." The
translations were done for the transla:tor at least, a Siloam
of these healing waters, flowing in from fifty linguistic
hillsides of human experience, and I gain strength from
them in the hope that they may contribute its stream to
the ocean of understanding that shall one day consummate
its cleansing, reconciling task of pure ablution round earth's
human shores" (12).
The translation of the three Slovak poems (13) rendered by Dr. Kirkconnell follows:
THE BLOODY SONNETS
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
Song has no place in these high days of pain:
Fate calls for blood, that, splashed from heart to hand.
Is cast a:broad to consecrate the land
And from dead stones draw golden ears of grain,
Blood brings the splendor of the sun again,
Lighting our darkness with a flashing brand;
Blood brings the dawn that men may understand;
Blood brings the bread of Freedom to sustain.
SLOVAKIA
13
Only by blood, outpoured in rage and flame,
Oan we destroy the stubble and the taresSweeping away our slavery and shame
Like putrid flotsam that a swift stream bears.
And while that cleansing tide leaps on in flood,
Mer e song is silenced in the Song of Blood.
wss
P. 0. Hviezdoslav
The spring has gone. And I have lost the flowers
I might have gathered from its meadow-grass.
I merely marked t he sudden sprig aspire
Up through the turf in frost and golden fire ,
And, as I dallied, saw that glory pass
As swiftly ias the rainbow of June showers.
Ah, maiden beauty, fleeting are thy hours!
Summer has gone. And I have missed the gleaning
I might have gathered from its harvest-field.
I merely marked the flaming wheat-waves swaying
Across the leas where summer winds were playing;
But as I gazed, time seized that yellow yield
And fate forestalled by frantic interveningAh, love, at last I now thy tragic meaning!
Autumn has come. Bare stubbled prairies taunt me
In my sad brooding on what might have been.
Across the sky the haggard mists are weaving
A fog-shroud for the dying sun's receiving;
And fears of these dark days, bereavement's keen
Heart-hunger and deep thirst of spirit haunt me.
Alas, the terrors of love's winter daunt me!
HOPE
Svetozar Hurban Vajansky (14)
Snows are now deep in the valleys;
Drifts lie in mountains appalling.
What but the sunshine can slay them?
What but the rain in its falling?
Miseries cumber the nation,
Weight the chilled earth and outwear it.
14
SLOVAKIA
Woe to my pitiful people
How are they able to bear it?
But with sun comes rejoicing,
Smiting the snows down with slaughter;
See, where the drifts lay in rancor,
Runnels of muddying water.
Freedom's bright sun is now dawning,
Wasting our woes with its glory;
See, where oppression once crushed us,
Vanish the murderous story!
Dr. Kirkconnell's Attitude Towards Slovakb
For one who knows that after 1918 the Prague government made great efforts and spent lots of money in order
to hide the fact that Slovaks were not Czechs and that
they were dissatisfied with the Czech rule and its assimilatory tendencies, Prof. Kirkconnell's interest in Slovakia will perhaps be surprising. But much more surprising,
at least for the atmosphere of 1939, is his courageous stand
with regard to the problem which pushed Slovaks and
Czechs apart, and with regard to the Slovak language and
Slovak national entity.
W1th the exception of C. A. Macartney (15), Prague
governments gained Anglo-Saxon writers, scholars and
journalists to their side in presenting the Slovak problem
to international public opinion. The differences between
Czechs iand Slovaks were belittled: the Slovaks were presented as an ungrateful and unruly people, politically par ochial and underdeveloped, who were led by a "clerical
clique" into an opposition towards ia government which
was depicted as an example of democracy, progress and
tolerance.
Prof. Kirkconnell did not buy this picture of CzechoSlovakia and courageously pointed to the facts which were
hidden by the clever propaganda of Prague governments.
He saw in the correct historical perspective the origin of
Czecho-Slovakia and the inherent differences between the
Czechs and Slovaks.
"There were two documents"-wrote Kirkconnell in
1939- " on the strength of which the Slovaks were included
SLOVAKIA
15
in the new state. The first was a resolution supporting
union, drawn up by a private group of 106 men, meeting
in the little Slovak town of Turciansky sv. Martin. The
other was the so-called Pittsburgh Declaration, signed by
Czech and Slovak immigrants at Pitts'b urgh, U.S.A., in support of a federal union of the Czechs and Slovaks. In the
Slovak provinces, no plebiscite was ever t,aken; and a
Slovak delegation to Paris, seeking to state the other side
of the Slovak case, was arrested by the French police, on
the instigation of Benesh, and deported. Monsieur Andre
Tardieu, in his book LA PAIX, explains }aconically: "We
had to choose between a plebiscite and the creation of
Czecho-Slovakia" (16).
Prof. Kirkconnell had a different view from the majority of Anglo-Saxon scholars and writers also with regard to the official Czech theory that Czechs and Slovaks
were one ethnic unit and that the Slovak language was
merely a dialect of the Czech tongue.
"It cannot be too strongly emphasized"____.wrote Kirkconnell in the same book- "that the Slovaks are not
Czechs, and that there is no such creature as a "Czechoslovak. While they speak closely related Slavic languages,
Slovak is not a mere dialect of Czech. The differences are
about as great as those between the similarly related
languages, Dutch and German.- I have on my shelves Miroslav Kalal's Slovak-Czech dictionary (published 1924), in
which there are 35,000 Slovak words that were apparently
unintelligible to a Czech and hence required definition. As
a matter of fact, many Slovak philologists find the closest
relative of their language in the speech of the Slovenes,
laying to the southwest of Hungary" (17).
The reason of disagreement between the Czechs and
Slovaks were, according to Prof. Kirkconnell, more serious
than the Prague goverment or some scholars in the West
were ready to admit in 1939. He boldly pointed out that
Slovaks had serious reasons to be dissatisfied.
"When the treaty makers of Paris"-says Kirkconnell
-"linked Czechs and Slovaks together in a common state,
it was assumed that the ,a rrangement would prove an ideal
one; yet a visit to Middle Europe in 1938 found the Slovaks
one of the most discontented of the republic's minorities.
This is only intelligible if we realize the diverging past
16
SLOVAKIA
histories of the Czechs and the SlovaJks, and the unfulfilled
conditions under which the latter entered the Czech-dominated state in 1919" (18).
Looking with scholarly objectivity at the origin and
at the 20 years of political existance of Czecho-Slovakia,
Prof. Kirkconnell could not but express different views
also on the disintegration of that coontry and on the
creation of the Slovak Republic. He wrote critically on
some aspects of the first steps of the Slovak government
,and on the Slovak constitution, but with full understanding
of the reasons which led the Slovak Parliament on March
14, 1939, to declare Slovakia's independence:
"The creation, in March 1939, of a separate Slovak
state under German auspices did not come as a surprise
to anyone familiar with the feeling existing between the
Slovaks and the Czechs, and aware also of the Nazi eagerness to intensify and exploit such a situation for the furtherance of their own programme. A measure of Slovak
autonomy had, it is true, been granted by Prague after
the Munich settlement, but the ubiquitous presence of an
intrenched Czech officialdom in state and school, backed
by the Czech army, together with the difficulty of even
gradually replacing them with Slov,ak officials and teachers,
made exasperated impatience on the part of the Slovak
nationalists inevitable" (19).
Since 1939 Prof. Kirkconnell paid attention to the
cultul"al activities of Canadians of Slovak origin and favorably commented in the University of Toronto Quarterly
on two publications: Eudovit Srur and His Place in the
Slavic World and Contemporary tende.ncies in Slovak
Philology (20), quoting from the latter publication a corroboration of his views on Slovak language. In a personal
letter he also congratulated the author of the book Slovakia
-Nation at the Crossroads of Central Europe, considering
it as "an imposing scholarly work on the subject."
All this allows us to conclude that Slovakia, Slovak
culture and poetry, as well as the Slovak struggle for freedom found in this outstanding Canadian-Slavist a keen
observer and stanch defender of historical truth and scholly objectivity, who did not conform with half-truths even
if they were fashionable.
SLOVAKIA
17
RE·FE·RENCES
1.
Of R. A. Kann: The Multinational Empire, Rutgers University,
1950; p . 273.
2.
Scotus Viator: Racial Problems in Hungary, London, 1908, contributions by S. H. Vajanskt (Chapter XIX); Dusan JurkovH!~
On Slovak Popular Art (Chapter XWII); and Slovak Popular
Melodies (Chapter XX); ,p p. 362-392. In Vajanskt's contribution
we find several good translations or Slovak songs or poetry.
3.
Ernest Denis: Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917 ; p. 153-1'54; also J.
-M. Kirschbaum, Misconceptions of American Slavists about Slovak
Literature, in Slovakia, Vol. XI, Middletown, Pa., 1961; p. 22-42.
4.
The Encyclopedia Cana:diana gives Olll Prof. W. KirkcOI11I1e1l the
following account: Kirkconnell Watson, pr,o fessor a nd writer:
born -May 16, 1895, wt Port Hope, Ontario. Educ-ated at the Collegiate Institute, Lindsay; ·Q ueen's University (lM.A. 1916); the
Toronto Conservjj,tory df Music; and ; Lincoln College, Oxford.
Profes-sor of Ernglish at Wesley (la,ter United) College, Winnipeg,
1922-310; O'f c1,assics 1000-40; head of th·e English department at
MaoMas<ter University 1940-1948 ; became President oil' Acadia
University 1948. He pubJi.shed neal'ly 30 works, ranging from
learned treatises and poetry to short stories and children's tales.
His fkst book of verse was The Tide of Life (1930); Lyra Sacra
dates from 1939. An important scholarly work The Celestial
Cycle: The Theme of Paradise Lost in World Literature, with
Translations of the Major Analogues appeared in 1952.
His versability manifes'ted itseld' in an exceptional linguistic
ability: he pu,blished several collections of ve,r se translated
fr-om Icelandia, Polish and Hungarian sources. Collaborated with
,Seraphim Marion in The Quebec Tradition (1946) and with
A. S. P . Woodhouse in a survey, The Humanities in Canada
( 194 7) . Memlb er af many forei.gn learned societies; elected
F iR.S.C . 1936; awarded the Loren Pierce Medal, 1942 .
.5.
Preface to Canadian Overtones, Winnipeg, 1935, The Columbia
Press, Ltd.; p. 3-4.
-~.
Ibidem~ p. 4.
'l . Ibi(lem-p. 6.
8.
Under the Utle European Elegies, Prof. Kirkc_pnnen has published 100 poems w•h ich he translated f.rom 50 languages. In his
Canadian Overtones, he published translations from the Icelandic,
Swedish, Nor,wegian, Hung,arian, rtalian and Greek poetry.
9. •See Preface
10.
On Hviezdoslav, see Scatus Viator, op. cit., p. :!70-371; also W.
Lednicki (ed.), Adam Mickiewicz in World Literature; also this
w-r iter's contribution on "Two Slovak translators of Mickiewicz,"
p. 498-493. His "Bloody Sonets" were translated into English
by Jarosl1av Vajda; Hviezdoslav, on the other hand, translated
Shakespeare's Hamlet and Midsummer N!-ght's Dream into
Slovak.
SLOVi\KI.,\ ,
18
11.
European Elegies.
12.
Ibidem
13.
All three translations were originally puibl!shed
Anthology of Czechoslovak Poetry, New
Press, 1929.
An
In
C. A. Manning,
York, Columbia
14.' · On ' s. ;H : Viaja~sky role b~ .Slovak lit-erature artd : 'n atio~~f !Jfe
. se,e . Scotu~ .Viator;, op. cjt., p. 362; . L. I. StrakhoV1Sky ,( ed.),
Cambrl!J'ge, ·. Mass., 1949, p: . 489;
and ·r. · J. Kramoris, Slovakia and Slovak Literature, In The
Catholic Encyclopedia, XVILiil, 1950. S. H. Vajansky was a poe t
as well as novelist and national lead-er.
His chief works are:' (a) Poetical: Tatry a more (The Tatras and
the ·s ea), a · collection o.f poems; Zpod jarma (From under the
<...:_ 1'oke); ·Besed.y .a ,,dumy ,. (Conv.ersa,tion ' and Mediations)';- (·IJ)
Novels: Sucha ratolesf (The Dry Branch), by which is meant
the Slovak nobles who had deserted -their nationality; Kotlfn;
(c) · Stories and Sketches: ~alia (The Lily); Svietace Tiene
(Glittering \Shadows); Husle (The Violin); Two Sisters; The
Young Mini'ster. Ge11man translations have appeared ()Cf "Der
Kandidat," "Der Nachltwacher," "Das Weib des Hol1shauers,"
Der sch,varze Idealist," "Das Heimatslied." May English translations soon follow! -,R.W JS-.W.
l', , ' W~ihtbo1>l< of . SlaVic : Studies,
Hi.
Hungary and her Successors, Ox,f ord University
and Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942.
16.
W. Kirkconnell: Canada, Europe and Hitler, Oxiford University
Press, 1939 ;· p. 44.
17.
lrbidem~p. 43.
18.
lbiciem- p.44.
19.
lbidem- p. 47.
20.
Press,
1937
University of Toronto Quarterly, July 1961, Letters in Canada.
"Publications in Forei,g n Languages," p. 514 ; also his comment
on "Misconceptions of American Slavists arbout Slovak Literature,"
in the same revue, July 1962, p. 582, wh.er-e · Prof. Kirkconnell
writes : "Dr. Joseph M. Kirschbaum, of the University od: Montreal,
has contributed to Slovakia (!March-June 1961, 22-42) a heavily
documented essay on '\Misconceptions of American Slavists .a:bout
Slovak Literature. Whereas Czech propaganda has refused to
adm_it tha_t there was any Slovak literaiture before 18·44. Marxist
scholarshiIJ, without any Czech inhibitions, has recognized over
one hundr ed Slovak authors in the eighteenth-century 'school'
of Anton Bernolak, and th ere is evidence of a Slovak tradition
going all the way back to the Great Moravian. Elmpire in the
ninth cent<ury. Dr. Iimrich Kotvan's Bibliography of the School
of Bernolak 11urns to some · four hundred pages."
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
Canadian Translator of Slovak Poetry: Professor Watson Kirkconnell
Description
An account of the resource
J. M. Kirschbaum
Slovakia, Vol. 14 (No. 37), 1964
pp. 9-18
includes: "The Bloody Sonnets" (P. O. Hviezdoslav); "Loss" (P. O. Hviezdoslav); "Hope" (Svetozár Hurban Vajanský)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1964
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/28dd9c150f56b57e1a28fba02d689b94.pdf
4815fd154d5ccf07abafc0563bd4d893
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
36
Carpatho-Rusyns: Their
Current Status And Future
Perspectives
PAUL ROBERT MAGOSCI
Who Are The Rusyns?
In 1875, geographers from the old Hungarian Kingdom erected
a monument in a remote region of their country that carried the
following inscription: "Precise instruments have confirmed this
point where the latitude and longitude lines meet as the center of
Europe." 1 Just over a century later, in 1977, the former Soviet
authorities, who had by then ruled the area, erected a second
monument to mark the center of the continent that stretches from the
Arctic shores of Norway in the north to the beaches of Crete in the
south, and from the coast of Ireland in the west to the Ural
Mountains in the east. The precise center where the monuments are
located is near the village of Dilove (formerly Trebusany) in the
foothills of the northcentral Carpathian Mountains that from time
immemorial has been inhabited by an East Slavic people called
Carpatho-Rusyns, or simply Rusyns (sometimes in English: Ruthenians). Thus, in geographic terms, the Rusyns are not a peripheral
group, but rather one whose homeland - Carpathian Rus 1 - is located
literally in the heart of Europe.
According to present day international boundaries, Rusyns live
in more or less compact territory within the boundaries of four
1For a description, see Fedor Korecki, "Stredok Evropi-na Homjici," Nova dumka ,
VIII (21] (Vukovar, Yugoslavia, 1979), pp . 101-102.
�SLOVAKIA
37
countries: Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland, and Romania. There is also a
small group of Rusyns in Yugoslavia, descendants of immigrants
who left the Carpathian homeland in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. Statistical data on Rusyns is, depending on the country,
inadequate or completely unavailable. Therefore, we can only speak
in theoretical terms when discussing numbers . In theory, the number
of Rusyns could be as high as 1.2 million people: 977 ,000 in the
Transcarpathian oblast (former Subcarpathian Rus') of the Ukraine;
130,000 in the Presov Region of northeastern Slovakia; 60,000 in
the Lemko Region of southeastern Poland as well as in other parts
of that country; and 30,000 in the Vojvodina (Backa) and the
Croatian republic of former Yugoslavia.2
The Problem of Nomenclature
It is important to keep in mind what is meant by the term Rusyn.
Traditionally, the name Rusyn, or its local variant Rusnak, has been
used by the East Slavic inhabitants of the Carpathian region to describe themselves. However, by the twentieth century, in particular its
second half, the historic names Rusyn/Rusnak were replaced by
others, such as Ukrainian in Soviet Transcarpathia and the Presov
Region of Slovakia, or Lemko in Poland . There are also Rusyns
who have given up identifying with any East Slavic group, and instead associate with the dominant nationality of the country in which
2Since World War II, Rusyns were recorded in official statistics only in Yugoslavia
(21,000 in 1991) , Romania (1,000 in 1977), and most recently in Slovakia (17 ,000
in 1991) . "Vojvodina u tisloch i slovoch," Ruski kalendar 1992 (Novi Sad , 1991), p.
38; Anuarul statistic al Romaniei 1990 (Bucharest, 1990), p. 64; Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic: Preliminary Results of Population and Housing Census (Prague,
1991), pp . 30-3 I. There are also unconfirmed reports that the final published version of the 1991 Czecho-Slovak statistics will indicate 49,000 persons in Slovakia
who reported Rusyn as their mother tongue .
As for the estimates given here, the figure for the Transcarpathian oblast refers
to persons in that region who in the 1991 Ukrainian census were reported as
Ukrainian (the term Rusyn when given by a respondant is recorded as Ukrainian).
The estimates for Slovakia and Poland are from: Paul Robert Magocsi , The Rusyns of
Slovakia (New York, 1993), p. 1-2 and 111-112; and his Historical Atlas of East
Central Europe (Seattle , 1993) , p. 131.
�38
SLOVAKIA
they live, such as Polish in Poland or Slovak in Slovakia. These
changes in national self-designation have in some cases come gradually , prompted either by intellectual conviction or by national assimilation, especially among families of nationally-mixed parentage.
In the latter case, children often choose to identify - or are identified
by their parents - with the dominant state nationality, Slovak or
Polish.
More often, however, the change in nomenclature has been the
result of governmental decree in which the name Rusyn was banned
from official usage, as was the case after 1945 in Soviet Transcarpathia and Poland and by the early 1950s in Czechoslovakia. The
result is that today one can find within the same ethnolinguistic
group, within the same village, in some cases even within the same
family, people who will identify as a Rusyn, or a Lemko, or a Ukrainian, or a Slovak, or a Pole. Moreover, in the case of the East Slavic
designations - Rusyn/Rusnak, Lemko, Ukrainian - some people
consider these as synonyms, others as mutually-exclusive terms. In
other words, some people will say that Rusyn is simply the older
historic name for Ukrainian, and that Lemko is a regional name of
Ukrainian, while others are convinced that the names Lemko or Rusnak are regional forms for Rusyn which, in tum, designates a people
that is distinct from the Ukrainian and every other surrounding
nationality.
It should be noted that the estimated figure of 1.2 million Rusyns
given above refers to all people of the same linguistic and ethnographic origin, regardless of how they designate themselves on documents such as internal identity papers, passports, or decennial censuses. Our concern here will be primarily with the present-day Rusyn
movement or with that portion of the group (the precise numbers are
unknown) that considers Rusyns to comprise a distinct people.
Historical Background
It is neither possible nor appropriate to provide here an extensive
outline of Rusyn history. It is necessary, however, to keep a few
historical factors in mind in order to comprehend the current
�SLOVAKIA
39
situation.
Rusyns never had their own state or political independence.
Since the Middle Ages, the Rusyn homeland was ruled by Hungary
and Poland or Austria. Nonetheless, during the past century and a
half, they have at various times been recognized by neighboring or
ruling states as having the right to a territorial entity whose existence
was justified on the grounds that it was somehow of and for Rusyns
and that it would have some degree of automony or self-rule. 3 The
first experience in this regard came in late 1849, when in the wake of
the failure of the Hungarian revolution, the Austrian government
divided Hungary into five military and several civil districts. One of
the civil districts (Ungvar/Uzhorod) was based in the Subcarpathian
region and administered by local Rusyn political and cultural
activists . This experiment was to last only a few months.
Much more important was the period of political upheaval that
followed World War I. At that time, in an effort to retain Rusyninhabited lands within Hungary, the new government in Budapest
created, in December 1918, an autonomous Rusyn Land (Rus'ka
Krajina) that continued to function even after a pro-Soviet Communist regime came to power in March 1919.4 Simultaneously, the
recently-founded Czechoslovak government was also courting the
Rusyns, offering them a self-governing province to be called Rusinsko (Rusinia), or Subcarpathian Rus' (Podkarpatska Rus), if they
would join the Czechs and Slovaks in their new state. In May 1919,
the Rusyns accepted the Czechoslovak offer. Most significantly, the
Rusyn issue had reached the international political forum , so that
"the fullest degree of self-government" for "Ruthene territory south
of the Carpathians" was guaranteed by two international treaties at
the Paris Peace Conference (St. Germain-en-Laye, September 10,
3 For further details on Rusyn political entities in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, see Paul Robert Magocsi, The Shaping of a National Identity: Subcarpathian Rus' 1848-1948 (Cambridge, Mass .: Harvard University Press, 1978) . pp
46-47, 93-95 , and 237-245.
4soviet-Marxist literature is fond of elaborating upon the 40 days of Soviet rule in
Transcarpathia. Cf. Borys Spivak and Mychajlo Trojan, 40 nezabutnich dniv: z
istoriji borot'by za vladu Rad na Zakarpatti v 1919 roci (Uzhorod: Karpaty, 1967).
�40
SLOVAKIA
1919, and Trianon, June 4, 1920) and by the Czechoslovak constitution (February 29, 1920).
For the next two decades the vast majority of Rusyns - approximately three-fourths the total number at the time - lived in Subcarpathian Rus, a territory that was Rusyn in name, that had its own
Rusyn schools, and that had all the trappings of self-rule including a
governor, a partially-elected diet, a national anthem, and a national
theater. Finally, in late 1938, actual autonomy was granted to
Subcarpathian Rus' (by then renamed Carpatho-Ukraine). Not only
had autonomy been demanded by local politicians, it was also one of
the provisions of the infamous Munich Pact, which led to the
restructuring of Czechoslovakia. The Carpatho-Ukraine was to
function for nearly half a year until the complete liquidation of what
remained of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.
The twentieth century also witnessed three short-lived efforts at
Rusyn independence. The first of these came in 1919, when after
being unsuccessful in their bid to join fellow Rusyns south of the
mountains, the Lernkos living in the former Austrian province of
Galicia created an independent republic that functioned for sixteen
months before its government was arrested in March 1920, by the
authorities of Poland, which became the new ruler over Rusyn lands
north of the Carpathians.5 At the same time, along the eastern edge
of Subcarpathian territory a regional ethnic group known as Hutsuls
established their own republic which lasted four months (FebruaryJune 1919) before being driven out by troops from Romania. The
last unsuccessful attempt came two decades later, when the Carpatho-Ukrainian autonomous government declared symbolically its
independence on the last day of Czechoslovakia's existence (March
15, 1939) before the province was invaded and reannexed to Hungary .6 The point is that although Rusyns may never have had their
5 On the little-known Lemko Republic and its relationship to political thought in
the western Ukrainian lands, see Paul Robert Magocsi,"The Ukrainian Question
Between Poland and Czechoslovakia: The Lernko Rusyn Republic (1918-1920) and
Political Thought in Western Rus'-Ukraine," Nationalities Papers (New York,
forthcoming) .
6 Ukrainian-oriented emigres from Carpatho-Ukraine have put great stress on the
�SLOVAKIA
41
own state, they did have for a significant period of time in the twentieth century the experience - and therefore historical memory - of
their own political entity, Subcarpathian Rus', which was recognized
both by the state in which they lived (Czechoslovakia) and by the
international community (Paris Peace Conference, League of
Nations).
Although the Rusyn homeland is located in the geographical
center of Europe, it is at the same time along a cultural borderland. It
is along that great divide between the Catholic West and Orthodox
East, what Riccardo Picchio has classified in the broadest cultural
terms as Slavia romana and Slavia orthodoxa.7 Located where they
are, this division has had a profound effect on the Rusyn psyche.
The very language or series of dialects that Rusyns speak reflect
the influences of both cultural spheres. Thus, while their speech
clearly belongs to the realm of East Slavic languages, much of their
vocabulary, pronounciational stress, and even syntax is West Slavic.
The cultural divide is most graphically evident in what is for
traditional Rusyn culture the all-important factor of religion. Some
Rusyns are Orthodox, but the majority, at least during the past two
centuries, is Catholic, or more precisely Greek Catholic. These
confessional differences reflect a whole mind-set that is either western - or eastern-oriented. The eastern mind-set tends to surrender
the self to fate in the hope that the Christian God and his intercessors, Christ and the Virgin Mary, might somehow alleviate the
burdens of this earthly life. In contrast, the western mind-set seems
March I 5, I 939 declaration of independence, arguing that it revealed how the
Ukrainian orientation had supposedly won the hearts and minds of the entire
population even before the Soviets arrived in the region in late 1944 . Cf. Peter G.
Stercho, Diplomacy of Double Morality: Europe's Crossroads in Carpatho- Ukraine ,
1919-1939 (New York: Carpathian Research Centre , 1971) . This view is also being
promoted in the Ukraine since the onset of the Gorbachev era. See the minutes of the
RUCH meeting held in the former Carpathi-Ukrainian capitol of Chust to coincide
with the 52nd anniversary of the one-day of independence: "4 sesija Velykoji Rady
Ruchu," Visnyk Ruchu, no . 4 (Kiev, 1990).
7Riccardo Picchio, "Guidelines for the Comparative Study of the Language Question
Among the Slavs," in Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, Vol.I, ed. Riccardo
Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt (New Haven , Conn .: Yale Concilium on International
and Area Studies, 1984), pp. 1-42.
�42
SLOVAKIA
to feel that if an individual receives education or political training, he
or she can somehow put their lives in order and, therefore, be able to
have some control over destiny .
The east-west dichotomy in the Rusyn psyche also impinges on
attitudes toward nationai identity. The eastern orientation tends to
think in universalistic terms and be satisfied with viewing Rusyns as
part of a single East Slavic Orthodox religious and cultural world.
The western orientation - epitomized by the very distinctiveness of
Greek Catholics from other Catholics - accepts the idea of national
and linguistic particularity. Universalism versus particularism are
attitudes that greatly influenced Rusyn political and cultural leaders ,
especially regarding the nationality question.
Being a stateless people, Rusyns have had, at least until the second half of the twentieth century , to depend on their leaders, the
intelligentsia, to determine the precise direction of their national revival . The Rusyn national revival began during the second half of the
nineteenth century and culminated during the interwar years, by
which time it had evolved into a comprehensive movement concerned with political, cultural, and social issues. Most of the nationalist intelligentsia did agree on one basic premise: that Rusyns are
East Slavs and that their linguistic and cultural traditions were based
in the east, albeit with pronounced western influences. What they
could not agree upon, however, was whether Rusyns were a branch
of the Russian nationality, or of the Ukrainian nationality, or whether they formed a distinct fourth East Slavic Rusyn nationality. Not
surprisingly, debates about national and linguistic orientation quickly
became caught up in local partisan politics. Politicians had their own
agendas, and they more often than not made opportunistic use of the
nationality question in order to promote party or other ideological
interests.
As for the nationalist intelligentsia, they easily fulfilled the precepts of all activists in the formative stages of national movements.
Namely, they had no difficulty using history to formulate an ideology that was able to convince people they were either Russian,
�SLOVAKIA
43
Ukrainian, or Rusyn. 8 The debate over the national orientation of the
Rusyns was not yet resolved before the outbreak of World War II,
despite the achievements during the interwar years of the Ukrainian
orientation in the largest Rusyn territory , Subcarpathian Rus' (Carpath~Ukraine).
In a sense, the year 1939 marked an end to the natural evolution
of discussions about a Rusyn nationality. This is because beginning
in that year and lasting for half a century, the nationality debate was
effectively stifled by state intervention. This happened first under
fascist regimes in Hungary(which reannexed Subcarpathian Rus'), in
Slovakia (which retained the Presov Region), and in the Germanruled Generalgouvernement (which ruled the Lemko Region); and
then as a result of Soviet rule after 1945, whether directly in Subcarpathian Rus' (renamed Transcarpathian Ukraine) or through proSoviet Communist governments in Poland and Czechoslovakia. As
is well known, the Communist era with its anti-democratic approach
to the nationality question was to last until the revolutions of 1989
and 1991. The only exception was the case of the small group of
Rusyns in the Vojvodina region of Yugoslavia. Although a Communist regime was installed in their land as well, the Yugoslav
government allowed the Vojvodinian Rusyns to decide their own
national orientation.
This was not to be the case for the Rusyns living in the Carpathian homeland. In short, the Soviet regime declared that further
debate was unnecessary because the nationality question had supposedly been resolved long ago. Based on a decision made by the
Communist party (Bolshevik) of the Ukraine taken in December
8Generally, the Russian-oriented intelligentsia, or Russophiles, were Orthodox
adherents or sympathizers who believed in the unity of Eastern Slavic Christian
culture represented by three branches of the East Slavs - Great Russians , Belorussians, and Little Russians (including Carpatho-Rusyns) - all considered to be
part of one common Russian (ob§cerusskiJ) nationality . The Ukrainian--0riented and
Rusyn--0riented intelligentsias were western--0riented Greek Catholics who believed
in various degrees of national and/or regional differentiation - the Ukrainophiles
arguing for the unity of one people that stretched "from the Carpathians to the
Caucasus"; the Rusynophiles arguing that the Rus' population in the Carpathians
(from the Poprad to Tysa rivers) comprises a separate people.
�44
SLOVAKIA
1925, all Rusyns , regardless what they may have called themselves,
were declared to be Ukrainians. Any who opposed the Ukrainian
viewpoint were accused of having "anti-historical" and, therefore,
"anti-Soviet" opinions; they often were removed from their jobs;
and they might even have been arrested as "counterrevolutionaries."
Closely connected with these developments was the liquidation first
in Soviet Transcarpathia (1949) and then in Czechoslovakia (1950)
of the Greek Catholic Church, which by the mid-twentieth century
had become the stronghold of the Rusyn orientation.
When Communist regimes were established in Poland (1945)
and Czechoslovakia (1948), they adapted the Soviet line and decreed
that the Ru syn minorities within their borders were Ukrainians.
They forbade Rusyn publications and the use of the name Rusyn in
official documents. The situation was particularly bad in Poland. Not
only were the Lemko Rusyns declared to be Ukrainians, they were
forcibly deported en masse from their Carpathian homeland in 1947
and scattered throughout the former German lands of post-1945
western and northern Poland.9
It is ironic to note the advantages that accrued to the governments in question through their use - or, more properly, misuse - of
the name Ukrainian. For example, by declaring that the population
was Ukrainian, this allowed the Soviet Union to justify the annexation in 1945 of Subcarpathian Rus', a territory that throughout the
war it had agreed should be returned to Czechoslovakia. Nationalist
ideology could now conveniently serve Stalin's political designs on
the international stage. In any case, how could the Soviet worker's
state refuse the request of fellow "Ukrainian workers" in Transcarpathia who "voluntarily" were demanding to be united with the
"Mother Ukraine"?
9 The actual deportations took place in two phases. Between 1945 and 1946, about
200,000 Lemko Rusyns "voluntarily" took up the offer to resettle eastward in the
Ukraine in exchange for Poles who moved west within the new postwar boundaries of
Poland . The remaining 80,000 Lemko Rusyns , mostly in the western Lemko region ,
were forcibly deported in 1947 . For details, see Kazimierz Pudlo , Lemkowie: process
wrastania w ~rodowisko Dolnego Sl{lska, 1947-1985 (Wroclaw: Polskie Towarszystwo Ludoznawcze, 1987), esp . pp. 24-34.
�SLOVAKIA
45
In neighboring Poland, identification of Lemkos as Ukrainians
made it easier for the government to deport them, since the
Communist Polish government argued that, as "Ukrainians," the
Lemkos were helping the anti-Communist Ukrainian Insurgent
Army (UPA) under Stepan Bandera, which was held up in the
Carpathians and still fighting the Polish and Soviet authorities after
the end of World War II. South of the mountains in Czechoslovakia,
the administrative imposition of a Ukrainian identity beginning in
1952 proved to be advantageous to those Slovaks who had always
claimed that "their Rusnaks" were really "Slovaks of the Greek
Catholic faith. 1110 In essence, forced Ukrainianization (combined
with the liquidation of the local Greek Catholic Church and forced
collectivization of peasant land) led during the 1950s and 1960s to
the most rapid degree of Slovakization and national assimilation that
Rusyns had ever experienced. It is nonetheless true that during this
same period, the Czechoslovak government provided extensive
funding to create a wide range of cultural organizations that were
Ukrainian in national form but socialist in content. A well-paid local
Ukrainian intelligentsia was even able to attain several significant
scholarly and literary achievements. However, this had little real
effect upon the Rusyn peasant masses in Slovakia. For them, the
choice was simple: if one could not be a Rusyn, better declare
oneself a Slovak than a Ukrainian (which among other things was
associated with the hated East).
Once again Yugoslavia was the exception. The government there
provided both funding and legal guarantees, while the local intelligentsia decided to adopt a Rusyn orientation and to develop the local
speech into a sociologically-complete Rusyn literary language. In
fact, Rusyns became one of the five official nationalities in the
lO Beginning already in 1945, new Rusyn political and cultural organizations carried the name Ukrainian . However, despite their name, they paradoxically functioned
using Russian or vernacular Rusyn as the language of instruction and communication. In 1952, a decree of the Communist Party of Slovakia initiated a policy of
Ukrainianization that banned use of the term Rusyn and replaced Russian with
Ukrainian as the language of instruction in schools . For details, see Pavel Macu,
"National Assimilation: The Case of the Rusyn-Ukrainians of Czechoslovakia,"
East-Central Europe, II, 2 (Pittsburgh, 1975), pp. 101-131.
�46
SLOVAKIA
autonomous province of the Vojvodina.
Yet Yugoslavia was the exception that proved the rule. And the
rule was that after 1945, Rusyns ceased to exist. All Soviet,
Czechoslovak, and Polish documents and publications referred to
the population only as Ukrainian.1 1 Publications in the West, both
by Ukrainian emigre and North American Soviet and East European
specialists, also accepted the view that Rusyns did not exist, or to
quote the New Columbia Encyclopedia (1975): "There is no ethnic
or linguistic distinction between Ukrainians and Ruthenians
[Rusyns] ." "The majority of the population [of Transcarpathia] is
Ukrainian." 12
The Current Situation
Then came the 1980s. The first signs of change came in Poland,
where the Lemko Rusyns - both those who were dispersed in the
"West" of that country as well as about 10,000 who had managed to
return to the Carpathian homeland - began to gather at annual cultural festivals. These "unofficial" festivals received no government
financial support, but by the same token they were not under any
ideological control. As a result, the Lemkos began to revive the idea
that they were neither Poles nor Ukrainians, but rather part of a
distinct Slavic people closely related to Rusyns living south of the
mountains in Slovakia. The Lemkos seemed to be acting in isolation
and for several years that was , indeed, the case.1 3
Later came the changes brought about by the November 1989
Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. New initiative committees
were founded that were often dominated by individuals who had not
11 Whereas the idea of a Rusyn nationality in the Carpathians was not recognized by
schools and official circles in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries, they have
recognized the Rusyns (Rusnaks) of Yugoslavia as a distinct ethnic group with its
own literary language . Cf. A.E. Suprun and A .M. Kaljuta, Vvedenie v slavjanskuju
filologiju (Minsk: Vy§ej§aja §kola, 1981), pp . 137-139.
12 "Ruthenia," in the New Columbia Encyclopedia , ed. William H. Harris and Judith
S. Levey, eds. (New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1975), p. 2383.
l3 On the Lemko-Rusyn revival, see the series of articles in the Carpatho-Rusyn
American, X and XI (Fairview, NJ ., 1987-88).
�SLOVAKIA
47
been associated with the Communist regime. At first, the initiative
committees tried to transform (they would say democratize) the older
Ukrainian organizations, but when that failed they established their
own Rusyn organizations and publications.
At the very same time, in neighboring Transcarpathia, the first
Rusyn-oriented organization to exist anywhere in Carpathian Rus'
since World War II was established in February 1990 in the oblast's
administrative center of Uzhorod. Known as the Society of Carpatho-Rusyns (Tovarystvo Karpats'kych Rusyniv) and with branches
throughout Transcarpathia, its goals were at first of a cultural and
ecological nature - to promote and preserve knowledge of local history and customs. But before long, the Society moved on to political
demands, in particular the recognition of Rusyn as a distinct nationality and the return of the autonomous status of Subcarpathian Rus',
a status which they argued was illegally taken away in 1945.
Before 1990 came to a close, a total of five new Rusyn organizations had come into existence where Rusyns live. Aside from the
Society of Carpatho-Rusyns in Ukrainian Transcarpathia were the
Rusyn Renaissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda) in Medzilaborce,
Czechoslovakia (est. March 1990); the Lemko Association (Stovarysynja Lemkiv) in Legnica, Poland (est. April 1990); the Society of
Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' (Spolecnost pratel Podkarpatske
Rusi) in Prague (est. October 1990); and the Ruska Matka (Rusyn
Matka) in Ruski Kerestur, Yugoslavia (est. December 1990). By the
spring of 1991, a sixth one was established, this time in Hungary:
the Rusyn Organization in Hungary (Magyarorszagi Ruszinok Szervezete) in Budapest (est. May 1991). Most of these organizations
have their own Rusyn-language newspaper or magazine, 14 or they
have access to existing publications. All five organizations have put
forth basically the same demands: that Rusyns be recognized as a
distinct nationality; that a Rusyn literary language be codified and
eventually be used in schools as a medium of instruction; and that
14 These include: Besida (Legnica, Poland, 1989-present); Otcyj chram (Uzhorod,
1990-91); Podkarpatski Rus (Prague, 1991-present); Rusyn (Medzilaborce ,
Czechoslovakia, 1990-present); Narodny novyntj (Pre§ov, 1991-present).
�48
SLOVAKIA
Rusyns be guaranteed full rights as a national minority in the
countries where they live or, in the case of Transcarpathia, that
Rusyns be recognized as the dominant indigenous nationality.
As in all new or revived movements, the Rusyn orientation must
first be able to make itself known to the constituency it purports to
represent. This is inherently problematic, because with the exception
of Yugoslavia, nowhere do Rusyns control the local media. Their
message, or at least an awareness of their movement's existence, has
been helped less by their own publications than by the fierce
polemics that have filled the non-Rusyn press in Poland, former
Czechoslovakia, and most especially former Soviet Transcarpathia.
This is because from the moment the first Rusyn activity began,
local pro-Ukrainian activists attacked the Rusyn orientation as
"anachronistic," "ahistorical," "unenlightened," "in the service of
American imperialists," and "treacherous" to the Ukrainian nation. 15
As a result, more attention of a semi-sensationalist journalistic nature was given the Rusyn problem than might otherwise have been the
case. The Czech and Slovak press also paid much - although more
rational - attention to the Rusyn-Ukrainian debate, especially in the
context of the nationality question that concerned Czechoslovak
society as a whole.
Whatever latent isolation Rusyn leaders in their respective countries may have still felt was overcome in March 1991, when, at the
initiative of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, the first World Congress of Rusyns was convened in Medzilaborce, Czechoslovakia.
Indeed, despite a history of interaction between Rusyn communities
in the homeland as well as the immigration in America during the
twentieth century, this was, in fact, the first time representatives
from all countries where Rusyns live (Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
15 The best (or worst) examples of the anti-Rusyn polemical attacks comes from
scholars in the former Soviet Ukrainian intellectual establishment: Pavlo Cucka,
"Kak rusiny stali ukraincami," Zakarpatskaja pravda (U:lhorod), September 12-16,
1989; Vasyl' Mel'nyk, "Neorusynstvo i joho interpretatory," Zakarpats'ka pravda
(U:lhorod), August 18, 21, 22, 24, 1990; Jurij Balega, "Rusynstvo: ideolohy i
pokrovyteli," ibid., September 6,7 ,9, 1990; and Oleksa Myfanyc, "To chto :le vony?:
do idejnych vytokiv novitn'oho 'karpatorusynstva'," Literatuma Ukrajina (Kiev),
January 17, 1991.
�SLOVAKIA
49
Yugoslavia, the United States) gathered together in one place. The
congress constituted itself as a permanent umbrella organization, and
its very existence had an enormous impact on instilling Rusyn
national pride in the over 300 persons who attended, not to mention
innumerable others who read about it through the generally widespread press coverage.1 6
It is interesting to note that one week after the congress took
place, Czechoslovakia conducted its decennial census in which
people for the first time since World War II had the right to answer
that they were of Rusyn nationality. Despite problems with the
manner in which the nationality questionwas asked and subsequently classified, in Slovakia 17,000 persons responded they were
Rusyns as compared to 14,000 Ukrainians. 17 This raises the question of numbers. Observers will legitimately ask just how many
people identify as Rusyns? And even among those who do respond
Rusyn, does use of such a term necessarily mean they are denying a
possible simultaneous identification as Ukrainians? At this point,
there is no way to know the precise answers to those questions. All
we know is that in Slovakia, when given a chance in March 1991, of
those people of East Slavic background who did not identify as
Slovak and who had the choice between a Rusyn or Ukrainian identity, 55 percent chose Rusyn. As for the number of Rusyns in Poland and Ukrainian Transcarpathia, we simply do not know at this
stage, nor do we have any indications, such as census data, scientific
polling, or membership in political parties, that might help to provide
a reasonable estimate.
What we can be certain of, however, is that after forty years of
Communist rule, Rusyns have not gone away. Today, there are
Rusyn organizations, Rusyn publications, and a relatively wide
range of writers, teachers, professionals, and peasants who continue
to articulate in the press and at public manifestations their belonging
16 Information on the First World Congress as well as its official declaration are
found in the Carpatho--Rusyn American , XIV, 2 and 3 (Fairview, NJ., 1991). pp . 7-9
and 8-9.
17 Mykola Mu§ynka, "Skil'ky rusyniv-ukrajinciv u Slovaccyni? ," Svoboda (Jersey
City, NJ.), July 19, 1991.
�50
SLOVAKIA
to a distinct Rusyn people.1 8
Protection for Rusyns in the Future
As with many minorities, the future of their survival depends on
the willingness of the governments in the states where they live to
provide them with adequate legal protection and perhaps financial
assistance for their national development. In this regard, the Rusyns
need to inform and constantly to remind the international community
that they exist. In tum, Rusyns should be able to expect that the
international community will monitor their status and, if necessary,
put pressure on the governments of the Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia, in order to ensure that their national rights are
protected.
In fact, all four states in which Rusyns live have already ratified
several agreements pertaining to national minorities at recent meetings of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe
(CSCE). Of particular importance for Rusyns were the decisions
reached in·June 1990 at the Copenhagen meeting of the CSCE .. At
Copenhagen it was agreed that "to belong to a national minority is a
matter of a person's individual choice and no disadvantage may arise
from the exercise of such choice." Moreover, "persons belonging to
national minorities can exercise and enjoy their rights individually as
well as in community with other members of their group. 1119
This means that regardless how scholars or governments might
define Rusyns, if there are individuals and/or groups who call themselves by that name and who believe they constitute a distinct natio18 Among the best known of these to date are: in Transcarpathia , the writers
Volodymyr Fedyny§ynec', Ivan Petrovcij, and Vasylij Socka, and the political
activists Mychajlo Tomcanij, Petro Hodma§, and Vasyl' Zajac; in Czechoslovakia,
the head of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, Vasyl' Turok, and the advisor to the
Slovak government on nationality affairs, Ivan Bicko, and the editor Aleksander
Zozuljak; in Poland, the poets Petro Trochanovskij and Olena Due , and the head of
the Lemko Association , Andrij Kopca; and in Yugoslavia, the director of the Ruske
Slovo publishing house, Ljubomir Medje§i, and the writers Djura Papharhaj and
Natalja Duda§.
19 Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human
Dimension of the CSCE (Copenhagen, 1990), pp. 40--41, paragraphs 32 and 32.6.
�SLOVAKIA
51
nality , they have a right to do so and to be recognized as Rusyns by
the governments of the countries in which they live. The Copenhagen agreement also recognized the role of non-governmental
organizations in promoting the interests of national minorities, and it
called on the participating states to assure that the teaching of history
and culture in the educational establishments "will also take account
of the history and culture of national minorities. 1120 At a follow-up
CSCE meeting in Geneva (July 1991), member states accepted the
provisions of a special report which guaranteed the right of national
minorities to participate in non-governmental organizations outside
their country of residence. The report reaffirmed as well the principle
that individuals or organizations representing national minorities be
allowed "unimpeded contacts ... across frontiers ... with persons
with whom they share a common ethnic or national origin." 21
Finally, at the most recent CSCE meeting held in Moscow
(September-October 1991), member states reaffirmed the agreements reached at all previous meetings and agreed further that
"commitments undertaken in the field of the human dimension of the
CSCE [including those pertaining to national minorities] are matters
of direct legitimate concern to all participating States and do not
belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the State concemed." 22
Before looking specifically at what Rusyns need in each country
to protect and guarantee their future existence, it is necessary to
clarify the issue of international boundaries. In the Carpathian homeland, Rusyns live within the borders of three states, and at least until
late 1992 there was discussion in the Czech , Slovak, and Transcarpathian press about certain political activists who demanded the
return of Ukraine's Transcarpathian oblast (historic Subcarpathian
Rus') to Czechoslovakia. 23 There was even talk that Transcarpathia
20 Ibid., p. 41 , paragraph 34.
21 Report of the CSCE Meeting of Experts on National Minorities (Geneva , 1991) , p.
10 .
22 Document of the Moscow Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of
the CSCE (Moscow, 1991 ), p. 2.
23 The Republican party in Czechoslovakia led by Dr. Miroslav SIMek had as one of
its goals the "return of Subcarpathian Rus"' to Czechoslovakia. "Zpl!t do Ceskoslovenska," Republika (Prague), October 18-24, 1990; "Rozhovor s pi'edsedou SPR-
�52
SLOVAKIA
might be returned to Hungary or divided between Hungary and
Czechoslovakia. In fact, most of these propositions were little more
than the speculations of individuals that were blown out of proportion by political rivals and by journalists seeking to report a good
story .24 The Czecho--Slovak federal government publicly declared
that it "cannot be concerned with the fate" of Transcarpathia.25 With
the end of Czechoslovakia in December 1992, the question of
unification has become moot. As for the Rusyn organizations that
have come into existence in 1990, none of them nor the World
Congress of Rusyns that met in 1991 has ever voiced any demand
for border changes. On the contrary, all the new organizations as
well as· the vast majority of Rusyn spokespersons wherever they live
warn against tampering with existing international boundaries.
On the other hand, the Society of Carpatho--Rusyns in Transcarpathia has called openly for the return of the status of automony that
Subcarpathian Rus' did enjoy during the interwar years. 26 In order
to determine the views of the local population, the society, joined by
other minority organizations, called for a question on Transcarpathian autonomy to be added to the referendum on Ukrainian indeRS, Ph Dr. Miroslavem Shidkem," ibid., August, 1991. The head of the National
Socialist party, C. Cejka, stated that Czechoslovak jurisdiction still applies to Subcarpathian Rus' . "NSS chtc!jf Podkarpatskou Rus, "Lidova demokracie (Prague), September 3, 1991.
24 Jaromfr Hoi'ec of the Society of Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' in Prague and wellknown publicist has written about the recent political activism in Transcarpathia in
numerous articles in the Czech press, which imply that the local population would
be sympathetic to re-unification with Czechoslovakia. Cf. his recent articles in Lidova demokracie (Prague): "Freedom for Subcarpathian Rus"' (September 7, 1991);
"Czechs in Subcarpathia" (September 18, 1991); and "Subcarpathia Calls For an
Independent Republic" (September 20, 1991).
The Hungarian press has also followed closely the demands for Transcarpathian
autonomy: "Ruszin koztlirsaslig Klirplitaljlin, "Magyar hfrlap (Budapest), September
10, 1991; "A ruszinok kovetelese: Jegyen Klirplitalja koztlirsaslig! , "Nap/6 (Debrecen), September 3, 1991.
25 The quote is attributed to Czechoslovakia's foreign minister, Jiff Dienstbier, in
"Svobodu pro Podkarpatskou Rus," Lidova demokracie, September 9, 1991.
26 The text of the declaration, which was sent to the Soviet president Mikhail
Gorbachev , to the Supreme Soviets of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR, and to the
United Nations, appeared first in the Society's newspaper, Otey} chram (SeptemberOctober, 1990) . It is available in English translation in the Carpatho-Rusyn American, XIV, 1 (Fairview , NJ., 1991), pp 4-5 .
�SLOVAKIA
53
pendence that was held on December 1, 1991 .27 There was a large
voter tum-out, with 92.6 percent favoring Ukrainian independence
and 78 percent self-rule for Transcarpathia. 28 The issue of Transcarpathian autonomy elicited great interest in neighboring countries,
although this is, in fact, an internal issue for whatever kind of
government and state structure is finally established in what until
recently was the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In short,
Transcarpathia has been and should for the foreseeable future remain
a part of Ukraine.
However, as a sovereign member of the international community, Ukraine must, in tum, guarantee the individual and corporate
rights of Rusyns - or those citizens of Ukraine who wish to call
themselves Rusyns. It is true that the Ukrainian government has
already provided guarantees for national minorities living on its
territory: Russians, Jews, Poles, Germans, Tatars, etc. To this list
must be added Rusyns. This would mean that the "official," or one
might say traditional, Ukrainian view of the Rusyns has to change.
Namely, Ukrainian authorities must accept the fact that within its
boundaries, primarily in its Transcarpathian oblast, there are people
who define themselves as Rusyns in the sense of a nationality distinct from Ukrainians. Such people should have the right to declare
themselves in their passports and internal documents as Rusyns, and
the state census bureau should publish data on the number of
persons who identify as Rusyns and not simply classify them - as
has been done until now - as Ukrainians. 29 If such guarantees are
27 "Rezoljucija mityngu Tovarystva Karpats'kych Rusyniv z pytannja nacional'noho
vidrod!ennja rusyns'koho narodu i vidnovlennja statusu Pidkarpats'koho kraju ,
Mukacevo, 01.09.1991," Molod' Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), September 14, 1991, p. 4.
28 Paul Robert Magocsi, "Rusyns Regain Their Autonomy," Ukrainian Canadian
Herald (Toronto), March 16, 1992, p. 7.
29 Soviet guidelines used by the State Committee for Statistics in order to classify
answers in the census reports were determined largely on recommendations from
authorities in individual republics as well as from the Institute of Ethnography and
the Institute of Linguistics of the Soviet Academy of Sciences. SeeSJovari nacional'nostej i jazykov dlja kodirovanija otvetov na 8 i 9 voprosy perepisnych Jistov
(Moscow: Gosudarstvennyj komitet SSSR po statistike, 1988).
It is interesting to note that a recent report by the Institute of Ethnography (No.
14110/2171, dated February 6, 1990) stated: "It is theoretically possible to con-
�54
SLOVAKIA
provided, there is no reason why Rusyns in Transcarpathia could
not remain Rusyns as well as function as full-fledged citizens of a
sovereign and democratic Ukrainian state. Indeed, independent
Ukraine has recently become a member of the Conference in
Security and Cooperation in Europe, which obliges it to accept and
implement the principles of the Copenhagen and other agreements
on national minorities outlined above.
Following the trend that has taken hold in the former Soviet
Union, it would seem desirable that the new Ukrainian state become
a decentralized entity in which each of its component regions would
have a large degree of automony in economic and cultural matters .30
Thus, questions such as what language might be taught in elementary schools, or what kind of national orientation should be adopted
by regional cultural and educational institutions, or what amount of
funding might be given to Rusyn-oriented groups, are all decisions
that would be made by the people's assembly in Uzhorod and not in
Kiev. Of course, it goes without saying that the free movement of
peoples across borders with neighboring Rusyn regions in Slovakia
and Poland must be guaranteed. Fortunately, this possibility exists
already, albeit with a waiting time at border crossings that every day
of the week averages between 15 and 20 hours.
As for neighboring Slovakia, the situation of Rusyns, especially
since the November 1989 Velvet Revolution, is much better than in
either Ukrainian Transcarpathia or Poland. Initially, the Slovak
government (generally through its Ministry of Culture) and the
former Czecho-Slovak federal government (through allotment of
discretionary funds) provided only ad hoc grants to the new Rusyn
organizations and publications. Normal budgetary allotments of the
Slovak government intended for its East Slavic Rusyn/Ukrainian
elude that Rusyns can be considered at the same level as Russians , Ukrainians , and
Belorussians, and that they are not a part of any of those groups ." (document in the
author's possession) .
30 Discussions regarding the restructuring of the Ukraine have been going on for the
past few years . Neighbouring Galicia as well as Transcarpathia feel confident that
each could do much better economically if it were independent of the centre in Kiev .
Cf. Ivan Hrancak, "Vidnovleni haluzky karpats'koho kraju : Ukrajina federatyvna?,"
No vyny Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), February 6, 1991 .
�SLOVAKIA
55
minority continued to go to the Union of Rusyn-Ukrainians of
Czechoslovakia (SRUC), that is, to the Ukrainian-oriented cultural
organization that is the direct descendant (still with largely the same
leadership) as the formerly Communist-dominated Cultural Union
of Ukrainian Workers (KSUT). Slovak government funding
through other ministries also supported in Presov several Ukrainian
university departments and institutes at Safarik University , a
Ukrainian radio station, and a Ukrainian publishing house, as well
as the Museum of Ukrainian Culture (recently renamed the
Aleksander Pavlovy Regional Museum) in Svidnik. As of 1993 ,
two Rusyn-oriented organizations also receive a normal budgetary
allotment. These include the Aleksander Duchnovyc Theater (formerly the Ukrainian National Theater) which is of a Rusyn orientation and the Rusyn Renasissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda), both
based in Presov.
The Slovak government now recognizes that there are two
clearly-defined national orientations - Rusyn and Ukrainian - and
that if support for national minorities is to continue in Slovakia, then
funding should be provided to Rusyn as well as Ukrainian organizations. But how should the government divide a financial allotment
among its East Slavic minority, which until recently has been designated only as Ukrainian? The Slovak government has opted for what
seems the most reasonable solution. It has accepted the percentages
revealed in the results of the 1991 census, and, therefore, has provided roughly 50 percent financial support to Rusyn cultural organizations and media and 50 percent to Ukrainian cultural organizations, schools, and its media.
The question of schools in Slovakia is particularly problematic,
because beginning in the 1960s the language of instruction in the
vast majority of Rusyn-inhabited villages was changed - at the request of parents themselves - from Ukrainian to Slovak. Moreover,
as part of a consolidation process during the past two decades, many
small elementary schools in Rusyn-inhabited villages were closed.
Even if private or public elementary schools will be reopened in
Rusyn villages, it is likely that Slovak will be the language of instruction. The Slovak ministry of education, however, should
�56
SLOVAKIA
provide teachers and textbooks in Rusyn or in Ukrainian for those
villages that may submit such requests. Most important, the standard
Slovak-language history textbooks used throughout Slovakia
should include an adequate discussion of the history and culture of
Rusyns and other minorities which will be of benefit to all students.
This would be in keeping with the CSCE agreement reached in
Copenhagen, which - along with other "international treaties on
human rights and freedoms" - are, according to the new consitution
of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, "universally binding on
its territory and supercede its own laws."31
The Rusyns, or Lemko Rusyns of Poland perhaps need the most
help. Not only is the majority of Lemko Rusyns scattered throughout the western and northern regions of Poland, but their fledgling
pro-Rusyn organization, the Lemko Association with its amateur
theatrical troupe, and the older Lemkovyna folk ensemble receive no
financial support at all from the Polish government, either in the
form of an annual budgetary allotment or ad hoc grants. Whatever
government funds assigned to national minority cultural activity are
given, they invariably go to the Union of Ukrainians in Poland
(Ob'jednannja Ukrajinciv Pollsci), the direct descendant of the
Communist-dominated Ukrainian Socio-Cultural Society (USKT).
Support for the new Union of Ukrainians must continue, especially
since most Ukrainians in Poland are not originally from nor do they
live in the Carpathian region. On the otherhand, Lemko Rusyns
must also be recognized as a distinct national minority and receive a
fair share of funding.
How to determine what is a "fair share" will, of course, be difficult, since Poland does not even have nationality as a category on its
decennial census questionnaires. Perhaps a referendum attached to
the next national vote could include a question that lists all the
national groups in Poland and asks the respondent to which one
he/she would wish to assign a portion of their taxes for cultural
31 Cf. Section 2 of the Constitutional Act of January 9, 1991, instituting the charter
of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as a Constitutional Act of the Federal Assembly of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic .
�SLOVAK.IA
57
activity. This would be somewhat similar to municipalities in Canada
that ask their residents to indicate whether they want their tax dollars
to be assigned to public schools or to separate (Catholic) schools.
Whatever the mechanism decided upon, in keeping with its commitments as a member state of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Polish government is obliged to recognize
Lernko Rusyns as a distinct national minority and to provide funding
for Lernko cultural organizations and Lernko-language schools in
those communities that demand them.
Lastly, we turn to the situation in Yugoslavia. Ever since World
War II, the Yugoslav policy of equality for its six component
republics and support for the national minorities that live within
them has encouraged the Croatian Republic and, in particular, the
Vojvodina Autonomous Region of the Serbian Republic to finance
liberally Rusyn cultural and educational activity. It is to be expected
that when the republics of Yugoslavia sort out their present
difficulties, the republics of Croatia and, in particular, Serbia will
continue their judicious support and protection of their respective
Rusyn minorities.
Conclusion
The Rusyns are one example of the many groups who suffered
under the totalitarian regimes imposed on East Central Europe
during the past four decades. Now that those regimes no longer
exist, there is a real opportunity to correct past injustices and to
assure the future survival of the Rusyns. It is, after all, in the interest
of all four countries where Rusyns live - Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia - to become part of the larger European community.
The way in which those countries resolve the Rusyn issue will, in
part, determine to what degree they are ready for membership in the
new Europe.
��SYMPOSIUM
��
SLOVAKIA
36
Carpatho-Rusyns: Their
Current Status And Future
Perspectives
PAUL ROBERT MAGOSCI
Who Are The Rusyns?
In 1875, geographers from the old Hungarian Kingdom erected
a monument in a remote region of their country that carried the
following inscription: "Precise instruments have confirmed this
point where the latitude and longitude lines meet as the center of
Europe." 1 Just over a century later, in 1977, the former Soviet
authorities, who had by then ruled the area, erected a second
monument to mark the center of the continent that stretches from the
Arctic shores of Norway in the north to the beaches of Crete in the
south, and from the coast of Ireland in the west to the Ural
Mountains in the east. The precise center where the monuments are
located is near the village of Dilove (formerly Trebusany) in the
foothills of the northcentral Carpathian Mountains that from time
immemorial has been inhabited by an East Slavic people called
Carpatho-Rusyns, or simply Rusyns (sometimes in English: Ruthenians). Thus, in geographic terms, the Rusyns are not a peripheral
group, but rather one whose homeland - Carpathian Rus 1 - is located
literally in the heart of Europe.
According to present day international boundaries, Rusyns live
in more or less compact territory within the boundaries of four
1For a description, see Fedor Korecki, "Stredok Evropi-na Homjici," Nova dumka ,
VIII (21] (Vukovar, Yugoslavia, 1979), pp . 101-102.
�SLOVAKIA
37
countries: Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland, and Romania. There is also a
small group of Rusyns in Yugoslavia, descendants of immigrants
who left the Carpathian homeland in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. Statistical data on Rusyns is, depending on the country,
inadequate or completely unavailable. Therefore, we can only speak
in theoretical terms when discussing numbers . In theory, the number
of Rusyns could be as high as 1.2 million people: 977 ,000 in the
Transcarpathian oblast (former Subcarpathian Rus') of the Ukraine;
130,000 in the Presov Region of northeastern Slovakia; 60,000 in
the Lemko Region of southeastern Poland as well as in other parts
of that country; and 30,000 in the Vojvodina (Backa) and the
Croatian republic of former Yugoslavia.2
The Problem of Nomenclature
It is important to keep in mind what is meant by the term Rusyn.
Traditionally, the name Rusyn, or its local variant Rusnak, has been
used by the East Slavic inhabitants of the Carpathian region to describe themselves. However, by the twentieth century, in particular its
second half, the historic names Rusyn/Rusnak were replaced by
others, such as Ukrainian in Soviet Transcarpathia and the Presov
Region of Slovakia, or Lemko in Poland . There are also Rusyns
who have given up identifying with any East Slavic group, and instead associate with the dominant nationality of the country in which
2Since World War II, Rusyns were recorded in official statistics only in Yugoslavia
(21,000 in 1991) , Romania (1,000 in 1977), and most recently in Slovakia (17 ,000
in 1991) . "Vojvodina u tisloch i slovoch," Ruski kalendar 1992 (Novi Sad , 1991), p.
38; Anuarul statistic al Romaniei 1990 (Bucharest, 1990), p. 64; Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic: Preliminary Results of Population and Housing Census (Prague,
1991), pp . 30-3 I. There are also unconfirmed reports that the final published version of the 1991 Czecho-Slovak statistics will indicate 49,000 persons in Slovakia
who reported Rusyn as their mother tongue .
As for the estimates given here, the figure for the Transcarpathian oblast refers
to persons in that region who in the 1991 Ukrainian census were reported as
Ukrainian (the term Rusyn when given by a respondant is recorded as Ukrainian).
The estimates for Slovakia and Poland are from: Paul Robert Magocsi , The Rusyns of
Slovakia (New York, 1993), p. 1-2 and 111-112; and his Historical Atlas of East
Central Europe (Seattle , 1993) , p. 131.
�38
SLOVAKIA
they live, such as Polish in Poland or Slovak in Slovakia. These
changes in national self-designation have in some cases come gradually , prompted either by intellectual conviction or by national assimilation, especially among families of nationally-mixed parentage.
In the latter case, children often choose to identify - or are identified
by their parents - with the dominant state nationality, Slovak or
Polish.
More often, however, the change in nomenclature has been the
result of governmental decree in which the name Rusyn was banned
from official usage, as was the case after 1945 in Soviet Transcarpathia and Poland and by the early 1950s in Czechoslovakia. The
result is that today one can find within the same ethnolinguistic
group, within the same village, in some cases even within the same
family, people who will identify as a Rusyn, or a Lemko, or a Ukrainian, or a Slovak, or a Pole. Moreover, in the case of the East Slavic
designations - Rusyn/Rusnak, Lemko, Ukrainian - some people
consider these as synonyms, others as mutually-exclusive terms. In
other words, some people will say that Rusyn is simply the older
historic name for Ukrainian, and that Lemko is a regional name of
Ukrainian, while others are convinced that the names Lemko or Rusnak are regional forms for Rusyn which, in tum, designates a people
that is distinct from the Ukrainian and every other surrounding
nationality.
It should be noted that the estimated figure of 1.2 million Rusyns
given above refers to all people of the same linguistic and ethnographic origin, regardless of how they designate themselves on documents such as internal identity papers, passports, or decennial censuses. Our concern here will be primarily with the present-day Rusyn
movement or with that portion of the group (the precise numbers are
unknown) that considers Rusyns to comprise a distinct people.
Historical Background
It is neither possible nor appropriate to provide here an extensive
outline of Rusyn history. It is necessary, however, to keep a few
historical factors in mind in order to comprehend the current
�SLOVAKIA
39
situation.
Rusyns never had their own state or political independence.
Since the Middle Ages, the Rusyn homeland was ruled by Hungary
and Poland or Austria. Nonetheless, during the past century and a
half, they have at various times been recognized by neighboring or
ruling states as having the right to a territorial entity whose existence
was justified on the grounds that it was somehow of and for Rusyns
and that it would have some degree of automony or self-rule. 3 The
first experience in this regard came in late 1849, when in the wake of
the failure of the Hungarian revolution, the Austrian government
divided Hungary into five military and several civil districts. One of
the civil districts (Ungvar/Uzhorod) was based in the Subcarpathian
region and administered by local Rusyn political and cultural
activists . This experiment was to last only a few months.
Much more important was the period of political upheaval that
followed World War I. At that time, in an effort to retain Rusyninhabited lands within Hungary, the new government in Budapest
created, in December 1918, an autonomous Rusyn Land (Rus'ka
Krajina) that continued to function even after a pro-Soviet Communist regime came to power in March 1919.4 Simultaneously, the
recently-founded Czechoslovak government was also courting the
Rusyns, offering them a self-governing province to be called Rusinsko (Rusinia), or Subcarpathian Rus' (Podkarpatska Rus), if they
would join the Czechs and Slovaks in their new state. In May 1919,
the Rusyns accepted the Czechoslovak offer. Most significantly, the
Rusyn issue had reached the international political forum , so that
"the fullest degree of self-government" for "Ruthene territory south
of the Carpathians" was guaranteed by two international treaties at
the Paris Peace Conference (St. Germain-en-Laye, September 10,
3 For further details on Rusyn political entities in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, see Paul Robert Magocsi, The Shaping of a National Identity: Subcarpathian Rus' 1848-1948 (Cambridge, Mass .: Harvard University Press, 1978) . pp
46-47, 93-95 , and 237-245.
4soviet-Marxist literature is fond of elaborating upon the 40 days of Soviet rule in
Transcarpathia. Cf. Borys Spivak and Mychajlo Trojan, 40 nezabutnich dniv: z
istoriji borot'by za vladu Rad na Zakarpatti v 1919 roci (Uzhorod: Karpaty, 1967).
�40
SLOVAKIA
1919, and Trianon, June 4, 1920) and by the Czechoslovak constitution (February 29, 1920).
For the next two decades the vast majority of Rusyns - approximately three-fourths the total number at the time - lived in Subcarpathian Rus, a territory that was Rusyn in name, that had its own
Rusyn schools, and that had all the trappings of self-rule including a
governor, a partially-elected diet, a national anthem, and a national
theater. Finally, in late 1938, actual autonomy was granted to
Subcarpathian Rus' (by then renamed Carpatho-Ukraine). Not only
had autonomy been demanded by local politicians, it was also one of
the provisions of the infamous Munich Pact, which led to the
restructuring of Czechoslovakia. The Carpatho-Ukraine was to
function for nearly half a year until the complete liquidation of what
remained of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.
The twentieth century also witnessed three short-lived efforts at
Rusyn independence. The first of these came in 1919, when after
being unsuccessful in their bid to join fellow Rusyns south of the
mountains, the Lernkos living in the former Austrian province of
Galicia created an independent republic that functioned for sixteen
months before its government was arrested in March 1920, by the
authorities of Poland, which became the new ruler over Rusyn lands
north of the Carpathians.5 At the same time, along the eastern edge
of Subcarpathian territory a regional ethnic group known as Hutsuls
established their own republic which lasted four months (FebruaryJune 1919) before being driven out by troops from Romania. The
last unsuccessful attempt came two decades later, when the Carpatho-Ukrainian autonomous government declared symbolically its
independence on the last day of Czechoslovakia's existence (March
15, 1939) before the province was invaded and reannexed to Hungary .6 The point is that although Rusyns may never have had their
5 On the little-known Lemko Republic and its relationship to political thought in
the western Ukrainian lands, see Paul Robert Magocsi,"The Ukrainian Question
Between Poland and Czechoslovakia: The Lernko Rusyn Republic (1918-1920) and
Political Thought in Western Rus'-Ukraine," Nationalities Papers (New York,
forthcoming) .
6 Ukrainian-oriented emigres from Carpatho-Ukraine have put great stress on the
�SLOVAKIA
41
own state, they did have for a significant period of time in the twentieth century the experience - and therefore historical memory - of
their own political entity, Subcarpathian Rus', which was recognized
both by the state in which they lived (Czechoslovakia) and by the
international community (Paris Peace Conference, League of
Nations).
Although the Rusyn homeland is located in the geographical
center of Europe, it is at the same time along a cultural borderland. It
is along that great divide between the Catholic West and Orthodox
East, what Riccardo Picchio has classified in the broadest cultural
terms as Slavia romana and Slavia orthodoxa.7 Located where they
are, this division has had a profound effect on the Rusyn psyche.
The very language or series of dialects that Rusyns speak reflect
the influences of both cultural spheres. Thus, while their speech
clearly belongs to the realm of East Slavic languages, much of their
vocabulary, pronounciational stress, and even syntax is West Slavic.
The cultural divide is most graphically evident in what is for
traditional Rusyn culture the all-important factor of religion. Some
Rusyns are Orthodox, but the majority, at least during the past two
centuries, is Catholic, or more precisely Greek Catholic. These
confessional differences reflect a whole mind-set that is either western - or eastern-oriented. The eastern mind-set tends to surrender
the self to fate in the hope that the Christian God and his intercessors, Christ and the Virgin Mary, might somehow alleviate the
burdens of this earthly life. In contrast, the western mind-set seems
March I 5, I 939 declaration of independence, arguing that it revealed how the
Ukrainian orientation had supposedly won the hearts and minds of the entire
population even before the Soviets arrived in the region in late 1944 . Cf. Peter G.
Stercho, Diplomacy of Double Morality: Europe's Crossroads in Carpatho- Ukraine ,
1919-1939 (New York: Carpathian Research Centre , 1971) . This view is also being
promoted in the Ukraine since the onset of the Gorbachev era. See the minutes of the
RUCH meeting held in the former Carpathi-Ukrainian capitol of Chust to coincide
with the 52nd anniversary of the one-day of independence: "4 sesija Velykoji Rady
Ruchu," Visnyk Ruchu, no . 4 (Kiev, 1990).
7Riccardo Picchio, "Guidelines for the Comparative Study of the Language Question
Among the Slavs," in Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, Vol.I, ed. Riccardo
Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt (New Haven , Conn .: Yale Concilium on International
and Area Studies, 1984), pp. 1-42.
�42
SLOVAKIA
to feel that if an individual receives education or political training, he
or she can somehow put their lives in order and, therefore, be able to
have some control over destiny .
The east-west dichotomy in the Rusyn psyche also impinges on
attitudes toward nationai identity. The eastern orientation tends to
think in universalistic terms and be satisfied with viewing Rusyns as
part of a single East Slavic Orthodox religious and cultural world.
The western orientation - epitomized by the very distinctiveness of
Greek Catholics from other Catholics - accepts the idea of national
and linguistic particularity. Universalism versus particularism are
attitudes that greatly influenced Rusyn political and cultural leaders ,
especially regarding the nationality question.
Being a stateless people, Rusyns have had, at least until the second half of the twentieth century , to depend on their leaders, the
intelligentsia, to determine the precise direction of their national revival . The Rusyn national revival began during the second half of the
nineteenth century and culminated during the interwar years, by
which time it had evolved into a comprehensive movement concerned with political, cultural, and social issues. Most of the nationalist intelligentsia did agree on one basic premise: that Rusyns are
East Slavs and that their linguistic and cultural traditions were based
in the east, albeit with pronounced western influences. What they
could not agree upon, however, was whether Rusyns were a branch
of the Russian nationality, or of the Ukrainian nationality, or whether they formed a distinct fourth East Slavic Rusyn nationality. Not
surprisingly, debates about national and linguistic orientation quickly
became caught up in local partisan politics. Politicians had their own
agendas, and they more often than not made opportunistic use of the
nationality question in order to promote party or other ideological
interests.
As for the nationalist intelligentsia, they easily fulfilled the precepts of all activists in the formative stages of national movements.
Namely, they had no difficulty using history to formulate an ideology that was able to convince people they were either Russian,
�SLOVAKIA
43
Ukrainian, or Rusyn. 8 The debate over the national orientation of the
Rusyns was not yet resolved before the outbreak of World War II,
despite the achievements during the interwar years of the Ukrainian
orientation in the largest Rusyn territory , Subcarpathian Rus' (Carpath~Ukraine).
In a sense, the year 1939 marked an end to the natural evolution
of discussions about a Rusyn nationality. This is because beginning
in that year and lasting for half a century, the nationality debate was
effectively stifled by state intervention. This happened first under
fascist regimes in Hungary(which reannexed Subcarpathian Rus'), in
Slovakia (which retained the Presov Region), and in the Germanruled Generalgouvernement (which ruled the Lemko Region); and
then as a result of Soviet rule after 1945, whether directly in Subcarpathian Rus' (renamed Transcarpathian Ukraine) or through proSoviet Communist governments in Poland and Czechoslovakia. As
is well known, the Communist era with its anti-democratic approach
to the nationality question was to last until the revolutions of 1989
and 1991. The only exception was the case of the small group of
Rusyns in the Vojvodina region of Yugoslavia. Although a Communist regime was installed in their land as well, the Yugoslav
government allowed the Vojvodinian Rusyns to decide their own
national orientation.
This was not to be the case for the Rusyns living in the Carpathian homeland. In short, the Soviet regime declared that further
debate was unnecessary because the nationality question had supposedly been resolved long ago. Based on a decision made by the
Communist party (Bolshevik) of the Ukraine taken in December
8Generally, the Russian-oriented intelligentsia, or Russophiles, were Orthodox
adherents or sympathizers who believed in the unity of Eastern Slavic Christian
culture represented by three branches of the East Slavs - Great Russians , Belorussians, and Little Russians (including Carpatho-Rusyns) - all considered to be
part of one common Russian (ob§cerusskiJ) nationality . The Ukrainian--0riented and
Rusyn--0riented intelligentsias were western--0riented Greek Catholics who believed
in various degrees of national and/or regional differentiation - the Ukrainophiles
arguing for the unity of one people that stretched "from the Carpathians to the
Caucasus"; the Rusynophiles arguing that the Rus' population in the Carpathians
(from the Poprad to Tysa rivers) comprises a separate people.
�44
SLOVAKIA
1925, all Rusyns , regardless what they may have called themselves,
were declared to be Ukrainians. Any who opposed the Ukrainian
viewpoint were accused of having "anti-historical" and, therefore,
"anti-Soviet" opinions; they often were removed from their jobs;
and they might even have been arrested as "counterrevolutionaries."
Closely connected with these developments was the liquidation first
in Soviet Transcarpathia (1949) and then in Czechoslovakia (1950)
of the Greek Catholic Church, which by the mid-twentieth century
had become the stronghold of the Rusyn orientation.
When Communist regimes were established in Poland (1945)
and Czechoslovakia (1948), they adapted the Soviet line and decreed
that the Ru syn minorities within their borders were Ukrainians.
They forbade Rusyn publications and the use of the name Rusyn in
official documents. The situation was particularly bad in Poland. Not
only were the Lemko Rusyns declared to be Ukrainians, they were
forcibly deported en masse from their Carpathian homeland in 1947
and scattered throughout the former German lands of post-1945
western and northern Poland.9
It is ironic to note the advantages that accrued to the governments in question through their use - or, more properly, misuse - of
the name Ukrainian. For example, by declaring that the population
was Ukrainian, this allowed the Soviet Union to justify the annexation in 1945 of Subcarpathian Rus', a territory that throughout the
war it had agreed should be returned to Czechoslovakia. Nationalist
ideology could now conveniently serve Stalin's political designs on
the international stage. In any case, how could the Soviet worker's
state refuse the request of fellow "Ukrainian workers" in Transcarpathia who "voluntarily" were demanding to be united with the
"Mother Ukraine"?
9 The actual deportations took place in two phases. Between 1945 and 1946, about
200,000 Lemko Rusyns "voluntarily" took up the offer to resettle eastward in the
Ukraine in exchange for Poles who moved west within the new postwar boundaries of
Poland . The remaining 80,000 Lemko Rusyns , mostly in the western Lemko region ,
were forcibly deported in 1947 . For details, see Kazimierz Pudlo , Lemkowie: process
wrastania w ~rodowisko Dolnego Sl{lska, 1947-1985 (Wroclaw: Polskie Towarszystwo Ludoznawcze, 1987), esp . pp. 24-34.
�SLOVAKIA
45
In neighboring Poland, identification of Lemkos as Ukrainians
made it easier for the government to deport them, since the
Communist Polish government argued that, as "Ukrainians," the
Lemkos were helping the anti-Communist Ukrainian Insurgent
Army (UPA) under Stepan Bandera, which was held up in the
Carpathians and still fighting the Polish and Soviet authorities after
the end of World War II. South of the mountains in Czechoslovakia,
the administrative imposition of a Ukrainian identity beginning in
1952 proved to be advantageous to those Slovaks who had always
claimed that "their Rusnaks" were really "Slovaks of the Greek
Catholic faith. 1110 In essence, forced Ukrainianization (combined
with the liquidation of the local Greek Catholic Church and forced
collectivization of peasant land) led during the 1950s and 1960s to
the most rapid degree of Slovakization and national assimilation that
Rusyns had ever experienced. It is nonetheless true that during this
same period, the Czechoslovak government provided extensive
funding to create a wide range of cultural organizations that were
Ukrainian in national form but socialist in content. A well-paid local
Ukrainian intelligentsia was even able to attain several significant
scholarly and literary achievements. However, this had little real
effect upon the Rusyn peasant masses in Slovakia. For them, the
choice was simple: if one could not be a Rusyn, better declare
oneself a Slovak than a Ukrainian (which among other things was
associated with the hated East).
Once again Yugoslavia was the exception. The government there
provided both funding and legal guarantees, while the local intelligentsia decided to adopt a Rusyn orientation and to develop the local
speech into a sociologically-complete Rusyn literary language. In
fact, Rusyns became one of the five official nationalities in the
lO Beginning already in 1945, new Rusyn political and cultural organizations carried the name Ukrainian . However, despite their name, they paradoxically functioned
using Russian or vernacular Rusyn as the language of instruction and communication. In 1952, a decree of the Communist Party of Slovakia initiated a policy of
Ukrainianization that banned use of the term Rusyn and replaced Russian with
Ukrainian as the language of instruction in schools . For details, see Pavel Macu,
"National Assimilation: The Case of the Rusyn-Ukrainians of Czechoslovakia,"
East-Central Europe, II, 2 (Pittsburgh, 1975), pp. 101-131.
�46
SLOVAKIA
autonomous province of the Vojvodina.
Yet Yugoslavia was the exception that proved the rule. And the
rule was that after 1945, Rusyns ceased to exist. All Soviet,
Czechoslovak, and Polish documents and publications referred to
the population only as Ukrainian.1 1 Publications in the West, both
by Ukrainian emigre and North American Soviet and East European
specialists, also accepted the view that Rusyns did not exist, or to
quote the New Columbia Encyclopedia (1975): "There is no ethnic
or linguistic distinction between Ukrainians and Ruthenians
[Rusyns] ." "The majority of the population [of Transcarpathia] is
Ukrainian." 12
The Current Situation
Then came the 1980s. The first signs of change came in Poland,
where the Lemko Rusyns - both those who were dispersed in the
"West" of that country as well as about 10,000 who had managed to
return to the Carpathian homeland - began to gather at annual cultural festivals. These "unofficial" festivals received no government
financial support, but by the same token they were not under any
ideological control. As a result, the Lemkos began to revive the idea
that they were neither Poles nor Ukrainians, but rather part of a
distinct Slavic people closely related to Rusyns living south of the
mountains in Slovakia. The Lemkos seemed to be acting in isolation
and for several years that was , indeed, the case.1 3
Later came the changes brought about by the November 1989
Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. New initiative committees
were founded that were often dominated by individuals who had not
11 Whereas the idea of a Rusyn nationality in the Carpathians was not recognized by
schools and official circles in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries, they have
recognized the Rusyns (Rusnaks) of Yugoslavia as a distinct ethnic group with its
own literary language . Cf. A.E. Suprun and A .M. Kaljuta, Vvedenie v slavjanskuju
filologiju (Minsk: Vy§ej§aja §kola, 1981), pp . 137-139.
12 "Ruthenia," in the New Columbia Encyclopedia , ed. William H. Harris and Judith
S. Levey, eds. (New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1975), p. 2383.
l3 On the Lemko-Rusyn revival, see the series of articles in the Carpatho-Rusyn
American, X and XI (Fairview, NJ ., 1987-88).
�SLOVAKIA
47
been associated with the Communist regime. At first, the initiative
committees tried to transform (they would say democratize) the older
Ukrainian organizations, but when that failed they established their
own Rusyn organizations and publications.
At the very same time, in neighboring Transcarpathia, the first
Rusyn-oriented organization to exist anywhere in Carpathian Rus'
since World War II was established in February 1990 in the oblast's
administrative center of Uzhorod. Known as the Society of Carpatho-Rusyns (Tovarystvo Karpats'kych Rusyniv) and with branches
throughout Transcarpathia, its goals were at first of a cultural and
ecological nature - to promote and preserve knowledge of local history and customs. But before long, the Society moved on to political
demands, in particular the recognition of Rusyn as a distinct nationality and the return of the autonomous status of Subcarpathian Rus',
a status which they argued was illegally taken away in 1945.
Before 1990 came to a close, a total of five new Rusyn organizations had come into existence where Rusyns live. Aside from the
Society of Carpatho-Rusyns in Ukrainian Transcarpathia were the
Rusyn Renaissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda) in Medzilaborce,
Czechoslovakia (est. March 1990); the Lemko Association (Stovarysynja Lemkiv) in Legnica, Poland (est. April 1990); the Society of
Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' (Spolecnost pratel Podkarpatske
Rusi) in Prague (est. October 1990); and the Ruska Matka (Rusyn
Matka) in Ruski Kerestur, Yugoslavia (est. December 1990). By the
spring of 1991, a sixth one was established, this time in Hungary:
the Rusyn Organization in Hungary (Magyarorszagi Ruszinok Szervezete) in Budapest (est. May 1991). Most of these organizations
have their own Rusyn-language newspaper or magazine, 14 or they
have access to existing publications. All five organizations have put
forth basically the same demands: that Rusyns be recognized as a
distinct nationality; that a Rusyn literary language be codified and
eventually be used in schools as a medium of instruction; and that
14 These include: Besida (Legnica, Poland, 1989-present); Otcyj chram (Uzhorod,
1990-91); Podkarpatski Rus (Prague, 1991-present); Rusyn (Medzilaborce ,
Czechoslovakia, 1990-present); Narodny novyntj (Pre§ov, 1991-present).
�48
SLOVAKIA
Rusyns be guaranteed full rights as a national minority in the
countries where they live or, in the case of Transcarpathia, that
Rusyns be recognized as the dominant indigenous nationality.
As in all new or revived movements, the Rusyn orientation must
first be able to make itself known to the constituency it purports to
represent. This is inherently problematic, because with the exception
of Yugoslavia, nowhere do Rusyns control the local media. Their
message, or at least an awareness of their movement's existence, has
been helped less by their own publications than by the fierce
polemics that have filled the non-Rusyn press in Poland, former
Czechoslovakia, and most especially former Soviet Transcarpathia.
This is because from the moment the first Rusyn activity began,
local pro-Ukrainian activists attacked the Rusyn orientation as
"anachronistic," "ahistorical," "unenlightened," "in the service of
American imperialists," and "treacherous" to the Ukrainian nation. 15
As a result, more attention of a semi-sensationalist journalistic nature was given the Rusyn problem than might otherwise have been the
case. The Czech and Slovak press also paid much - although more
rational - attention to the Rusyn-Ukrainian debate, especially in the
context of the nationality question that concerned Czechoslovak
society as a whole.
Whatever latent isolation Rusyn leaders in their respective countries may have still felt was overcome in March 1991, when, at the
initiative of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, the first World Congress of Rusyns was convened in Medzilaborce, Czechoslovakia.
Indeed, despite a history of interaction between Rusyn communities
in the homeland as well as the immigration in America during the
twentieth century, this was, in fact, the first time representatives
from all countries where Rusyns live (Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
15 The best (or worst) examples of the anti-Rusyn polemical attacks comes from
scholars in the former Soviet Ukrainian intellectual establishment: Pavlo Cucka,
"Kak rusiny stali ukraincami," Zakarpatskaja pravda (U:lhorod), September 12-16,
1989; Vasyl' Mel'nyk, "Neorusynstvo i joho interpretatory," Zakarpats'ka pravda
(U:lhorod), August 18, 21, 22, 24, 1990; Jurij Balega, "Rusynstvo: ideolohy i
pokrovyteli," ibid., September 6,7 ,9, 1990; and Oleksa Myfanyc, "To chto :le vony?:
do idejnych vytokiv novitn'oho 'karpatorusynstva'," Literatuma Ukrajina (Kiev),
January 17, 1991.
�SLOVAKIA
49
Yugoslavia, the United States) gathered together in one place. The
congress constituted itself as a permanent umbrella organization, and
its very existence had an enormous impact on instilling Rusyn
national pride in the over 300 persons who attended, not to mention
innumerable others who read about it through the generally widespread press coverage.1 6
It is interesting to note that one week after the congress took
place, Czechoslovakia conducted its decennial census in which
people for the first time since World War II had the right to answer
that they were of Rusyn nationality. Despite problems with the
manner in which the nationality questionwas asked and subsequently classified, in Slovakia 17,000 persons responded they were
Rusyns as compared to 14,000 Ukrainians. 17 This raises the question of numbers. Observers will legitimately ask just how many
people identify as Rusyns? And even among those who do respond
Rusyn, does use of such a term necessarily mean they are denying a
possible simultaneous identification as Ukrainians? At this point,
there is no way to know the precise answers to those questions. All
we know is that in Slovakia, when given a chance in March 1991, of
those people of East Slavic background who did not identify as
Slovak and who had the choice between a Rusyn or Ukrainian identity, 55 percent chose Rusyn. As for the number of Rusyns in Poland and Ukrainian Transcarpathia, we simply do not know at this
stage, nor do we have any indications, such as census data, scientific
polling, or membership in political parties, that might help to provide
a reasonable estimate.
What we can be certain of, however, is that after forty years of
Communist rule, Rusyns have not gone away. Today, there are
Rusyn organizations, Rusyn publications, and a relatively wide
range of writers, teachers, professionals, and peasants who continue
to articulate in the press and at public manifestations their belonging
16 Information on the First World Congress as well as its official declaration are
found in the Carpatho--Rusyn American , XIV, 2 and 3 (Fairview, NJ., 1991). pp . 7-9
and 8-9.
17 Mykola Mu§ynka, "Skil'ky rusyniv-ukrajinciv u Slovaccyni? ," Svoboda (Jersey
City, NJ.), July 19, 1991.
�50
SLOVAKIA
to a distinct Rusyn people.1 8
Protection for Rusyns in the Future
As with many minorities, the future of their survival depends on
the willingness of the governments in the states where they live to
provide them with adequate legal protection and perhaps financial
assistance for their national development. In this regard, the Rusyns
need to inform and constantly to remind the international community
that they exist. In tum, Rusyns should be able to expect that the
international community will monitor their status and, if necessary,
put pressure on the governments of the Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia, in order to ensure that their national rights are
protected.
In fact, all four states in which Rusyns live have already ratified
several agreements pertaining to national minorities at recent meetings of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe
(CSCE). Of particular importance for Rusyns were the decisions
reached in·June 1990 at the Copenhagen meeting of the CSCE .. At
Copenhagen it was agreed that "to belong to a national minority is a
matter of a person's individual choice and no disadvantage may arise
from the exercise of such choice." Moreover, "persons belonging to
national minorities can exercise and enjoy their rights individually as
well as in community with other members of their group. 1119
This means that regardless how scholars or governments might
define Rusyns, if there are individuals and/or groups who call themselves by that name and who believe they constitute a distinct natio18 Among the best known of these to date are: in Transcarpathia , the writers
Volodymyr Fedyny§ynec', Ivan Petrovcij, and Vasylij Socka, and the political
activists Mychajlo Tomcanij, Petro Hodma§, and Vasyl' Zajac; in Czechoslovakia,
the head of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, Vasyl' Turok, and the advisor to the
Slovak government on nationality affairs, Ivan Bicko, and the editor Aleksander
Zozuljak; in Poland, the poets Petro Trochanovskij and Olena Due , and the head of
the Lemko Association , Andrij Kopca; and in Yugoslavia, the director of the Ruske
Slovo publishing house, Ljubomir Medje§i, and the writers Djura Papharhaj and
Natalja Duda§.
19 Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human
Dimension of the CSCE (Copenhagen, 1990), pp. 40--41, paragraphs 32 and 32.6.
�SLOVAKIA
51
nality , they have a right to do so and to be recognized as Rusyns by
the governments of the countries in which they live. The Copenhagen agreement also recognized the role of non-governmental
organizations in promoting the interests of national minorities, and it
called on the participating states to assure that the teaching of history
and culture in the educational establishments "will also take account
of the history and culture of national minorities. 1120 At a follow-up
CSCE meeting in Geneva (July 1991), member states accepted the
provisions of a special report which guaranteed the right of national
minorities to participate in non-governmental organizations outside
their country of residence. The report reaffirmed as well the principle
that individuals or organizations representing national minorities be
allowed "unimpeded contacts ... across frontiers ... with persons
with whom they share a common ethnic or national origin." 21
Finally, at the most recent CSCE meeting held in Moscow
(September-October 1991), member states reaffirmed the agreements reached at all previous meetings and agreed further that
"commitments undertaken in the field of the human dimension of the
CSCE [including those pertaining to national minorities] are matters
of direct legitimate concern to all participating States and do not
belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the State concemed." 22
Before looking specifically at what Rusyns need in each country
to protect and guarantee their future existence, it is necessary to
clarify the issue of international boundaries. In the Carpathian homeland, Rusyns live within the borders of three states, and at least until
late 1992 there was discussion in the Czech , Slovak, and Transcarpathian press about certain political activists who demanded the
return of Ukraine's Transcarpathian oblast (historic Subcarpathian
Rus') to Czechoslovakia. 23 There was even talk that Transcarpathia
20 Ibid., p. 41 , paragraph 34.
21 Report of the CSCE Meeting of Experts on National Minorities (Geneva , 1991) , p.
10 .
22 Document of the Moscow Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of
the CSCE (Moscow, 1991 ), p. 2.
23 The Republican party in Czechoslovakia led by Dr. Miroslav SIMek had as one of
its goals the "return of Subcarpathian Rus"' to Czechoslovakia. "Zpl!t do Ceskoslovenska," Republika (Prague), October 18-24, 1990; "Rozhovor s pi'edsedou SPR-
�52
SLOVAKIA
might be returned to Hungary or divided between Hungary and
Czechoslovakia. In fact, most of these propositions were little more
than the speculations of individuals that were blown out of proportion by political rivals and by journalists seeking to report a good
story .24 The Czecho--Slovak federal government publicly declared
that it "cannot be concerned with the fate" of Transcarpathia.25 With
the end of Czechoslovakia in December 1992, the question of
unification has become moot. As for the Rusyn organizations that
have come into existence in 1990, none of them nor the World
Congress of Rusyns that met in 1991 has ever voiced any demand
for border changes. On the contrary, all the new organizations as
well as· the vast majority of Rusyn spokespersons wherever they live
warn against tampering with existing international boundaries.
On the other hand, the Society of Carpatho--Rusyns in Transcarpathia has called openly for the return of the status of automony that
Subcarpathian Rus' did enjoy during the interwar years. 26 In order
to determine the views of the local population, the society, joined by
other minority organizations, called for a question on Transcarpathian autonomy to be added to the referendum on Ukrainian indeRS, Ph Dr. Miroslavem Shidkem," ibid., August, 1991. The head of the National
Socialist party, C. Cejka, stated that Czechoslovak jurisdiction still applies to Subcarpathian Rus' . "NSS chtc!jf Podkarpatskou Rus, "Lidova demokracie (Prague), September 3, 1991.
24 Jaromfr Hoi'ec of the Society of Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' in Prague and wellknown publicist has written about the recent political activism in Transcarpathia in
numerous articles in the Czech press, which imply that the local population would
be sympathetic to re-unification with Czechoslovakia. Cf. his recent articles in Lidova demokracie (Prague): "Freedom for Subcarpathian Rus"' (September 7, 1991);
"Czechs in Subcarpathia" (September 18, 1991); and "Subcarpathia Calls For an
Independent Republic" (September 20, 1991).
The Hungarian press has also followed closely the demands for Transcarpathian
autonomy: "Ruszin koztlirsaslig Klirplitaljlin, "Magyar hfrlap (Budapest), September
10, 1991; "A ruszinok kovetelese: Jegyen Klirplitalja koztlirsaslig! , "Nap/6 (Debrecen), September 3, 1991.
25 The quote is attributed to Czechoslovakia's foreign minister, Jiff Dienstbier, in
"Svobodu pro Podkarpatskou Rus," Lidova demokracie, September 9, 1991.
26 The text of the declaration, which was sent to the Soviet president Mikhail
Gorbachev , to the Supreme Soviets of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR, and to the
United Nations, appeared first in the Society's newspaper, Otey} chram (SeptemberOctober, 1990) . It is available in English translation in the Carpatho-Rusyn American, XIV, 1 (Fairview , NJ., 1991), pp 4-5 .
�SLOVAKIA
53
pendence that was held on December 1, 1991 .27 There was a large
voter tum-out, with 92.6 percent favoring Ukrainian independence
and 78 percent self-rule for Transcarpathia. 28 The issue of Transcarpathian autonomy elicited great interest in neighboring countries,
although this is, in fact, an internal issue for whatever kind of
government and state structure is finally established in what until
recently was the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In short,
Transcarpathia has been and should for the foreseeable future remain
a part of Ukraine.
However, as a sovereign member of the international community, Ukraine must, in tum, guarantee the individual and corporate
rights of Rusyns - or those citizens of Ukraine who wish to call
themselves Rusyns. It is true that the Ukrainian government has
already provided guarantees for national minorities living on its
territory: Russians, Jews, Poles, Germans, Tatars, etc. To this list
must be added Rusyns. This would mean that the "official," or one
might say traditional, Ukrainian view of the Rusyns has to change.
Namely, Ukrainian authorities must accept the fact that within its
boundaries, primarily in its Transcarpathian oblast, there are people
who define themselves as Rusyns in the sense of a nationality distinct from Ukrainians. Such people should have the right to declare
themselves in their passports and internal documents as Rusyns, and
the state census bureau should publish data on the number of
persons who identify as Rusyns and not simply classify them - as
has been done until now - as Ukrainians. 29 If such guarantees are
27 "Rezoljucija mityngu Tovarystva Karpats'kych Rusyniv z pytannja nacional'noho
vidrod!ennja rusyns'koho narodu i vidnovlennja statusu Pidkarpats'koho kraju ,
Mukacevo, 01.09.1991," Molod' Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), September 14, 1991, p. 4.
28 Paul Robert Magocsi, "Rusyns Regain Their Autonomy," Ukrainian Canadian
Herald (Toronto), March 16, 1992, p. 7.
29 Soviet guidelines used by the State Committee for Statistics in order to classify
answers in the census reports were determined largely on recommendations from
authorities in individual republics as well as from the Institute of Ethnography and
the Institute of Linguistics of the Soviet Academy of Sciences. SeeSJovari nacional'nostej i jazykov dlja kodirovanija otvetov na 8 i 9 voprosy perepisnych Jistov
(Moscow: Gosudarstvennyj komitet SSSR po statistike, 1988).
It is interesting to note that a recent report by the Institute of Ethnography (No.
14110/2171, dated February 6, 1990) stated: "It is theoretically possible to con-
�54
SLOVAKIA
provided, there is no reason why Rusyns in Transcarpathia could
not remain Rusyns as well as function as full-fledged citizens of a
sovereign and democratic Ukrainian state. Indeed, independent
Ukraine has recently become a member of the Conference in
Security and Cooperation in Europe, which obliges it to accept and
implement the principles of the Copenhagen and other agreements
on national minorities outlined above.
Following the trend that has taken hold in the former Soviet
Union, it would seem desirable that the new Ukrainian state become
a decentralized entity in which each of its component regions would
have a large degree of automony in economic and cultural matters .30
Thus, questions such as what language might be taught in elementary schools, or what kind of national orientation should be adopted
by regional cultural and educational institutions, or what amount of
funding might be given to Rusyn-oriented groups, are all decisions
that would be made by the people's assembly in Uzhorod and not in
Kiev. Of course, it goes without saying that the free movement of
peoples across borders with neighboring Rusyn regions in Slovakia
and Poland must be guaranteed. Fortunately, this possibility exists
already, albeit with a waiting time at border crossings that every day
of the week averages between 15 and 20 hours.
As for neighboring Slovakia, the situation of Rusyns, especially
since the November 1989 Velvet Revolution, is much better than in
either Ukrainian Transcarpathia or Poland. Initially, the Slovak
government (generally through its Ministry of Culture) and the
former Czecho-Slovak federal government (through allotment of
discretionary funds) provided only ad hoc grants to the new Rusyn
organizations and publications. Normal budgetary allotments of the
Slovak government intended for its East Slavic Rusyn/Ukrainian
elude that Rusyns can be considered at the same level as Russians , Ukrainians , and
Belorussians, and that they are not a part of any of those groups ." (document in the
author's possession) .
30 Discussions regarding the restructuring of the Ukraine have been going on for the
past few years . Neighbouring Galicia as well as Transcarpathia feel confident that
each could do much better economically if it were independent of the centre in Kiev .
Cf. Ivan Hrancak, "Vidnovleni haluzky karpats'koho kraju : Ukrajina federatyvna?,"
No vyny Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), February 6, 1991 .
�SLOVAKIA
55
minority continued to go to the Union of Rusyn-Ukrainians of
Czechoslovakia (SRUC), that is, to the Ukrainian-oriented cultural
organization that is the direct descendant (still with largely the same
leadership) as the formerly Communist-dominated Cultural Union
of Ukrainian Workers (KSUT). Slovak government funding
through other ministries also supported in Presov several Ukrainian
university departments and institutes at Safarik University , a
Ukrainian radio station, and a Ukrainian publishing house, as well
as the Museum of Ukrainian Culture (recently renamed the
Aleksander Pavlovy Regional Museum) in Svidnik. As of 1993 ,
two Rusyn-oriented organizations also receive a normal budgetary
allotment. These include the Aleksander Duchnovyc Theater (formerly the Ukrainian National Theater) which is of a Rusyn orientation and the Rusyn Renasissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda), both
based in Presov.
The Slovak government now recognizes that there are two
clearly-defined national orientations - Rusyn and Ukrainian - and
that if support for national minorities is to continue in Slovakia, then
funding should be provided to Rusyn as well as Ukrainian organizations. But how should the government divide a financial allotment
among its East Slavic minority, which until recently has been designated only as Ukrainian? The Slovak government has opted for what
seems the most reasonable solution. It has accepted the percentages
revealed in the results of the 1991 census, and, therefore, has provided roughly 50 percent financial support to Rusyn cultural organizations and media and 50 percent to Ukrainian cultural organizations, schools, and its media.
The question of schools in Slovakia is particularly problematic,
because beginning in the 1960s the language of instruction in the
vast majority of Rusyn-inhabited villages was changed - at the request of parents themselves - from Ukrainian to Slovak. Moreover,
as part of a consolidation process during the past two decades, many
small elementary schools in Rusyn-inhabited villages were closed.
Even if private or public elementary schools will be reopened in
Rusyn villages, it is likely that Slovak will be the language of instruction. The Slovak ministry of education, however, should
�56
SLOVAKIA
provide teachers and textbooks in Rusyn or in Ukrainian for those
villages that may submit such requests. Most important, the standard
Slovak-language history textbooks used throughout Slovakia
should include an adequate discussion of the history and culture of
Rusyns and other minorities which will be of benefit to all students.
This would be in keeping with the CSCE agreement reached in
Copenhagen, which - along with other "international treaties on
human rights and freedoms" - are, according to the new consitution
of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, "universally binding on
its territory and supercede its own laws."31
The Rusyns, or Lemko Rusyns of Poland perhaps need the most
help. Not only is the majority of Lemko Rusyns scattered throughout the western and northern regions of Poland, but their fledgling
pro-Rusyn organization, the Lemko Association with its amateur
theatrical troupe, and the older Lemkovyna folk ensemble receive no
financial support at all from the Polish government, either in the
form of an annual budgetary allotment or ad hoc grants. Whatever
government funds assigned to national minority cultural activity are
given, they invariably go to the Union of Ukrainians in Poland
(Ob'jednannja Ukrajinciv Pollsci), the direct descendant of the
Communist-dominated Ukrainian Socio-Cultural Society (USKT).
Support for the new Union of Ukrainians must continue, especially
since most Ukrainians in Poland are not originally from nor do they
live in the Carpathian region. On the otherhand, Lemko Rusyns
must also be recognized as a distinct national minority and receive a
fair share of funding.
How to determine what is a "fair share" will, of course, be difficult, since Poland does not even have nationality as a category on its
decennial census questionnaires. Perhaps a referendum attached to
the next national vote could include a question that lists all the
national groups in Poland and asks the respondent to which one
he/she would wish to assign a portion of their taxes for cultural
31 Cf. Section 2 of the Constitutional Act of January 9, 1991, instituting the charter
of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as a Constitutional Act of the Federal Assembly of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic .
�SLOVAK.IA
57
activity. This would be somewhat similar to municipalities in Canada
that ask their residents to indicate whether they want their tax dollars
to be assigned to public schools or to separate (Catholic) schools.
Whatever the mechanism decided upon, in keeping with its commitments as a member state of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Polish government is obliged to recognize
Lernko Rusyns as a distinct national minority and to provide funding
for Lernko cultural organizations and Lernko-language schools in
those communities that demand them.
Lastly, we turn to the situation in Yugoslavia. Ever since World
War II, the Yugoslav policy of equality for its six component
republics and support for the national minorities that live within
them has encouraged the Croatian Republic and, in particular, the
Vojvodina Autonomous Region of the Serbian Republic to finance
liberally Rusyn cultural and educational activity. It is to be expected
that when the republics of Yugoslavia sort out their present
difficulties, the republics of Croatia and, in particular, Serbia will
continue their judicious support and protection of their respective
Rusyn minorities.
Conclusion
The Rusyns are one example of the many groups who suffered
under the totalitarian regimes imposed on East Central Europe
during the past four decades. Now that those regimes no longer
exist, there is a real opportunity to correct past injustices and to
assure the future survival of the Rusyns. It is, after all, in the interest
of all four countries where Rusyns live - Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia - to become part of the larger European community.
The way in which those countries resolve the Rusyn issue will, in
part, determine to what degree they are ready for membership in the
new Europe.
��SYMPOSIUM
��
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
1991-92, Vol. 35
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 35 (No. 64-65), 1991-92.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
The Slovak League of America
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
1991-92
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
36
Carpatho-Rusyns: Their
Current Status And Future
Perspectives
PAUL ROBERT MAGOSCI
Who Are The Rusyns?
In 1875, geographers from the old Hungarian Kingdom erected
a monument in a remote region of their country that carried the
following inscription: "Precise instruments have confirmed this
point where the latitude and longitude lines meet as the center of
Europe." 1 Just over a century later, in 1977, the former Soviet
authorities, who had by then ruled the area, erected a second
monument to mark the center of the continent that stretches from the
Arctic shores of Norway in the north to the beaches of Crete in the
south, and from the coast of Ireland in the west to the Ural
Mountains in the east. The precise center where the monuments are
located is near the village of Dilove (formerly Trebusany) in the
foothills of the northcentral Carpathian Mountains that from time
immemorial has been inhabited by an East Slavic people called
Carpatho-Rusyns, or simply Rusyns (sometimes in English: Ruthenians). Thus, in geographic terms, the Rusyns are not a peripheral
group, but rather one whose homeland - Carpathian Rus 1 - is located
literally in the heart of Europe.
According to present day international boundaries, Rusyns live
in more or less compact territory within the boundaries of four
1For a description, see Fedor Korecki, "Stredok Evropi-na Homjici," Nova dumka ,
VIII (21] (Vukovar, Yugoslavia, 1979), pp . 101-102.
SLOVAKIA
37
countries: Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland, and Romania. There is also a
small group of Rusyns in Yugoslavia, descendants of immigrants
who left the Carpathian homeland in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. Statistical data on Rusyns is, depending on the country,
inadequate or completely unavailable. Therefore, we can only speak
in theoretical terms when discussing numbers . In theory, the number
of Rusyns could be as high as 1.2 million people: 977 ,000 in the
Transcarpathian oblast (former Subcarpathian Rus') of the Ukraine;
130,000 in the Presov Region of northeastern Slovakia; 60,000 in
the Lemko Region of southeastern Poland as well as in other parts
of that country; and 30,000 in the Vojvodina (Backa) and the
Croatian republic of former Yugoslavia.2
The Problem of Nomenclature
It is important to keep in mind what is meant by the term Rusyn.
Traditionally, the name Rusyn, or its local variant Rusnak, has been
used by the East Slavic inhabitants of the Carpathian region to describe themselves. However, by the twentieth century, in particular its
second half, the historic names Rusyn/Rusnak were replaced by
others, such as Ukrainian in Soviet Transcarpathia and the Presov
Region of Slovakia, or Lemko in Poland . There are also Rusyns
who have given up identifying with any East Slavic group, and instead associate with the dominant nationality of the country in which
2Since World War II, Rusyns were recorded in official statistics only in Yugoslavia
(21,000 in 1991) , Romania (1,000 in 1977), and most recently in Slovakia (17 ,000
in 1991) . "Vojvodina u tisloch i slovoch," Ruski kalendar 1992 (Novi Sad , 1991), p.
38; Anuarul statistic al Romaniei 1990 (Bucharest, 1990), p. 64; Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic: Preliminary Results of Population and Housing Census (Prague,
1991), pp . 30-3 I. There are also unconfirmed reports that the final published version of the 1991 Czecho-Slovak statistics will indicate 49,000 persons in Slovakia
who reported Rusyn as their mother tongue .
As for the estimates given here, the figure for the Transcarpathian oblast refers
to persons in that region who in the 1991 Ukrainian census were reported as
Ukrainian (the term Rusyn when given by a respondant is recorded as Ukrainian).
The estimates for Slovakia and Poland are from: Paul Robert Magocsi , The Rusyns of
Slovakia (New York, 1993), p. 1-2 and 111-112; and his Historical Atlas of East
Central Europe (Seattle , 1993) , p. 131.
38
SLOVAKIA
they live, such as Polish in Poland or Slovak in Slovakia. These
changes in national self-designation have in some cases come gradually , prompted either by intellectual conviction or by national assimilation, especially among families of nationally-mixed parentage.
In the latter case, children often choose to identify - or are identified
by their parents - with the dominant state nationality, Slovak or
Polish.
More often, however, the change in nomenclature has been the
result of governmental decree in which the name Rusyn was banned
from official usage, as was the case after 1945 in Soviet Transcarpathia and Poland and by the early 1950s in Czechoslovakia. The
result is that today one can find within the same ethnolinguistic
group, within the same village, in some cases even within the same
family, people who will identify as a Rusyn, or a Lemko, or a Ukrainian, or a Slovak, or a Pole. Moreover, in the case of the East Slavic
designations - Rusyn/Rusnak, Lemko, Ukrainian - some people
consider these as synonyms, others as mutually-exclusive terms. In
other words, some people will say that Rusyn is simply the older
historic name for Ukrainian, and that Lemko is a regional name of
Ukrainian, while others are convinced that the names Lemko or Rusnak are regional forms for Rusyn which, in tum, designates a people
that is distinct from the Ukrainian and every other surrounding
nationality.
It should be noted that the estimated figure of 1.2 million Rusyns
given above refers to all people of the same linguistic and ethnographic origin, regardless of how they designate themselves on documents such as internal identity papers, passports, or decennial censuses. Our concern here will be primarily with the present-day Rusyn
movement or with that portion of the group (the precise numbers are
unknown) that considers Rusyns to comprise a distinct people.
Historical Background
It is neither possible nor appropriate to provide here an extensive
outline of Rusyn history. It is necessary, however, to keep a few
historical factors in mind in order to comprehend the current
SLOVAKIA
39
situation.
Rusyns never had their own state or political independence.
Since the Middle Ages, the Rusyn homeland was ruled by Hungary
and Poland or Austria. Nonetheless, during the past century and a
half, they have at various times been recognized by neighboring or
ruling states as having the right to a territorial entity whose existence
was justified on the grounds that it was somehow of and for Rusyns
and that it would have some degree of automony or self-rule. 3 The
first experience in this regard came in late 1849, when in the wake of
the failure of the Hungarian revolution, the Austrian government
divided Hungary into five military and several civil districts. One of
the civil districts (Ungvar/Uzhorod) was based in the Subcarpathian
region and administered by local Rusyn political and cultural
activists . This experiment was to last only a few months.
Much more important was the period of political upheaval that
followed World War I. At that time, in an effort to retain Rusyninhabited lands within Hungary, the new government in Budapest
created, in December 1918, an autonomous Rusyn Land (Rus'ka
Krajina) that continued to function even after a pro-Soviet Communist regime came to power in March 1919.4 Simultaneously, the
recently-founded Czechoslovak government was also courting the
Rusyns, offering them a self-governing province to be called Rusinsko (Rusinia), or Subcarpathian Rus' (Podkarpatska Rus), if they
would join the Czechs and Slovaks in their new state. In May 1919,
the Rusyns accepted the Czechoslovak offer. Most significantly, the
Rusyn issue had reached the international political forum , so that
"the fullest degree of self-government" for "Ruthene territory south
of the Carpathians" was guaranteed by two international treaties at
the Paris Peace Conference (St. Germain-en-Laye, September 10,
3 For further details on Rusyn political entities in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, see Paul Robert Magocsi, The Shaping of a National Identity: Subcarpathian Rus' 1848-1948 (Cambridge, Mass .: Harvard University Press, 1978) . pp
46-47, 93-95 , and 237-245.
4soviet-Marxist literature is fond of elaborating upon the 40 days of Soviet rule in
Transcarpathia. Cf. Borys Spivak and Mychajlo Trojan, 40 nezabutnich dniv: z
istoriji borot'by za vladu Rad na Zakarpatti v 1919 roci (Uzhorod: Karpaty, 1967).
40
SLOVAKIA
1919, and Trianon, June 4, 1920) and by the Czechoslovak constitution (February 29, 1920).
For the next two decades the vast majority of Rusyns - approximately three-fourths the total number at the time - lived in Subcarpathian Rus, a territory that was Rusyn in name, that had its own
Rusyn schools, and that had all the trappings of self-rule including a
governor, a partially-elected diet, a national anthem, and a national
theater. Finally, in late 1938, actual autonomy was granted to
Subcarpathian Rus' (by then renamed Carpatho-Ukraine). Not only
had autonomy been demanded by local politicians, it was also one of
the provisions of the infamous Munich Pact, which led to the
restructuring of Czechoslovakia. The Carpatho-Ukraine was to
function for nearly half a year until the complete liquidation of what
remained of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.
The twentieth century also witnessed three short-lived efforts at
Rusyn independence. The first of these came in 1919, when after
being unsuccessful in their bid to join fellow Rusyns south of the
mountains, the Lernkos living in the former Austrian province of
Galicia created an independent republic that functioned for sixteen
months before its government was arrested in March 1920, by the
authorities of Poland, which became the new ruler over Rusyn lands
north of the Carpathians.5 At the same time, along the eastern edge
of Subcarpathian territory a regional ethnic group known as Hutsuls
established their own republic which lasted four months (FebruaryJune 1919) before being driven out by troops from Romania. The
last unsuccessful attempt came two decades later, when the Carpatho-Ukrainian autonomous government declared symbolically its
independence on the last day of Czechoslovakia's existence (March
15, 1939) before the province was invaded and reannexed to Hungary .6 The point is that although Rusyns may never have had their
5 On the little-known Lemko Republic and its relationship to political thought in
the western Ukrainian lands, see Paul Robert Magocsi,"The Ukrainian Question
Between Poland and Czechoslovakia: The Lernko Rusyn Republic (1918-1920) and
Political Thought in Western Rus'-Ukraine," Nationalities Papers (New York,
forthcoming) .
6 Ukrainian-oriented emigres from Carpatho-Ukraine have put great stress on the
SLOVAKIA
41
own state, they did have for a significant period of time in the twentieth century the experience - and therefore historical memory - of
their own political entity, Subcarpathian Rus', which was recognized
both by the state in which they lived (Czechoslovakia) and by the
international community (Paris Peace Conference, League of
Nations).
Although the Rusyn homeland is located in the geographical
center of Europe, it is at the same time along a cultural borderland. It
is along that great divide between the Catholic West and Orthodox
East, what Riccardo Picchio has classified in the broadest cultural
terms as Slavia romana and Slavia orthodoxa.7 Located where they
are, this division has had a profound effect on the Rusyn psyche.
The very language or series of dialects that Rusyns speak reflect
the influences of both cultural spheres. Thus, while their speech
clearly belongs to the realm of East Slavic languages, much of their
vocabulary, pronounciational stress, and even syntax is West Slavic.
The cultural divide is most graphically evident in what is for
traditional Rusyn culture the all-important factor of religion. Some
Rusyns are Orthodox, but the majority, at least during the past two
centuries, is Catholic, or more precisely Greek Catholic. These
confessional differences reflect a whole mind-set that is either western - or eastern-oriented. The eastern mind-set tends to surrender
the self to fate in the hope that the Christian God and his intercessors, Christ and the Virgin Mary, might somehow alleviate the
burdens of this earthly life. In contrast, the western mind-set seems
March I 5, I 939 declaration of independence, arguing that it revealed how the
Ukrainian orientation had supposedly won the hearts and minds of the entire
population even before the Soviets arrived in the region in late 1944 . Cf. Peter G.
Stercho, Diplomacy of Double Morality: Europe's Crossroads in Carpatho- Ukraine ,
1919-1939 (New York: Carpathian Research Centre , 1971) . This view is also being
promoted in the Ukraine since the onset of the Gorbachev era. See the minutes of the
RUCH meeting held in the former Carpathi-Ukrainian capitol of Chust to coincide
with the 52nd anniversary of the one-day of independence: "4 sesija Velykoji Rady
Ruchu," Visnyk Ruchu, no . 4 (Kiev, 1990).
7Riccardo Picchio, "Guidelines for the Comparative Study of the Language Question
Among the Slavs," in Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, Vol.I, ed. Riccardo
Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt (New Haven , Conn .: Yale Concilium on International
and Area Studies, 1984), pp. 1-42.
42
SLOVAKIA
to feel that if an individual receives education or political training, he
or she can somehow put their lives in order and, therefore, be able to
have some control over destiny .
The east-west dichotomy in the Rusyn psyche also impinges on
attitudes toward nationai identity. The eastern orientation tends to
think in universalistic terms and be satisfied with viewing Rusyns as
part of a single East Slavic Orthodox religious and cultural world.
The western orientation - epitomized by the very distinctiveness of
Greek Catholics from other Catholics - accepts the idea of national
and linguistic particularity. Universalism versus particularism are
attitudes that greatly influenced Rusyn political and cultural leaders ,
especially regarding the nationality question.
Being a stateless people, Rusyns have had, at least until the second half of the twentieth century , to depend on their leaders, the
intelligentsia, to determine the precise direction of their national revival . The Rusyn national revival began during the second half of the
nineteenth century and culminated during the interwar years, by
which time it had evolved into a comprehensive movement concerned with political, cultural, and social issues. Most of the nationalist intelligentsia did agree on one basic premise: that Rusyns are
East Slavs and that their linguistic and cultural traditions were based
in the east, albeit with pronounced western influences. What they
could not agree upon, however, was whether Rusyns were a branch
of the Russian nationality, or of the Ukrainian nationality, or whether they formed a distinct fourth East Slavic Rusyn nationality. Not
surprisingly, debates about national and linguistic orientation quickly
became caught up in local partisan politics. Politicians had their own
agendas, and they more often than not made opportunistic use of the
nationality question in order to promote party or other ideological
interests.
As for the nationalist intelligentsia, they easily fulfilled the precepts of all activists in the formative stages of national movements.
Namely, they had no difficulty using history to formulate an ideology that was able to convince people they were either Russian,
SLOVAKIA
43
Ukrainian, or Rusyn. 8 The debate over the national orientation of the
Rusyns was not yet resolved before the outbreak of World War II,
despite the achievements during the interwar years of the Ukrainian
orientation in the largest Rusyn territory , Subcarpathian Rus' (Carpath~Ukraine).
In a sense, the year 1939 marked an end to the natural evolution
of discussions about a Rusyn nationality. This is because beginning
in that year and lasting for half a century, the nationality debate was
effectively stifled by state intervention. This happened first under
fascist regimes in Hungary(which reannexed Subcarpathian Rus'), in
Slovakia (which retained the Presov Region), and in the Germanruled Generalgouvernement (which ruled the Lemko Region); and
then as a result of Soviet rule after 1945, whether directly in Subcarpathian Rus' (renamed Transcarpathian Ukraine) or through proSoviet Communist governments in Poland and Czechoslovakia. As
is well known, the Communist era with its anti-democratic approach
to the nationality question was to last until the revolutions of 1989
and 1991. The only exception was the case of the small group of
Rusyns in the Vojvodina region of Yugoslavia. Although a Communist regime was installed in their land as well, the Yugoslav
government allowed the Vojvodinian Rusyns to decide their own
national orientation.
This was not to be the case for the Rusyns living in the Carpathian homeland. In short, the Soviet regime declared that further
debate was unnecessary because the nationality question had supposedly been resolved long ago. Based on a decision made by the
Communist party (Bolshevik) of the Ukraine taken in December
8Generally, the Russian-oriented intelligentsia, or Russophiles, were Orthodox
adherents or sympathizers who believed in the unity of Eastern Slavic Christian
culture represented by three branches of the East Slavs - Great Russians , Belorussians, and Little Russians (including Carpatho-Rusyns) - all considered to be
part of one common Russian (ob§cerusskiJ) nationality . The Ukrainian--0riented and
Rusyn--0riented intelligentsias were western--0riented Greek Catholics who believed
in various degrees of national and/or regional differentiation - the Ukrainophiles
arguing for the unity of one people that stretched "from the Carpathians to the
Caucasus"; the Rusynophiles arguing that the Rus' population in the Carpathians
(from the Poprad to Tysa rivers) comprises a separate people.
44
SLOVAKIA
1925, all Rusyns , regardless what they may have called themselves,
were declared to be Ukrainians. Any who opposed the Ukrainian
viewpoint were accused of having "anti-historical" and, therefore,
"anti-Soviet" opinions; they often were removed from their jobs;
and they might even have been arrested as "counterrevolutionaries."
Closely connected with these developments was the liquidation first
in Soviet Transcarpathia (1949) and then in Czechoslovakia (1950)
of the Greek Catholic Church, which by the mid-twentieth century
had become the stronghold of the Rusyn orientation.
When Communist regimes were established in Poland (1945)
and Czechoslovakia (1948), they adapted the Soviet line and decreed
that the Ru syn minorities within their borders were Ukrainians.
They forbade Rusyn publications and the use of the name Rusyn in
official documents. The situation was particularly bad in Poland. Not
only were the Lemko Rusyns declared to be Ukrainians, they were
forcibly deported en masse from their Carpathian homeland in 1947
and scattered throughout the former German lands of post-1945
western and northern Poland.9
It is ironic to note the advantages that accrued to the governments in question through their use - or, more properly, misuse - of
the name Ukrainian. For example, by declaring that the population
was Ukrainian, this allowed the Soviet Union to justify the annexation in 1945 of Subcarpathian Rus', a territory that throughout the
war it had agreed should be returned to Czechoslovakia. Nationalist
ideology could now conveniently serve Stalin's political designs on
the international stage. In any case, how could the Soviet worker's
state refuse the request of fellow "Ukrainian workers" in Transcarpathia who "voluntarily" were demanding to be united with the
"Mother Ukraine"?
9 The actual deportations took place in two phases. Between 1945 and 1946, about
200,000 Lemko Rusyns "voluntarily" took up the offer to resettle eastward in the
Ukraine in exchange for Poles who moved west within the new postwar boundaries of
Poland . The remaining 80,000 Lemko Rusyns , mostly in the western Lemko region ,
were forcibly deported in 1947 . For details, see Kazimierz Pudlo , Lemkowie: process
wrastania w ~rodowisko Dolnego Sl{lska, 1947-1985 (Wroclaw: Polskie Towarszystwo Ludoznawcze, 1987), esp . pp. 24-34.
SLOVAKIA
45
In neighboring Poland, identification of Lemkos as Ukrainians
made it easier for the government to deport them, since the
Communist Polish government argued that, as "Ukrainians," the
Lemkos were helping the anti-Communist Ukrainian Insurgent
Army (UPA) under Stepan Bandera, which was held up in the
Carpathians and still fighting the Polish and Soviet authorities after
the end of World War II. South of the mountains in Czechoslovakia,
the administrative imposition of a Ukrainian identity beginning in
1952 proved to be advantageous to those Slovaks who had always
claimed that "their Rusnaks" were really "Slovaks of the Greek
Catholic faith. 1110 In essence, forced Ukrainianization (combined
with the liquidation of the local Greek Catholic Church and forced
collectivization of peasant land) led during the 1950s and 1960s to
the most rapid degree of Slovakization and national assimilation that
Rusyns had ever experienced. It is nonetheless true that during this
same period, the Czechoslovak government provided extensive
funding to create a wide range of cultural organizations that were
Ukrainian in national form but socialist in content. A well-paid local
Ukrainian intelligentsia was even able to attain several significant
scholarly and literary achievements. However, this had little real
effect upon the Rusyn peasant masses in Slovakia. For them, the
choice was simple: if one could not be a Rusyn, better declare
oneself a Slovak than a Ukrainian (which among other things was
associated with the hated East).
Once again Yugoslavia was the exception. The government there
provided both funding and legal guarantees, while the local intelligentsia decided to adopt a Rusyn orientation and to develop the local
speech into a sociologically-complete Rusyn literary language. In
fact, Rusyns became one of the five official nationalities in the
lO Beginning already in 1945, new Rusyn political and cultural organizations carried the name Ukrainian . However, despite their name, they paradoxically functioned
using Russian or vernacular Rusyn as the language of instruction and communication. In 1952, a decree of the Communist Party of Slovakia initiated a policy of
Ukrainianization that banned use of the term Rusyn and replaced Russian with
Ukrainian as the language of instruction in schools . For details, see Pavel Macu,
"National Assimilation: The Case of the Rusyn-Ukrainians of Czechoslovakia,"
East-Central Europe, II, 2 (Pittsburgh, 1975), pp. 101-131.
46
SLOVAKIA
autonomous province of the Vojvodina.
Yet Yugoslavia was the exception that proved the rule. And the
rule was that after 1945, Rusyns ceased to exist. All Soviet,
Czechoslovak, and Polish documents and publications referred to
the population only as Ukrainian.1 1 Publications in the West, both
by Ukrainian emigre and North American Soviet and East European
specialists, also accepted the view that Rusyns did not exist, or to
quote the New Columbia Encyclopedia (1975): "There is no ethnic
or linguistic distinction between Ukrainians and Ruthenians
[Rusyns] ." "The majority of the population [of Transcarpathia] is
Ukrainian." 12
The Current Situation
Then came the 1980s. The first signs of change came in Poland,
where the Lemko Rusyns - both those who were dispersed in the
"West" of that country as well as about 10,000 who had managed to
return to the Carpathian homeland - began to gather at annual cultural festivals. These "unofficial" festivals received no government
financial support, but by the same token they were not under any
ideological control. As a result, the Lemkos began to revive the idea
that they were neither Poles nor Ukrainians, but rather part of a
distinct Slavic people closely related to Rusyns living south of the
mountains in Slovakia. The Lemkos seemed to be acting in isolation
and for several years that was , indeed, the case.1 3
Later came the changes brought about by the November 1989
Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. New initiative committees
were founded that were often dominated by individuals who had not
11 Whereas the idea of a Rusyn nationality in the Carpathians was not recognized by
schools and official circles in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries, they have
recognized the Rusyns (Rusnaks) of Yugoslavia as a distinct ethnic group with its
own literary language . Cf. A.E. Suprun and A .M. Kaljuta, Vvedenie v slavjanskuju
filologiju (Minsk: Vy§ej§aja §kola, 1981), pp . 137-139.
12 "Ruthenia," in the New Columbia Encyclopedia , ed. William H. Harris and Judith
S. Levey, eds. (New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1975), p. 2383.
l3 On the Lemko-Rusyn revival, see the series of articles in the Carpatho-Rusyn
American, X and XI (Fairview, NJ ., 1987-88).
SLOVAKIA
47
been associated with the Communist regime. At first, the initiative
committees tried to transform (they would say democratize) the older
Ukrainian organizations, but when that failed they established their
own Rusyn organizations and publications.
At the very same time, in neighboring Transcarpathia, the first
Rusyn-oriented organization to exist anywhere in Carpathian Rus'
since World War II was established in February 1990 in the oblast's
administrative center of Uzhorod. Known as the Society of Carpatho-Rusyns (Tovarystvo Karpats'kych Rusyniv) and with branches
throughout Transcarpathia, its goals were at first of a cultural and
ecological nature - to promote and preserve knowledge of local history and customs. But before long, the Society moved on to political
demands, in particular the recognition of Rusyn as a distinct nationality and the return of the autonomous status of Subcarpathian Rus',
a status which they argued was illegally taken away in 1945.
Before 1990 came to a close, a total of five new Rusyn organizations had come into existence where Rusyns live. Aside from the
Society of Carpatho-Rusyns in Ukrainian Transcarpathia were the
Rusyn Renaissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda) in Medzilaborce,
Czechoslovakia (est. March 1990); the Lemko Association (Stovarysynja Lemkiv) in Legnica, Poland (est. April 1990); the Society of
Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' (Spolecnost pratel Podkarpatske
Rusi) in Prague (est. October 1990); and the Ruska Matka (Rusyn
Matka) in Ruski Kerestur, Yugoslavia (est. December 1990). By the
spring of 1991, a sixth one was established, this time in Hungary:
the Rusyn Organization in Hungary (Magyarorszagi Ruszinok Szervezete) in Budapest (est. May 1991). Most of these organizations
have their own Rusyn-language newspaper or magazine, 14 or they
have access to existing publications. All five organizations have put
forth basically the same demands: that Rusyns be recognized as a
distinct nationality; that a Rusyn literary language be codified and
eventually be used in schools as a medium of instruction; and that
14 These include: Besida (Legnica, Poland, 1989-present); Otcyj chram (Uzhorod,
1990-91); Podkarpatski Rus (Prague, 1991-present); Rusyn (Medzilaborce ,
Czechoslovakia, 1990-present); Narodny novyntj (Pre§ov, 1991-present).
48
SLOVAKIA
Rusyns be guaranteed full rights as a national minority in the
countries where they live or, in the case of Transcarpathia, that
Rusyns be recognized as the dominant indigenous nationality.
As in all new or revived movements, the Rusyn orientation must
first be able to make itself known to the constituency it purports to
represent. This is inherently problematic, because with the exception
of Yugoslavia, nowhere do Rusyns control the local media. Their
message, or at least an awareness of their movement's existence, has
been helped less by their own publications than by the fierce
polemics that have filled the non-Rusyn press in Poland, former
Czechoslovakia, and most especially former Soviet Transcarpathia.
This is because from the moment the first Rusyn activity began,
local pro-Ukrainian activists attacked the Rusyn orientation as
"anachronistic," "ahistorical," "unenlightened," "in the service of
American imperialists," and "treacherous" to the Ukrainian nation. 15
As a result, more attention of a semi-sensationalist journalistic nature was given the Rusyn problem than might otherwise have been the
case. The Czech and Slovak press also paid much - although more
rational - attention to the Rusyn-Ukrainian debate, especially in the
context of the nationality question that concerned Czechoslovak
society as a whole.
Whatever latent isolation Rusyn leaders in their respective countries may have still felt was overcome in March 1991, when, at the
initiative of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, the first World Congress of Rusyns was convened in Medzilaborce, Czechoslovakia.
Indeed, despite a history of interaction between Rusyn communities
in the homeland as well as the immigration in America during the
twentieth century, this was, in fact, the first time representatives
from all countries where Rusyns live (Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
15 The best (or worst) examples of the anti-Rusyn polemical attacks comes from
scholars in the former Soviet Ukrainian intellectual establishment: Pavlo Cucka,
"Kak rusiny stali ukraincami," Zakarpatskaja pravda (U:lhorod), September 12-16,
1989; Vasyl' Mel'nyk, "Neorusynstvo i joho interpretatory," Zakarpats'ka pravda
(U:lhorod), August 18, 21, 22, 24, 1990; Jurij Balega, "Rusynstvo: ideolohy i
pokrovyteli," ibid., September 6,7 ,9, 1990; and Oleksa Myfanyc, "To chto :le vony?:
do idejnych vytokiv novitn'oho 'karpatorusynstva'," Literatuma Ukrajina (Kiev),
January 17, 1991.
SLOVAKIA
49
Yugoslavia, the United States) gathered together in one place. The
congress constituted itself as a permanent umbrella organization, and
its very existence had an enormous impact on instilling Rusyn
national pride in the over 300 persons who attended, not to mention
innumerable others who read about it through the generally widespread press coverage.1 6
It is interesting to note that one week after the congress took
place, Czechoslovakia conducted its decennial census in which
people for the first time since World War II had the right to answer
that they were of Rusyn nationality. Despite problems with the
manner in which the nationality questionwas asked and subsequently classified, in Slovakia 17,000 persons responded they were
Rusyns as compared to 14,000 Ukrainians. 17 This raises the question of numbers. Observers will legitimately ask just how many
people identify as Rusyns? And even among those who do respond
Rusyn, does use of such a term necessarily mean they are denying a
possible simultaneous identification as Ukrainians? At this point,
there is no way to know the precise answers to those questions. All
we know is that in Slovakia, when given a chance in March 1991, of
those people of East Slavic background who did not identify as
Slovak and who had the choice between a Rusyn or Ukrainian identity, 55 percent chose Rusyn. As for the number of Rusyns in Poland and Ukrainian Transcarpathia, we simply do not know at this
stage, nor do we have any indications, such as census data, scientific
polling, or membership in political parties, that might help to provide
a reasonable estimate.
What we can be certain of, however, is that after forty years of
Communist rule, Rusyns have not gone away. Today, there are
Rusyn organizations, Rusyn publications, and a relatively wide
range of writers, teachers, professionals, and peasants who continue
to articulate in the press and at public manifestations their belonging
16 Information on the First World Congress as well as its official declaration are
found in the Carpatho--Rusyn American , XIV, 2 and 3 (Fairview, NJ., 1991). pp . 7-9
and 8-9.
17 Mykola Mu§ynka, "Skil'ky rusyniv-ukrajinciv u Slovaccyni? ," Svoboda (Jersey
City, NJ.), July 19, 1991.
50
SLOVAKIA
to a distinct Rusyn people.1 8
Protection for Rusyns in the Future
As with many minorities, the future of their survival depends on
the willingness of the governments in the states where they live to
provide them with adequate legal protection and perhaps financial
assistance for their national development. In this regard, the Rusyns
need to inform and constantly to remind the international community
that they exist. In tum, Rusyns should be able to expect that the
international community will monitor their status and, if necessary,
put pressure on the governments of the Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia, in order to ensure that their national rights are
protected.
In fact, all four states in which Rusyns live have already ratified
several agreements pertaining to national minorities at recent meetings of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe
(CSCE). Of particular importance for Rusyns were the decisions
reached in·June 1990 at the Copenhagen meeting of the CSCE .. At
Copenhagen it was agreed that "to belong to a national minority is a
matter of a person's individual choice and no disadvantage may arise
from the exercise of such choice." Moreover, "persons belonging to
national minorities can exercise and enjoy their rights individually as
well as in community with other members of their group. 1119
This means that regardless how scholars or governments might
define Rusyns, if there are individuals and/or groups who call themselves by that name and who believe they constitute a distinct natio18 Among the best known of these to date are: in Transcarpathia , the writers
Volodymyr Fedyny§ynec', Ivan Petrovcij, and Vasylij Socka, and the political
activists Mychajlo Tomcanij, Petro Hodma§, and Vasyl' Zajac; in Czechoslovakia,
the head of the Rusyn Renaissance Society, Vasyl' Turok, and the advisor to the
Slovak government on nationality affairs, Ivan Bicko, and the editor Aleksander
Zozuljak; in Poland, the poets Petro Trochanovskij and Olena Due , and the head of
the Lemko Association , Andrij Kopca; and in Yugoslavia, the director of the Ruske
Slovo publishing house, Ljubomir Medje§i, and the writers Djura Papharhaj and
Natalja Duda§.
19 Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human
Dimension of the CSCE (Copenhagen, 1990), pp. 40--41, paragraphs 32 and 32.6.
SLOVAKIA
51
nality , they have a right to do so and to be recognized as Rusyns by
the governments of the countries in which they live. The Copenhagen agreement also recognized the role of non-governmental
organizations in promoting the interests of national minorities, and it
called on the participating states to assure that the teaching of history
and culture in the educational establishments "will also take account
of the history and culture of national minorities. 1120 At a follow-up
CSCE meeting in Geneva (July 1991), member states accepted the
provisions of a special report which guaranteed the right of national
minorities to participate in non-governmental organizations outside
their country of residence. The report reaffirmed as well the principle
that individuals or organizations representing national minorities be
allowed "unimpeded contacts ... across frontiers ... with persons
with whom they share a common ethnic or national origin." 21
Finally, at the most recent CSCE meeting held in Moscow
(September-October 1991), member states reaffirmed the agreements reached at all previous meetings and agreed further that
"commitments undertaken in the field of the human dimension of the
CSCE [including those pertaining to national minorities] are matters
of direct legitimate concern to all participating States and do not
belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the State concemed." 22
Before looking specifically at what Rusyns need in each country
to protect and guarantee their future existence, it is necessary to
clarify the issue of international boundaries. In the Carpathian homeland, Rusyns live within the borders of three states, and at least until
late 1992 there was discussion in the Czech , Slovak, and Transcarpathian press about certain political activists who demanded the
return of Ukraine's Transcarpathian oblast (historic Subcarpathian
Rus') to Czechoslovakia. 23 There was even talk that Transcarpathia
20 Ibid., p. 41 , paragraph 34.
21 Report of the CSCE Meeting of Experts on National Minorities (Geneva , 1991) , p.
10 .
22 Document of the Moscow Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of
the CSCE (Moscow, 1991 ), p. 2.
23 The Republican party in Czechoslovakia led by Dr. Miroslav SIMek had as one of
its goals the "return of Subcarpathian Rus"' to Czechoslovakia. "Zpl!t do Ceskoslovenska," Republika (Prague), October 18-24, 1990; "Rozhovor s pi'edsedou SPR-
52
SLOVAKIA
might be returned to Hungary or divided between Hungary and
Czechoslovakia. In fact, most of these propositions were little more
than the speculations of individuals that were blown out of proportion by political rivals and by journalists seeking to report a good
story .24 The Czecho--Slovak federal government publicly declared
that it "cannot be concerned with the fate" of Transcarpathia.25 With
the end of Czechoslovakia in December 1992, the question of
unification has become moot. As for the Rusyn organizations that
have come into existence in 1990, none of them nor the World
Congress of Rusyns that met in 1991 has ever voiced any demand
for border changes. On the contrary, all the new organizations as
well as· the vast majority of Rusyn spokespersons wherever they live
warn against tampering with existing international boundaries.
On the other hand, the Society of Carpatho--Rusyns in Transcarpathia has called openly for the return of the status of automony that
Subcarpathian Rus' did enjoy during the interwar years. 26 In order
to determine the views of the local population, the society, joined by
other minority organizations, called for a question on Transcarpathian autonomy to be added to the referendum on Ukrainian indeRS, Ph Dr. Miroslavem Shidkem," ibid., August, 1991. The head of the National
Socialist party, C. Cejka, stated that Czechoslovak jurisdiction still applies to Subcarpathian Rus' . "NSS chtc!jf Podkarpatskou Rus, "Lidova demokracie (Prague), September 3, 1991.
24 Jaromfr Hoi'ec of the Society of Friends of Subcarpathian Rus' in Prague and wellknown publicist has written about the recent political activism in Transcarpathia in
numerous articles in the Czech press, which imply that the local population would
be sympathetic to re-unification with Czechoslovakia. Cf. his recent articles in Lidova demokracie (Prague): "Freedom for Subcarpathian Rus"' (September 7, 1991);
"Czechs in Subcarpathia" (September 18, 1991); and "Subcarpathia Calls For an
Independent Republic" (September 20, 1991).
The Hungarian press has also followed closely the demands for Transcarpathian
autonomy: "Ruszin koztlirsaslig Klirplitaljlin, "Magyar hfrlap (Budapest), September
10, 1991; "A ruszinok kovetelese: Jegyen Klirplitalja koztlirsaslig! , "Nap/6 (Debrecen), September 3, 1991.
25 The quote is attributed to Czechoslovakia's foreign minister, Jiff Dienstbier, in
"Svobodu pro Podkarpatskou Rus," Lidova demokracie, September 9, 1991.
26 The text of the declaration, which was sent to the Soviet president Mikhail
Gorbachev , to the Supreme Soviets of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR, and to the
United Nations, appeared first in the Society's newspaper, Otey} chram (SeptemberOctober, 1990) . It is available in English translation in the Carpatho-Rusyn American, XIV, 1 (Fairview , NJ., 1991), pp 4-5 .
SLOVAKIA
53
pendence that was held on December 1, 1991 .27 There was a large
voter tum-out, with 92.6 percent favoring Ukrainian independence
and 78 percent self-rule for Transcarpathia. 28 The issue of Transcarpathian autonomy elicited great interest in neighboring countries,
although this is, in fact, an internal issue for whatever kind of
government and state structure is finally established in what until
recently was the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In short,
Transcarpathia has been and should for the foreseeable future remain
a part of Ukraine.
However, as a sovereign member of the international community, Ukraine must, in tum, guarantee the individual and corporate
rights of Rusyns - or those citizens of Ukraine who wish to call
themselves Rusyns. It is true that the Ukrainian government has
already provided guarantees for national minorities living on its
territory: Russians, Jews, Poles, Germans, Tatars, etc. To this list
must be added Rusyns. This would mean that the "official," or one
might say traditional, Ukrainian view of the Rusyns has to change.
Namely, Ukrainian authorities must accept the fact that within its
boundaries, primarily in its Transcarpathian oblast, there are people
who define themselves as Rusyns in the sense of a nationality distinct from Ukrainians. Such people should have the right to declare
themselves in their passports and internal documents as Rusyns, and
the state census bureau should publish data on the number of
persons who identify as Rusyns and not simply classify them - as
has been done until now - as Ukrainians. 29 If such guarantees are
27 "Rezoljucija mityngu Tovarystva Karpats'kych Rusyniv z pytannja nacional'noho
vidrod!ennja rusyns'koho narodu i vidnovlennja statusu Pidkarpats'koho kraju ,
Mukacevo, 01.09.1991," Molod' Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), September 14, 1991, p. 4.
28 Paul Robert Magocsi, "Rusyns Regain Their Autonomy," Ukrainian Canadian
Herald (Toronto), March 16, 1992, p. 7.
29 Soviet guidelines used by the State Committee for Statistics in order to classify
answers in the census reports were determined largely on recommendations from
authorities in individual republics as well as from the Institute of Ethnography and
the Institute of Linguistics of the Soviet Academy of Sciences. SeeSJovari nacional'nostej i jazykov dlja kodirovanija otvetov na 8 i 9 voprosy perepisnych Jistov
(Moscow: Gosudarstvennyj komitet SSSR po statistike, 1988).
It is interesting to note that a recent report by the Institute of Ethnography (No.
14110/2171, dated February 6, 1990) stated: "It is theoretically possible to con-
54
SLOVAKIA
provided, there is no reason why Rusyns in Transcarpathia could
not remain Rusyns as well as function as full-fledged citizens of a
sovereign and democratic Ukrainian state. Indeed, independent
Ukraine has recently become a member of the Conference in
Security and Cooperation in Europe, which obliges it to accept and
implement the principles of the Copenhagen and other agreements
on national minorities outlined above.
Following the trend that has taken hold in the former Soviet
Union, it would seem desirable that the new Ukrainian state become
a decentralized entity in which each of its component regions would
have a large degree of automony in economic and cultural matters .30
Thus, questions such as what language might be taught in elementary schools, or what kind of national orientation should be adopted
by regional cultural and educational institutions, or what amount of
funding might be given to Rusyn-oriented groups, are all decisions
that would be made by the people's assembly in Uzhorod and not in
Kiev. Of course, it goes without saying that the free movement of
peoples across borders with neighboring Rusyn regions in Slovakia
and Poland must be guaranteed. Fortunately, this possibility exists
already, albeit with a waiting time at border crossings that every day
of the week averages between 15 and 20 hours.
As for neighboring Slovakia, the situation of Rusyns, especially
since the November 1989 Velvet Revolution, is much better than in
either Ukrainian Transcarpathia or Poland. Initially, the Slovak
government (generally through its Ministry of Culture) and the
former Czecho-Slovak federal government (through allotment of
discretionary funds) provided only ad hoc grants to the new Rusyn
organizations and publications. Normal budgetary allotments of the
Slovak government intended for its East Slavic Rusyn/Ukrainian
elude that Rusyns can be considered at the same level as Russians , Ukrainians , and
Belorussians, and that they are not a part of any of those groups ." (document in the
author's possession) .
30 Discussions regarding the restructuring of the Ukraine have been going on for the
past few years . Neighbouring Galicia as well as Transcarpathia feel confident that
each could do much better economically if it were independent of the centre in Kiev .
Cf. Ivan Hrancak, "Vidnovleni haluzky karpats'koho kraju : Ukrajina federatyvna?,"
No vyny Zakarpattja (Uzhorod), February 6, 1991 .
SLOVAKIA
55
minority continued to go to the Union of Rusyn-Ukrainians of
Czechoslovakia (SRUC), that is, to the Ukrainian-oriented cultural
organization that is the direct descendant (still with largely the same
leadership) as the formerly Communist-dominated Cultural Union
of Ukrainian Workers (KSUT). Slovak government funding
through other ministries also supported in Presov several Ukrainian
university departments and institutes at Safarik University , a
Ukrainian radio station, and a Ukrainian publishing house, as well
as the Museum of Ukrainian Culture (recently renamed the
Aleksander Pavlovy Regional Museum) in Svidnik. As of 1993 ,
two Rusyn-oriented organizations also receive a normal budgetary
allotment. These include the Aleksander Duchnovyc Theater (formerly the Ukrainian National Theater) which is of a Rusyn orientation and the Rusyn Renasissance Society (Rusyns'ka Obroda), both
based in Presov.
The Slovak government now recognizes that there are two
clearly-defined national orientations - Rusyn and Ukrainian - and
that if support for national minorities is to continue in Slovakia, then
funding should be provided to Rusyn as well as Ukrainian organizations. But how should the government divide a financial allotment
among its East Slavic minority, which until recently has been designated only as Ukrainian? The Slovak government has opted for what
seems the most reasonable solution. It has accepted the percentages
revealed in the results of the 1991 census, and, therefore, has provided roughly 50 percent financial support to Rusyn cultural organizations and media and 50 percent to Ukrainian cultural organizations, schools, and its media.
The question of schools in Slovakia is particularly problematic,
because beginning in the 1960s the language of instruction in the
vast majority of Rusyn-inhabited villages was changed - at the request of parents themselves - from Ukrainian to Slovak. Moreover,
as part of a consolidation process during the past two decades, many
small elementary schools in Rusyn-inhabited villages were closed.
Even if private or public elementary schools will be reopened in
Rusyn villages, it is likely that Slovak will be the language of instruction. The Slovak ministry of education, however, should
56
SLOVAKIA
provide teachers and textbooks in Rusyn or in Ukrainian for those
villages that may submit such requests. Most important, the standard
Slovak-language history textbooks used throughout Slovakia
should include an adequate discussion of the history and culture of
Rusyns and other minorities which will be of benefit to all students.
This would be in keeping with the CSCE agreement reached in
Copenhagen, which - along with other "international treaties on
human rights and freedoms" - are, according to the new consitution
of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, "universally binding on
its territory and supercede its own laws."31
The Rusyns, or Lemko Rusyns of Poland perhaps need the most
help. Not only is the majority of Lemko Rusyns scattered throughout the western and northern regions of Poland, but their fledgling
pro-Rusyn organization, the Lemko Association with its amateur
theatrical troupe, and the older Lemkovyna folk ensemble receive no
financial support at all from the Polish government, either in the
form of an annual budgetary allotment or ad hoc grants. Whatever
government funds assigned to national minority cultural activity are
given, they invariably go to the Union of Ukrainians in Poland
(Ob'jednannja Ukrajinciv Pollsci), the direct descendant of the
Communist-dominated Ukrainian Socio-Cultural Society (USKT).
Support for the new Union of Ukrainians must continue, especially
since most Ukrainians in Poland are not originally from nor do they
live in the Carpathian region. On the otherhand, Lemko Rusyns
must also be recognized as a distinct national minority and receive a
fair share of funding.
How to determine what is a "fair share" will, of course, be difficult, since Poland does not even have nationality as a category on its
decennial census questionnaires. Perhaps a referendum attached to
the next national vote could include a question that lists all the
national groups in Poland and asks the respondent to which one
he/she would wish to assign a portion of their taxes for cultural
31 Cf. Section 2 of the Constitutional Act of January 9, 1991, instituting the charter
of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as a Constitutional Act of the Federal Assembly of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic .
SLOVAK.IA
57
activity. This would be somewhat similar to municipalities in Canada
that ask their residents to indicate whether they want their tax dollars
to be assigned to public schools or to separate (Catholic) schools.
Whatever the mechanism decided upon, in keeping with its commitments as a member state of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Polish government is obliged to recognize
Lernko Rusyns as a distinct national minority and to provide funding
for Lernko cultural organizations and Lernko-language schools in
those communities that demand them.
Lastly, we turn to the situation in Yugoslavia. Ever since World
War II, the Yugoslav policy of equality for its six component
republics and support for the national minorities that live within
them has encouraged the Croatian Republic and, in particular, the
Vojvodina Autonomous Region of the Serbian Republic to finance
liberally Rusyn cultural and educational activity. It is to be expected
that when the republics of Yugoslavia sort out their present
difficulties, the republics of Croatia and, in particular, Serbia will
continue their judicious support and protection of their respective
Rusyn minorities.
Conclusion
The Rusyns are one example of the many groups who suffered
under the totalitarian regimes imposed on East Central Europe
during the past four decades. Now that those regimes no longer
exist, there is a real opportunity to correct past injustices and to
assure the future survival of the Rusyns. It is, after all, in the interest
of all four countries where Rusyns live - Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland,
and Yugoslavia - to become part of the larger European community.
The way in which those countries resolve the Rusyn issue will, in
part, determine to what degree they are ready for membership in the
new Europe.
SYMPOSIUM
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
Carpatho-Rusyns: Their Current Status and Future Perspectives
Description
An account of the resource
Paul Robert Magosci
Slovakia, Vol. 35 (No. 64-65), 1991-92
pp. 36-57
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Magocsi, Paul Robert, 1945-
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1991-92
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b620bf5179429bfc6dfaa814227e3664.pdf
b0b8bbb833dd36aa1a57c72478e0fa35
PDF Text
Text
28
SLOVAKIA
CA STL~
OF SLOV AKIA
A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval cru;tles is one of
the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centurles during which Slovakia was a frontler bulwark of W estern
European clvlllzaUon agalnst the continuous encroachment of the
rapacious Turks. Llfe was full of romance and of danger.
Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edlflces of the thirteenth
and fourteenth centurles. Tbe dlsastrous Mongol incursion of 1241
proved tbe inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a
period of intenslve building of castles with stone. Thls building activity continued well lnto the seventeeth century and ended with tbe
foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold 1. It was closely
modeled after P alma Nuova in Northern Italy.
By the beglnnlng of the eigbteenth century, lhe medieval castles
no longer fulf!lled th e demands of mllitary technique and as the
danger of further Turkls h invasions ceased, their owners a bandoned
them to live In more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced castles.
A few of the old castles were refashloned and to this day remaln
habltable. One of the largest and most lnteresting of the latter is at
Bojnice wblcb has no less tban 21S balls and rooms, is enclrcled by
wlde moats, and has several massive and lofty towers.
As to tJhe number and the picturesgueness of ruins, the Váh
river compares favorably to tbe Rhlne. Tbe setting is possl,bly even
more romantic and certalnly more primltlve. Many of the rulns are
flanked by dense forests. There are some tbirty of tbem, built mostly
upon steep crags overlooking tlhe rlver. In the Middle Ages they were
Quite lmpregnable. Standlng aloof from buman habitatlons of today,
their very lsolation transports tbe vlsltor in spirit to bygone centuries
of armored knlghts and robber barons. In those years royal authority
was rather dlfficult to enforce. Tbe owner was truly lord over the
Iand whlch bis eye could survey.
The mightiest and the most accessible of the citadels on the
Váh is at Trenčin. Between the years 1301-1321 lt was the residence
ot the famous Matthew Cák, "lord of the Váh and of the Tatras," wbo
possessed more than thlrty castles in different parts of tbe land. King
Charles 'Robert of Hungary besleged hlm in vain. The only Ume the
stronghold teli before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous
siege. The large stone can,non bans from this siege are stm visiblP.
in tbe walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks, and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but falled. Fire in 1790 reduced it
to rulns.
The most extensive ruin In Slovakia is Spišský Hrad, situated in
the Spiš region. Bullt of whlte limestone, it gllstens six hundred feet
a bove th.e surroundlng landscape. It !s huge, bavlng no less tban
five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has
four storles. The walls are ten feet thlck and reach an altitude of
seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being
mentioned already In tbe year 1120. It was abandoned In 1710 and
was turned into rulns by fire In 1780.
�SLOVAKIA
29
Tbe most memorable of the ruins of S lovakia is magnificent De-v in, sltuated not far {rom Bratislava, some five mlles towards Vlenna.
Devin is unlque. It is unllke 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 Carpathiaus, and across the Danube
commence the Alps.
The view from Devín is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which is insplring
and penetrates his soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestlc
Danube flowlng swlftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank
are hllls adorned wlth deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed
to the Southern sun, are vlneyards, small and quiltlike, as are the
fields on the more level opposite side or the stream. Also there are
forests, restrul to gaze upon. They ascend hills, outposts of the Alps.
Right beneath the ruins lies the town or Devin, exotic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently r1owing Morava
than like 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 flelds. You see the Danube approaching,
undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the
South you behold the Austrlan town of Hainburg nestled beneath
the ruins of the bistoric fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the
Romans, headquarters of one of their leglons. Finally, on the horlzon
to the Southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking a.bout
upon the wonderful panorama, you forget the woes and worries or
everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom tbe world
is a paradise.
You are treading upon prehistoric as well as on historic ground.
Man was here long before the commencement of the Cbristian era.
Bits or pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from
tbe second La Tene period have been uneartbed by archaeologlsts
wbo bave been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. Tbe
future is likely to furtber extend tbe past.
During tbe first two centuries of our ern Devín served as an outpost of the Roman Emplre against tbe turbulent Marcomanni and
Quadl, Germanic tribes living north or the Danube. It was fol'tifled by
the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth
century, the place recelved lts present appellation, named probably
after the national godess, Deva. It became a refuge from the ruth·
less Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps.
As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of thelr
principal centers. It was here that King Louls the German besieged
Rastislav, ruler of the so-called Great Moravian realm, without avail in
864.
Great Moravia fell to piece~ in 906 before the savage onrush of
the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remalned in the hands of the
Slovaks well lnto the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully wlthstood a slege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to
Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed.
What a hlstory Devin has had! For untold centuries it was
strateglcally the mos t vila! point of Centra! Europe. In its immediate
�30
SLOVAK.IA
v!clnity were fought the battles whlch determined the fate of the
heart of the contlnent.
I).espite the fact that on the once mlghty stone castle only two
medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruln.s,
nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That whlch remalns 1s
stately and lmposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse
is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as
well as its lncomparable locatlon, glves lt majesty. The places where
there were once lofty walls and wlde moats can stlll be clearly dlstinguished.
But three hours are required for a vislt to Devin trom Bratisli;wa. Tbe journey can be made most pleasantly by boat. And you
wlll conslder these three hours among the most worthwh!le you bave
spent on the European continent - after Slovakla is llberated from
the agents of Moscow, that 1s.
•
•
•
•
SLOVAK COSTUMES AND CUSTOMS
No other 1-and of Centra! Europe 1s able to display as many unspoiled popular and dlstinctive costumes as Slovakla. They are due
to tbe pure feellngs of the people.
The simple sense for color and ornamentation, wbich can only
sprlng from the soul of the people if lt ls to be of value and ls to be
a true echo of thelr lnner manlfestations, expresses ltself in the
costumes and customs spontaneously and characterlstically, as can
be the case only In a !and whlch has been 3pared trom too mucb
culture and whose lnhabltants llved tranqullly In remote mountalns
and valleys.
The varlous rellgious festivals, such as Easter, Ascenslon, Corpus
Chrlstl, and the celebration of the days of the local patron salnts,
cause the people to dlsplay the best -and the most beautiful lnherlted costumes. In many places, such as Čičmany and Revúca,
a simple folk archltecture of the abodes provldes a plcturesque and
approprlate settlng for such vlvld scenes. The treasures of popular
art, exhlblted at the Museum In Bratklava In systematlc arrangemerrt, stlll live. In the p1'0xlmlty of Bratislava, many places - especlally Vajnory, Chorvatský Grob, Schwannsbach, Čataj, Nemecký
Grob - have preserved much from prlstlne limes. Also there 1s opportunlty at St. Jur to watch the llfe of the people in lts pristlne
fashion. In the Trenčín reglon anclent customs are malntalned in
many vlllages, lncludlng Dubnica near the famous spa Trenčianske
Teplice. In the Tatra reglon the old costumes may be observed at
Valec, Štrba, and štola, and farther East at Ždiar, Podollnec and
elsewhere.
The mountaln pasture season ends wlth the anclent custom
of consecratlng cheese. Shepherds and herdsmen thus express the!r
thanks for a successful sea.'lon. In November and December the unmarrled glrls meet In the evenlngs at some farmhouse for joint spin•
ning and weavlng by hand. The weekly and annual markets, the p!lgrlmages, and the local festivals aftord excellent opportunltles for
observlng the llfe of the Slovak people.
�
28
SLOVAKIA
CA STL~
OF SLOV AKIA
A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval cru;tles is one of
the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centurles during which Slovakia was a frontler bulwark of W estern
European clvlllzaUon agalnst the continuous encroachment of the
rapacious Turks. Llfe was full of romance and of danger.
Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edlflces of the thirteenth
and fourteenth centurles. Tbe dlsastrous Mongol incursion of 1241
proved tbe inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a
period of intenslve building of castles with stone. Thls building activity continued well lnto the seventeeth century and ended with tbe
foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold 1. It was closely
modeled after P alma Nuova in Northern Italy.
By the beglnnlng of the eigbteenth century, lhe medieval castles
no longer fulf!lled th e demands of mllitary technique and as the
danger of further Turkls h invasions ceased, their owners a bandoned
them to live In more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced castles.
A few of the old castles were refashloned and to this day remaln
habltable. One of the largest and most lnteresting of the latter is at
Bojnice wblcb has no less tban 21S balls and rooms, is enclrcled by
wlde moats, and has several massive and lofty towers.
As to tJhe number and the picturesgueness of ruins, the Váh
river compares favorably to tbe Rhlne. Tbe setting is possl,bly even
more romantic and certalnly more primltlve. Many of the rulns are
flanked by dense forests. There are some tbirty of tbem, built mostly
upon steep crags overlooking tlhe rlver. In the Middle Ages they were
Quite lmpregnable. Standlng aloof from buman habitatlons of today,
their very lsolation transports tbe vlsltor in spirit to bygone centuries
of armored knlghts and robber barons. In those years royal authority
was rather dlfficult to enforce. Tbe owner was truly lord over the
Iand whlch bis eye could survey.
The mightiest and the most accessible of the citadels on the
Váh is at Trenčin. Between the years 1301-1321 lt was the residence
ot the famous Matthew Cák, "lord of the Váh and of the Tatras," wbo
possessed more than thlrty castles in different parts of tbe land. King
Charles 'Robert of Hungary besleged hlm in vain. The only Ume the
stronghold teli before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous
siege. The large stone can,non bans from this siege are stm visiblP.
in tbe walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks, and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but falled. Fire in 1790 reduced it
to rulns.
The most extensive ruin In Slovakia is Spišský Hrad, situated in
the Spiš region. Bullt of whlte limestone, it gllstens six hundred feet
a bove th.e surroundlng landscape. It !s huge, bavlng no less tban
five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has
four storles. The walls are ten feet thlck and reach an altitude of
seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being
mentioned already In tbe year 1120. It was abandoned In 1710 and
was turned into rulns by fire In 1780.
�SLOVAKIA
29
Tbe most memorable of the ruins of S lovakia is magnificent De-v in, sltuated not far {rom Bratislava, some five mlles towards Vlenna.
Devin is unlque. It is unllke 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 Carpathiaus, and across the Danube
commence the Alps.
The view from Devín is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which is insplring
and penetrates his soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestlc
Danube flowlng swlftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank
are hllls adorned wlth deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed
to the Southern sun, are vlneyards, small and quiltlike, as are the
fields on the more level opposite side or the stream. Also there are
forests, restrul to gaze upon. They ascend hills, outposts of the Alps.
Right beneath the ruins lies the town or Devin, exotic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently r1owing Morava
than like 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 flelds. You see the Danube approaching,
undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the
South you behold the Austrlan town of Hainburg nestled beneath
the ruins of the bistoric fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the
Romans, headquarters of one of their leglons. Finally, on the horlzon
to the Southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking a.bout
upon the wonderful panorama, you forget the woes and worries or
everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom tbe world
is a paradise.
You are treading upon prehistoric as well as on historic ground.
Man was here long before the commencement of the Cbristian era.
Bits or pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from
tbe second La Tene period have been uneartbed by archaeologlsts
wbo bave been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. Tbe
future is likely to furtber extend tbe past.
During tbe first two centuries of our ern Devín served as an outpost of the Roman Emplre against tbe turbulent Marcomanni and
Quadl, Germanic tribes living north or the Danube. It was fol'tifled by
the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth
century, the place recelved lts present appellation, named probably
after the national godess, Deva. It became a refuge from the ruth·
less Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps.
As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of thelr
principal centers. It was here that King Louls the German besieged
Rastislav, ruler of the so-called Great Moravian realm, without avail in
864.
Great Moravia fell to piece~ in 906 before the savage onrush of
the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remalned in the hands of the
Slovaks well lnto the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully wlthstood a slege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to
Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed.
What a hlstory Devin has had! For untold centuries it was
strateglcally the mos t vila! point of Centra! Europe. In its immediate
�30
SLOVAK.IA
v!clnity were fought the battles whlch determined the fate of the
heart of the contlnent.
I).espite the fact that on the once mlghty stone castle only two
medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruln.s,
nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That whlch remalns 1s
stately and lmposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse
is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as
well as its lncomparable locatlon, glves lt majesty. The places where
there were once lofty walls and wlde moats can stlll be clearly dlstinguished.
But three hours are required for a vislt to Devin trom Bratisli;wa. Tbe journey can be made most pleasantly by boat. And you
wlll conslder these three hours among the most worthwh!le you bave
spent on the European continent - after Slovakla is llberated from
the agents of Moscow, that 1s.
•
•
•
•
SLOVAK COSTUMES AND CUSTOMS
No other 1-and of Centra! Europe 1s able to display as many unspoiled popular and dlstinctive costumes as Slovakla. They are due
to tbe pure feellngs of the people.
The simple sense for color and ornamentation, wbich can only
sprlng from the soul of the people if lt ls to be of value and ls to be
a true echo of thelr lnner manlfestations, expresses ltself in the
costumes and customs spontaneously and characterlstically, as can
be the case only In a !and whlch has been 3pared trom too mucb
culture and whose lnhabltants llved tranqullly In remote mountalns
and valleys.
The varlous rellgious festivals, such as Easter, Ascenslon, Corpus
Chrlstl, and the celebration of the days of the local patron salnts,
cause the people to dlsplay the best -and the most beautiful lnherlted costumes. In many places, such as Čičmany and Revúca,
a simple folk archltecture of the abodes provldes a plcturesque and
approprlate settlng for such vlvld scenes. The treasures of popular
art, exhlblted at the Museum In Bratklava In systematlc arrangemerrt, stlll live. In the p1'0xlmlty of Bratislava, many places - especlally Vajnory, Chorvatský Grob, Schwannsbach, Čataj, Nemecký
Grob - have preserved much from prlstlne limes. Also there 1s opportunlty at St. Jur to watch the llfe of the people in lts pristlne
fashion. In the Trenčín reglon anclent customs are malntalned in
many vlllages, lncludlng Dubnica near the famous spa Trenčianske
Teplice. In the Tatra reglon the old costumes may be observed at
Valec, Štrba, and štola, and farther East at Ždiar, Podollnec and
elsewhere.
The mountaln pasture season ends wlth the anclent custom
of consecratlng cheese. Shepherds and herdsmen thus express the!r
thanks for a successful sea.'lon. In November and December the unmarrled glrls meet In the evenlngs at some farmhouse for joint spin•
ning and weavlng by hand. The weekly and annual markets, the p!lgrlmages, and the local festivals aftord excellent opportunltles for
observlng the llfe of the Slovak people.
�
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
28
SLOVAKIA
CA STL~
OF SLOV AKIA
A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval cru;tles is one of
the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centurles during which Slovakia was a frontler bulwark of W estern
European clvlllzaUon agalnst the continuous encroachment of the
rapacious Turks. Llfe was full of romance and of danger.
Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edlflces of the thirteenth
and fourteenth centurles. Tbe dlsastrous Mongol incursion of 1241
proved tbe inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a
period of intenslve building of castles with stone. Thls building activity continued well lnto the seventeeth century and ended with tbe
foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold 1. It was closely
modeled after P alma Nuova in Northern Italy.
By the beglnnlng of the eigbteenth century, lhe medieval castles
no longer fulf!lled th e demands of mllitary technique and as the
danger of further Turkls h invasions ceased, their owners a bandoned
them to live In more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced castles.
A few of the old castles were refashloned and to this day remaln
habltable. One of the largest and most lnteresting of the latter is at
Bojnice wblcb has no less tban 21S balls and rooms, is enclrcled by
wlde moats, and has several massive and lofty towers.
As to tJhe number and the picturesgueness of ruins, the Váh
river compares favorably to tbe Rhlne. Tbe setting is possl,bly even
more romantic and certalnly more primltlve. Many of the rulns are
flanked by dense forests. There are some tbirty of tbem, built mostly
upon steep crags overlooking tlhe rlver. In the Middle Ages they were
Quite lmpregnable. Standlng aloof from buman habitatlons of today,
their very lsolation transports tbe vlsltor in spirit to bygone centuries
of armored knlghts and robber barons. In those years royal authority
was rather dlfficult to enforce. Tbe owner was truly lord over the
Iand whlch bis eye could survey.
The mightiest and the most accessible of the citadels on the
Váh is at Trenčin. Between the years 1301-1321 lt was the residence
ot the famous Matthew Cák, "lord of the Váh and of the Tatras," wbo
possessed more than thlrty castles in different parts of tbe land. King
Charles 'Robert of Hungary besleged hlm in vain. The only Ume the
stronghold teli before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous
siege. The large stone can,non bans from this siege are stm visiblP.
in tbe walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks, and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but falled. Fire in 1790 reduced it
to rulns.
The most extensive ruin In Slovakia is Spišský Hrad, situated in
the Spiš region. Bullt of whlte limestone, it gllstens six hundred feet
a bove th.e surroundlng landscape. It !s huge, bavlng no less tban
five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has
four storles. The walls are ten feet thlck and reach an altitude of
seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being
mentioned already In tbe year 1120. It was abandoned In 1710 and
was turned into rulns by fire In 1780.
SLOVAKIA
29
Tbe most memorable of the ruins of S lovakia is magnificent De-v in, sltuated not far {rom Bratislava, some five mlles towards Vlenna.
Devin is unlque. It is unllke 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 Carpathiaus, and across the Danube
commence the Alps.
The view from Devín is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which is insplring
and penetrates his soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestlc
Danube flowlng swlftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank
are hllls adorned wlth deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed
to the Southern sun, are vlneyards, small and quiltlike, as are the
fields on the more level opposite side or the stream. Also there are
forests, restrul to gaze upon. They ascend hills, outposts of the Alps.
Right beneath the ruins lies the town or Devin, exotic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently r1owing Morava
than like 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 flelds. You see the Danube approaching,
undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the
South you behold the Austrlan town of Hainburg nestled beneath
the ruins of the bistoric fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the
Romans, headquarters of one of their leglons. Finally, on the horlzon
to the Southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking a.bout
upon the wonderful panorama, you forget the woes and worries or
everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom tbe world
is a paradise.
You are treading upon prehistoric as well as on historic ground.
Man was here long before the commencement of the Cbristian era.
Bits or pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from
tbe second La Tene period have been uneartbed by archaeologlsts
wbo bave been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. Tbe
future is likely to furtber extend tbe past.
During tbe first two centuries of our ern Devín served as an outpost of the Roman Emplre against tbe turbulent Marcomanni and
Quadl, Germanic tribes living north or the Danube. It was fol'tifled by
the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth
century, the place recelved lts present appellation, named probably
after the national godess, Deva. It became a refuge from the ruth·
less Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps.
As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of thelr
principal centers. It was here that King Louls the German besieged
Rastislav, ruler of the so-called Great Moravian realm, without avail in
864.
Great Moravia fell to piece~ in 906 before the savage onrush of
the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remalned in the hands of the
Slovaks well lnto the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully wlthstood a slege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to
Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed.
What a hlstory Devin has had! For untold centuries it was
strateglcally the mos t vila! point of Centra! Europe. In its immediate
30
SLOVAK.IA
v!clnity were fought the battles whlch determined the fate of the
heart of the contlnent.
I).espite the fact that on the once mlghty stone castle only two
medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruln.s,
nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That whlch remalns 1s
stately and lmposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse
is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as
well as its lncomparable locatlon, glves lt majesty. The places where
there were once lofty walls and wlde moats can stlll be clearly dlstinguished.
But three hours are required for a vislt to Devin trom Bratisli;wa. Tbe journey can be made most pleasantly by boat. And you
wlll conslder these three hours among the most worthwh!le you bave
spent on the European continent - after Slovakla is llberated from
the agents of Moscow, that 1s.
•
•
•
•
SLOVAK COSTUMES AND CUSTOMS
No other 1-and of Centra! Europe 1s able to display as many unspoiled popular and dlstinctive costumes as Slovakla. They are due
to tbe pure feellngs of the people.
The simple sense for color and ornamentation, wbich can only
sprlng from the soul of the people if lt ls to be of value and ls to be
a true echo of thelr lnner manlfestations, expresses ltself in the
costumes and customs spontaneously and characterlstically, as can
be the case only In a !and whlch has been 3pared trom too mucb
culture and whose lnhabltants llved tranqullly In remote mountalns
and valleys.
The varlous rellgious festivals, such as Easter, Ascenslon, Corpus
Chrlstl, and the celebration of the days of the local patron salnts,
cause the people to dlsplay the best -and the most beautiful lnherlted costumes. In many places, such as Čičmany and Revúca,
a simple folk archltecture of the abodes provldes a plcturesque and
approprlate settlng for such vlvld scenes. The treasures of popular
art, exhlblted at the Museum In Bratklava In systematlc arrangemerrt, stlll live. In the p1'0xlmlty of Bratislava, many places - especlally Vajnory, Chorvatský Grob, Schwannsbach, Čataj, Nemecký
Grob - have preserved much from prlstlne limes. Also there 1s opportunlty at St. Jur to watch the llfe of the people in lts pristlne
fashion. In the Trenčín reglon anclent customs are malntalned in
many vlllages, lncludlng Dubnica near the famous spa Trenčianske
Teplice. In the Tatra reglon the old costumes may be observed at
Valec, Štrba, and štola, and farther East at Ždiar, Podollnec and
elsewhere.
The mountaln pasture season ends wlth the anclent custom
of consecratlng cheese. Shepherds and herdsmen thus express the!r
thanks for a successful sea.'lon. In November and December the unmarrled glrls meet In the evenlngs at some farmhouse for joint spin•
ning and weavlng by hand. The weekly and annual markets, the p!lgrlmages, and the local festivals aftord excellent opportunltles for
observlng the llfe of the Slovak people.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2), December 1951
pp. 28-30
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1951
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/fffb2baa8fcbabe8af38a838ff5d3dfb.pdf
9ddca8ebd9a2c57f524a16334c4c7b13
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
61
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BECKOV
Beclkov - proibalbly caUed "Bludinec" originally - belongs to the group of the oldest citadels or castles of the
Vah region which were situated for the mos.t part on the
left banlk of the Vah river. Beneath BeckOIV there was an old
military and commercial road, whi'ch deiviated from the main
Czech highway near Jablonica and extended through Brezova to the Vah region. According to tradition, °the Beclwv
Castle already existed during the time of the Great Mora.
vran Empire, so that the legend aJbout its originating druoring the time of Ct"iJbor (a'bout 1412) prdbaibly has no historical basis.
Bookov is mentioned in docUilllents already in 1208 under the name of "BlU'lldix." In descri!bing Ska.Jilm, the documents tell us of a road "ooming from Beokov." The bishop
of Nitra (rubout 1228), we learn, donated a fourth of the
wine he had received as a tithe from Beckov to the monastery on Skalka. That means that in those days the vicinity
of Bec•k ov was intersted in growing grapes. In the 13th centll.'ry, Anonymous ("Belae regis notarius") oalled Becko;v
"Ca.strum Blundus" (Bolondoc), and Bela I. himself called
it "Bolondtuich." The Belelkov · fortress was at first a royal
military station and, later, bieneath the castle there originated the settlement of Beckov, which was once surrounded
by fortifications.
Matthew Cak oif Trencin, "the Lord of the V ah and the
Tatras," ruled over Bedkov at one time. After him to Beckov came the royal solicitor, which means that during the
rule o.f King Robert and King Louis I , Bedkov was in the
hands of the king. When Zigmond of Luxemburg sought
men in Boland in 1386 to fight his dvaJ, Charles of Durazza, he was escorted on this trip by four soldiers from Slovakia, one of whom, OtiJbor ("Tilbu'l'tius" in Latin) , received
extensiive lands from Zigmond for faithful services rendered. This CUbor was generally known as the Lord of the
Vah river ("dominus fluvii Vagi"), even though he also was
�62
SLOVAKIA
the admrinistrator of Bratislava (.Press/burg) amd, later,
the Duke of TransyWania. At that time Zigmond and his
wife donated wen Beckov to Ctilbor and this gift is confiitrned by a special document, dated in Trencin in 1396.
OUbor relbuilt and renovated the castle for his own use
and then dona!l:ed Podhrad to his old oasteMan J a.mes from
Nasil.O!V. Otiibor founded the ipr~osture in Norve Mesto (nad
Vahom) amd ,pa;rtiiciipated in the CouI11Cil of Kostmca (14141418). DUike Ctilbor, Lord of Treinici111, Hlohorvec and many
other casitles·, died in 1424 after he was stung by a bee. His
oldest son, • Ctihor II, . became BishOtp of Jager and Oti!bor
III inherited his father's properties and led his people in
the fights agaiinst the Hus.sites. Ten years after his father's death, Ctibor NI also passed away and the family's
v,ast hoWmgis, excepting Beckov, were wen orver by the
r01yal soli'c;itOT. Boolmv came in.to the hands, of the Banflfy
family from Dol111a Lindia:va; the last desicendant of this
clan, John Banffy died fighting the Tunks in 1595. While
the Banfey family nrled orver Bookorv, the preacller Borne~
missa visited them and wrote his collection of sermons,
known as "Postla," which was .published in 1584 and thus
prepared the way for the Retformatioo.
When the Turks attaciked Piestlany in 1599, they took
with them 13,000 eruptives from that part of the country
and plll'lldered and piilaged the entire vicinity Ulp to Trencin. History notes, howerver, that the people who sought
refuge in the Beokorv Oa,,stle were spared, even though the
TurlIB had oome under the very fortifications of the castle.
Imrich Thakoly used Beickov as a prison for his eruptives
aftetr his MoraJVian eJQpedition (Uherslky Brod).
Bult how did Beokov fall into ruins? Some say that the
castle was riazed durin1g the rei<gn of Leopold I, while others
say something else. Nervertheless, it is quite certain that
the great confla;gra:tion which devoured the commU!Ility of
Bookov in 1729, also completely ruined the castle.
The legend aJbout the oriigin orf the castle, which the
Slwaks oif BookOIV love to teH, relates that Ctilbor built the
c.astle to fwfill. his ;promise to his clown Beiclko. Ct:ifbor, the
legend says, was a passionate hunter. One evening, after
�S LOVAKIA
63
a successful day o,f hunting, Ctibo,r and his group made
cam11p near the high limestone rook upon whiclh the ruins
of .Beckov rest tod!ay. Ctilbor was in a jovJal mood. After
eating heartily, the group burst oot in song; some mernfbe:rs
of the party recounted tales of heroism, witches and goblins; others told jokes. But no one could te11 a tale or a
joke like Bedim, Ctilbor's court jester. Betoko had Otiibor
and his entourage in stirtJches. A.ifter the clown had rel,a ted
his last "just one more" taill tale, Ctibor s,aid to him:
"Booko, my fool, well done. Demand o!f me what you
will and I, iif your wish is at a'll humacly attrunaJble, shall
grant it."
Becka, seated at.oip a hrl.l!ge b1aclk bear the party had
ba;gged that da;y, grinned, fixed his eyes on the rook above
and said: "Look, if you are sll!ch a frumous mam, build me,
if you please, a castle upon that rook!"
The crowd roared with laughter, because every one
thoUJght that impossible. But Ctilbor lodked up art tilie rock,
rulbbed his, whiskers, smiled and r~lied: "You shall
have it!"
The legend continues that Ctilbor did fulfill his promise. A few days l•aiter he had his people start woI1k on the
new castle. We are toJd that Ctibor ordered his men to stO!p
all traivelers along the road beneath the site of the castle
and put them to work for ei ght days. In a year the castle
was bui,l t and Ctibor arnd his people celebriated the a-ccom:plishment. The new castle wa s beaurt1ful beyond comparison.
Ctilbor named it Beckov in honor of his olown Beclco. But
Ctilbor did not give it to Beclko. Aiocordin,g to the legend,
Ctibor lilked the castle so much that he moved into it himsellf and gave Be'clko one of his other castles.
The great Slovak patriot, writer and publisher, Joseph
MilosJ.av Hurban, was born in the viHaige of Becikov, March
19, 1817. He was one of the leaders of the SlOIVaJk rebellion
against the Haibsiburg,s in 1848-49; with Louis Stur and Michael Hoooa, he led the revolt for equal rights for the Slovak nation. Hur.ban and Hodza joined with Stu.ir to establish the literary Slovak that is used today by Slovaks everywhere.
1
�
SLOVAKIA
61
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BECKOV
Beclkov - proibalbly caUed "Bludinec" originally - belongs to the group of the oldest citadels or castles of the
Vah region which were situated for the mos.t part on the
left banlk of the Vah river. Beneath BeckOIV there was an old
military and commercial road, whi'ch deiviated from the main
Czech highway near Jablonica and extended through Brezova to the Vah region. According to tradition, °the Beclwv
Castle already existed during the time of the Great Mora.
vran Empire, so that the legend aJbout its originating druoring the time of Ct"iJbor (a'bout 1412) prdbaibly has no historical basis.
Bookov is mentioned in docUilllents already in 1208 under the name of "BlU'lldix." In descri!bing Ska.Jilm, the documents tell us of a road "ooming from Beokov." The bishop
of Nitra (rubout 1228), we learn, donated a fourth of the
wine he had received as a tithe from Beckov to the monastery on Skalka. That means that in those days the vicinity
of Bec•k ov was intersted in growing grapes. In the 13th centll.'ry, Anonymous ("Belae regis notarius") oalled Becko;v
"Ca.strum Blundus" (Bolondoc), and Bela I. himself called
it "Bolondtuich." The Belelkov · fortress was at first a royal
military station and, later, bieneath the castle there originated the settlement of Beckov, which was once surrounded
by fortifications.
Matthew Cak oif Trencin, "the Lord of the V ah and the
Tatras," ruled over Bedkov at one time. After him to Beckov came the royal solicitor, which means that during the
rule o.f King Robert and King Louis I , Bedkov was in the
hands of the king. When Zigmond of Luxemburg sought
men in Boland in 1386 to fight his dvaJ, Charles of Durazza, he was escorted on this trip by four soldiers from Slovakia, one of whom, OtiJbor ("Tilbu'l'tius" in Latin) , received
extensiive lands from Zigmond for faithful services rendered. This CUbor was generally known as the Lord of the
Vah river ("dominus fluvii Vagi"), even though he also was
�62
SLOVAKIA
the admrinistrator of Bratislava (.Press/burg) amd, later,
the Duke of TransyWania. At that time Zigmond and his
wife donated wen Beckov to Ctilbor and this gift is confiitrned by a special document, dated in Trencin in 1396.
OUbor relbuilt and renovated the castle for his own use
and then dona!l:ed Podhrad to his old oasteMan J a.mes from
Nasil.O!V. Otiibor founded the ipr~osture in Norve Mesto (nad
Vahom) amd ,pa;rtiiciipated in the CouI11Cil of Kostmca (14141418). DUike Ctilbor, Lord of Treinici111, Hlohorvec and many
other casitles·, died in 1424 after he was stung by a bee. His
oldest son, • Ctihor II, . became BishOtp of Jager and Oti!bor
III inherited his father's properties and led his people in
the fights agaiinst the Hus.sites. Ten years after his father's death, Ctibor NI also passed away and the family's
v,ast hoWmgis, excepting Beckov, were wen orver by the
r01yal soli'c;itOT. Boolmv came in.to the hands, of the Banflfy
family from Dol111a Lindia:va; the last desicendant of this
clan, John Banffy died fighting the Tunks in 1595. While
the Banfey family nrled orver Bookorv, the preacller Borne~
missa visited them and wrote his collection of sermons,
known as "Postla," which was .published in 1584 and thus
prepared the way for the Retformatioo.
When the Turks attaciked Piestlany in 1599, they took
with them 13,000 eruptives from that part of the country
and plll'lldered and piilaged the entire vicinity Ulp to Trencin. History notes, howerver, that the people who sought
refuge in the Beokorv Oa,,stle were spared, even though the
TurlIB had oome under the very fortifications of the castle.
Imrich Thakoly used Beickov as a prison for his eruptives
aftetr his MoraJVian eJQpedition (Uherslky Brod).
Bult how did Beokov fall into ruins? Some say that the
castle was riazed durin1g the rei<gn of Leopold I, while others
say something else. Nervertheless, it is quite certain that
the great confla;gra:tion which devoured the commU!Ility of
Bookov in 1729, also completely ruined the castle.
The legend aJbout the oriigin orf the castle, which the
Slwaks oif BookOIV love to teH, relates that Ctilbor built the
c.astle to fwfill. his ;promise to his clown Beiclko. Ct:ifbor, the
legend says, was a passionate hunter. One evening, after
�S LOVAKIA
63
a successful day o,f hunting, Ctibo,r and his group made
cam11p near the high limestone rook upon whiclh the ruins
of .Beckov rest tod!ay. Ctilbor was in a jovJal mood. After
eating heartily, the group burst oot in song; some mernfbe:rs
of the party recounted tales of heroism, witches and goblins; others told jokes. But no one could te11 a tale or a
joke like Bedim, Ctilbor's court jester. Betoko had Otiibor
and his entourage in stirtJches. A.ifter the clown had rel,a ted
his last "just one more" taill tale, Ctibor s,aid to him:
"Booko, my fool, well done. Demand o!f me what you
will and I, iif your wish is at a'll humacly attrunaJble, shall
grant it."
Becka, seated at.oip a hrl.l!ge b1aclk bear the party had
ba;gged that da;y, grinned, fixed his eyes on the rook above
and said: "Look, if you are sll!ch a frumous mam, build me,
if you please, a castle upon that rook!"
The crowd roared with laughter, because every one
thoUJght that impossible. But Ctilbor lodked up art tilie rock,
rulbbed his, whiskers, smiled and r~lied: "You shall
have it!"
The legend continues that Ctilbor did fulfill his promise. A few days l•aiter he had his people start woI1k on the
new castle. We are toJd that Ctibor ordered his men to stO!p
all traivelers along the road beneath the site of the castle
and put them to work for ei ght days. In a year the castle
was bui,l t and Ctibor arnd his people celebriated the a-ccom:plishment. The new castle wa s beaurt1ful beyond comparison.
Ctilbor named it Beckov in honor of his olown Beclco. But
Ctilbor did not give it to Beclko. Aiocordin,g to the legend,
Ctibor lilked the castle so much that he moved into it himsellf and gave Be'clko one of his other castles.
The great Slovak patriot, writer and publisher, Joseph
MilosJ.av Hurban, was born in the viHaige of Becikov, March
19, 1817. He was one of the leaders of the SlOIVaJk rebellion
against the Haibsiburg,s in 1848-49; with Louis Stur and Michael Hoooa, he led the revolt for equal rights for the Slovak nation. Hur.ban and Hodza joined with Stu.ir to establish the literary Slovak that is used today by Slovaks everywhere.
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
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
SLOVAKIA
61
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BECKOV
Beclkov - proibalbly caUed "Bludinec" originally - belongs to the group of the oldest citadels or castles of the
Vah region which were situated for the mos.t part on the
left banlk of the Vah river. Beneath BeckOIV there was an old
military and commercial road, whi'ch deiviated from the main
Czech highway near Jablonica and extended through Brezova to the Vah region. According to tradition, °the Beclwv
Castle already existed during the time of the Great Mora.
vran Empire, so that the legend aJbout its originating druoring the time of Ct"iJbor (a'bout 1412) prdbaibly has no historical basis.
Bookov is mentioned in docUilllents already in 1208 under the name of "BlU'lldix." In descri!bing Ska.Jilm, the documents tell us of a road "ooming from Beokov." The bishop
of Nitra (rubout 1228), we learn, donated a fourth of the
wine he had received as a tithe from Beckov to the monastery on Skalka. That means that in those days the vicinity
of Bec•k ov was intersted in growing grapes. In the 13th centll.'ry, Anonymous ("Belae regis notarius") oalled Becko;v
"Ca.strum Blundus" (Bolondoc), and Bela I. himself called
it "Bolondtuich." The Belelkov · fortress was at first a royal
military station and, later, bieneath the castle there originated the settlement of Beckov, which was once surrounded
by fortifications.
Matthew Cak oif Trencin, "the Lord of the V ah and the
Tatras," ruled over Bedkov at one time. After him to Beckov came the royal solicitor, which means that during the
rule o.f King Robert and King Louis I , Bedkov was in the
hands of the king. When Zigmond of Luxemburg sought
men in Boland in 1386 to fight his dvaJ, Charles of Durazza, he was escorted on this trip by four soldiers from Slovakia, one of whom, OtiJbor ("Tilbu'l'tius" in Latin) , received
extensiive lands from Zigmond for faithful services rendered. This CUbor was generally known as the Lord of the
Vah river ("dominus fluvii Vagi"), even though he also was
62
SLOVAKIA
the admrinistrator of Bratislava (.Press/burg) amd, later,
the Duke of TransyWania. At that time Zigmond and his
wife donated wen Beckov to Ctilbor and this gift is confiitrned by a special document, dated in Trencin in 1396.
OUbor relbuilt and renovated the castle for his own use
and then dona!l:ed Podhrad to his old oasteMan J a.mes from
Nasil.O!V. Otiibor founded the ipr~osture in Norve Mesto (nad
Vahom) amd ,pa;rtiiciipated in the CouI11Cil of Kostmca (14141418). DUike Ctilbor, Lord of Treinici111, Hlohorvec and many
other casitles·, died in 1424 after he was stung by a bee. His
oldest son, • Ctihor II, . became BishOtp of Jager and Oti!bor
III inherited his father's properties and led his people in
the fights agaiinst the Hus.sites. Ten years after his father's death, Ctibor NI also passed away and the family's
v,ast hoWmgis, excepting Beckov, were wen orver by the
r01yal soli'c;itOT. Boolmv came in.to the hands, of the Banflfy
family from Dol111a Lindia:va; the last desicendant of this
clan, John Banffy died fighting the Tunks in 1595. While
the Banfey family nrled orver Bookorv, the preacller Borne~
missa visited them and wrote his collection of sermons,
known as "Postla," which was .published in 1584 and thus
prepared the way for the Retformatioo.
When the Turks attaciked Piestlany in 1599, they took
with them 13,000 eruptives from that part of the country
and plll'lldered and piilaged the entire vicinity Ulp to Trencin. History notes, howerver, that the people who sought
refuge in the Beokorv Oa,,stle were spared, even though the
TurlIB had oome under the very fortifications of the castle.
Imrich Thakoly used Beickov as a prison for his eruptives
aftetr his MoraJVian eJQpedition (Uherslky Brod).
Bult how did Beokov fall into ruins? Some say that the
castle was riazed durin1g the rei<gn of Leopold I, while others
say something else. Nervertheless, it is quite certain that
the great confla;gra:tion which devoured the commU!Ility of
Bookov in 1729, also completely ruined the castle.
The legend aJbout the oriigin orf the castle, which the
Slwaks oif BookOIV love to teH, relates that Ctilbor built the
c.astle to fwfill. his ;promise to his clown Beiclko. Ct:ifbor, the
legend says, was a passionate hunter. One evening, after
S LOVAKIA
63
a successful day o,f hunting, Ctibo,r and his group made
cam11p near the high limestone rook upon whiclh the ruins
of .Beckov rest tod!ay. Ctilbor was in a jovJal mood. After
eating heartily, the group burst oot in song; some mernfbe:rs
of the party recounted tales of heroism, witches and goblins; others told jokes. But no one could te11 a tale or a
joke like Bedim, Ctilbor's court jester. Betoko had Otiibor
and his entourage in stirtJches. A.ifter the clown had rel,a ted
his last "just one more" taill tale, Ctibor s,aid to him:
"Booko, my fool, well done. Demand o!f me what you
will and I, iif your wish is at a'll humacly attrunaJble, shall
grant it."
Becka, seated at.oip a hrl.l!ge b1aclk bear the party had
ba;gged that da;y, grinned, fixed his eyes on the rook above
and said: "Look, if you are sll!ch a frumous mam, build me,
if you please, a castle upon that rook!"
The crowd roared with laughter, because every one
thoUJght that impossible. But Ctilbor lodked up art tilie rock,
rulbbed his, whiskers, smiled and r~lied: "You shall
have it!"
The legend continues that Ctilbor did fulfill his promise. A few days l•aiter he had his people start woI1k on the
new castle. We are toJd that Ctibor ordered his men to stO!p
all traivelers along the road beneath the site of the castle
and put them to work for ei ght days. In a year the castle
was bui,l t and Ctibor arnd his people celebriated the a-ccom:plishment. The new castle wa s beaurt1ful beyond comparison.
Ctilbor named it Beckov in honor of his olown Beclco. But
Ctilbor did not give it to Beclko. Aiocordin,g to the legend,
Ctibor lilked the castle so much that he moved into it himsellf and gave Be'clko one of his other castles.
The great Slovak patriot, writer and publisher, Joseph
MilosJ.av Hurban, was born in the viHaige of Becikov, March
19, 1817. He was one of the leaders of the SlOIVaJk rebellion
against the Haibsiburg,s in 1848-49; with Louis Stur and Michael Hoooa, he led the revolt for equal rights for the Slovak nation. Hur.ban and Hodza joined with Stu.ir to establish the literary Slovak that is used today by Slovaks everywhere.
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
Castles of Slovakia: Beckov
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 3 (8), September 1953
pp. 61-63
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September 1953
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cb56504b2fb7b5b01b1e5cccaadb7e64.pdf
08cd7f1762d80154fe56332576d6d7d8
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
59
protected it aigainst invasion, occupation and annexation,
gas chambers and concentration camps. But for that Benes
and his poli1Jcal regime denounced them as traitors. The Sl,ovaks were held responsible foT a situation which they thema situation into which they wetre
sellVes had not created thrust alOIIlg with the Czech nation by the aniti-diemocratic,
anit-Chri<Sltian, anti-Slovalk and imperialistic policies of the
late but not lamented Dr. Edward Benes, the man who sold
out the Slovaik and Ozech nations twice within a decade to
tota'1itarian powers.
•
•
•
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BUDATIN
The ruins of the Budatin Castle stand opposite 2ilina,
just about where the Kysuca pours into the Vah. In its time
it stood guard over the J ablunkov Pass and the old commercial highways. Slovak history tells us that the Slovaks, led
by Joseph Hurban, fought two battles here during the rebellion of the 1848-1849: the first one September 11, 1848, and
the second January 2, 1849. During the latter fight the
archives of Budatin, which today undoubtedly could have
shed some light on the foggy history of ancient Slovakia,
were destroyed by fire. In 1922-23, the lower part of the
castle was restored which was adorned with a typical Budatin
tower.
In the castle there are two spacious rooms, one on the
ground floor and the other on the upper floor, which are
adorned with numerous pictures, most of them portraits of
former owners of the castle. In one of the side rooms is a
portrait of Ludmila Lazansky, to whom the Slovaks even
today refer to as "our good Ludmila." The people still recall that the mistresses of Budatin Castle treated the Slovaks rather decently and that one of them even had a bridge
built across the Vah river at a time when there was no work
and people were starving. The rooms of the castle tower
are especially interesting, containing as they do many
precious antiquities. The view of the river and the vicinity
�60
S LOVAKIA
from the tower is very beautiful. In the corridor of the tower
one can also see the memorable cell with the escutcheon
of the Sunog-Komar family, where the daughter of Gaspar
Sunog, Catherine, was walled in, according to popular
legend for refusing to marry the man of her father's choice.
From the highest point of Budatin one can see the topmost
parts of the ruins of Lieta va Castle.
Budatin is mentioned in history as early as 1250; at
that time the tower existed, but not the other adjacent buildings. That year the Budatin Chapter issued the document
which determined and defined the properties of the Dukes
of Zvolen. The village of "Wudatin" is also mentioned in the
thirteenth century. At the beginning of the following
century, Budatin became the property of the king.
It is interesting to note that although Matthew Cak,
"the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," ruled over thirty
castles, he never was the lord of Budatin. Maximilian, a loyal
adherent of Robert, was awarded Budatin shortly after it
came into royal possession.
During the r eign of King Zigmund of the House of
Luxembourg, the Czech Brethren from Tabor settled beneath Budatin. In 1431 they captured '~ ilina which was well
fortified at that time, according to a document left by Zigmund. Old documents mention a certain Ladislaus of Hatna,
a valiant warrior, who was called to Budatin from Bohemia
by King Zigmund. Undoubtedly he became the captain of
the castle because he served Zigmund well; he escorted the
king to Milan for a coronation and two years later (1433)
also to Rome. The widow of Ladislaus, Raphaela, married
Gaspar Sunog, a Slovak whose name really was Komar
(Magyar translation "Szunyok").
In the sixteenth century, there was a struggle for the
throne of Hungary between King Ferdinand and John Zap of sky, just when the Turks threatened to take everything.
While the rivals fought it out for the crown of Hungary,
the wealthy landowners exploited the situation to enhance
their own positions. Many castles were taken by the plunderers. The vicinity of ~ilina was terrorized by the notorious
John and Raphael of Podmanin, who finally even took Buda-
�SLOVAKIA
61
tin away from the Sunog-Komar family. The castles Hricov
and Lednica, together with Budatin, became the feared residences of the robber knights. Zilina was their political centrum. The Podmanin brothers were apprehended and convicted by the regional court for their crimes, but when they
humbled themselves and begged forgiveness, the king
amnestied them and returned their properties. But they had
to give up Budatin to the Sunog-Komar clan. Later Budatin
came into the hands of Gaspar Sunog; the story of the
walled-in bride originated in his time.
At the beginning of December 1848, Joseph Miloslav
Hurban, Slovak patriot from Beckov, and emperor's officers
Bloudek, Zach and Janecek organized an expedition of
volunteers in Tesin, Silesia. This volunteer army joined with
a division of the Austrian army, which then took everything
along the Kysuca and stood before Budatin on December
11th. At that time, Budatin was guarded by a Magyar garrison, but the volunteers had little trouble in dispersing it.
When, however, they attempted to cross the bridge into
Zilina, they were surprised ·b y the Magyars who cannonaded
them and forced the expedition back to Budatin. With the
Magyar army was also the son of the mistress of the Budatin
Castle, Lady Caky, who in the meantime had fled from the
castle disguised as a peasant.
On January 2, 1849, another battle was staged at Budatin. The volunteers, led by Hurban, Zach and Bloudek, were
aided by the forces of General Gatz of Austria. After surprising the Magyars and taking the bridge over the Vah, the
volunteers rested in Zilina for six days and then moved
farther into the Trencin country. The archives of Budatin
Castle were destroyed by fire during this battle .
• • •
WHO SAID IT ?
"Some pussy-footing ostriches criticize the treaty between Soviet Russia rund Czechoslovakia Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do
not want anything from the Russia,ns except protection
frOiffi the Germ8!Ils, a:nd the Russians want nothing whatsoever from us." - (Jan Masaryk, BUSINESS WEEK, May
13, 1944).
�
SLOVAKIA
59
protected it aigainst invasion, occupation and annexation,
gas chambers and concentration camps. But for that Benes
and his poli1Jcal regime denounced them as traitors. The Sl,ovaks were held responsible foT a situation which they thema situation into which they wetre
sellVes had not created thrust alOIIlg with the Czech nation by the aniti-diemocratic,
anit-Chri<Sltian, anti-Slovalk and imperialistic policies of the
late but not lamented Dr. Edward Benes, the man who sold
out the Slovaik and Ozech nations twice within a decade to
tota'1itarian powers.
•
•
•
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BUDATIN
The ruins of the Budatin Castle stand opposite 2ilina,
just about where the Kysuca pours into the Vah. In its time
it stood guard over the J ablunkov Pass and the old commercial highways. Slovak history tells us that the Slovaks, led
by Joseph Hurban, fought two battles here during the rebellion of the 1848-1849: the first one September 11, 1848, and
the second January 2, 1849. During the latter fight the
archives of Budatin, which today undoubtedly could have
shed some light on the foggy history of ancient Slovakia,
were destroyed by fire. In 1922-23, the lower part of the
castle was restored which was adorned with a typical Budatin
tower.
In the castle there are two spacious rooms, one on the
ground floor and the other on the upper floor, which are
adorned with numerous pictures, most of them portraits of
former owners of the castle. In one of the side rooms is a
portrait of Ludmila Lazansky, to whom the Slovaks even
today refer to as "our good Ludmila." The people still recall that the mistresses of Budatin Castle treated the Slovaks rather decently and that one of them even had a bridge
built across the Vah river at a time when there was no work
and people were starving. The rooms of the castle tower
are especially interesting, containing as they do many
precious antiquities. The view of the river and the vicinity
�60
S LOVAKIA
from the tower is very beautiful. In the corridor of the tower
one can also see the memorable cell with the escutcheon
of the Sunog-Komar family, where the daughter of Gaspar
Sunog, Catherine, was walled in, according to popular
legend for refusing to marry the man of her father's choice.
From the highest point of Budatin one can see the topmost
parts of the ruins of Lieta va Castle.
Budatin is mentioned in history as early as 1250; at
that time the tower existed, but not the other adjacent buildings. That year the Budatin Chapter issued the document
which determined and defined the properties of the Dukes
of Zvolen. The village of "Wudatin" is also mentioned in the
thirteenth century. At the beginning of the following
century, Budatin became the property of the king.
It is interesting to note that although Matthew Cak,
"the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," ruled over thirty
castles, he never was the lord of Budatin. Maximilian, a loyal
adherent of Robert, was awarded Budatin shortly after it
came into royal possession.
During the r eign of King Zigmund of the House of
Luxembourg, the Czech Brethren from Tabor settled beneath Budatin. In 1431 they captured '~ ilina which was well
fortified at that time, according to a document left by Zigmund. Old documents mention a certain Ladislaus of Hatna,
a valiant warrior, who was called to Budatin from Bohemia
by King Zigmund. Undoubtedly he became the captain of
the castle because he served Zigmund well; he escorted the
king to Milan for a coronation and two years later (1433)
also to Rome. The widow of Ladislaus, Raphaela, married
Gaspar Sunog, a Slovak whose name really was Komar
(Magyar translation "Szunyok").
In the sixteenth century, there was a struggle for the
throne of Hungary between King Ferdinand and John Zap of sky, just when the Turks threatened to take everything.
While the rivals fought it out for the crown of Hungary,
the wealthy landowners exploited the situation to enhance
their own positions. Many castles were taken by the plunderers. The vicinity of ~ilina was terrorized by the notorious
John and Raphael of Podmanin, who finally even took Buda-
�SLOVAKIA
61
tin away from the Sunog-Komar family. The castles Hricov
and Lednica, together with Budatin, became the feared residences of the robber knights. Zilina was their political centrum. The Podmanin brothers were apprehended and convicted by the regional court for their crimes, but when they
humbled themselves and begged forgiveness, the king
amnestied them and returned their properties. But they had
to give up Budatin to the Sunog-Komar clan. Later Budatin
came into the hands of Gaspar Sunog; the story of the
walled-in bride originated in his time.
At the beginning of December 1848, Joseph Miloslav
Hurban, Slovak patriot from Beckov, and emperor's officers
Bloudek, Zach and Janecek organized an expedition of
volunteers in Tesin, Silesia. This volunteer army joined with
a division of the Austrian army, which then took everything
along the Kysuca and stood before Budatin on December
11th. At that time, Budatin was guarded by a Magyar garrison, but the volunteers had little trouble in dispersing it.
When, however, they attempted to cross the bridge into
Zilina, they were surprised ·b y the Magyars who cannonaded
them and forced the expedition back to Budatin. With the
Magyar army was also the son of the mistress of the Budatin
Castle, Lady Caky, who in the meantime had fled from the
castle disguised as a peasant.
On January 2, 1849, another battle was staged at Budatin. The volunteers, led by Hurban, Zach and Bloudek, were
aided by the forces of General Gatz of Austria. After surprising the Magyars and taking the bridge over the Vah, the
volunteers rested in Zilina for six days and then moved
farther into the Trencin country. The archives of Budatin
Castle were destroyed by fire during this battle .
• • •
WHO SAID IT ?
"Some pussy-footing ostriches criticize the treaty between Soviet Russia rund Czechoslovakia Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do
not want anything from the Russia,ns except protection
frOiffi the Germ8!Ils, a:nd the Russians want nothing 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
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
SLOVAKIA
59
protected it aigainst invasion, occupation and annexation,
gas chambers and concentration camps. But for that Benes
and his poli1Jcal regime denounced them as traitors. The Sl,ovaks were held responsible foT a situation which they thema situation into which they wetre
sellVes had not created thrust alOIIlg with the Czech nation by the aniti-diemocratic,
anit-Chri<Sltian, anti-Slovalk and imperialistic policies of the
late but not lamented Dr. Edward Benes, the man who sold
out the Slovaik and Ozech nations twice within a decade to
tota'1itarian powers.
•
•
•
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
BUDATIN
The ruins of the Budatin Castle stand opposite 2ilina,
just about where the Kysuca pours into the Vah. In its time
it stood guard over the J ablunkov Pass and the old commercial highways. Slovak history tells us that the Slovaks, led
by Joseph Hurban, fought two battles here during the rebellion of the 1848-1849: the first one September 11, 1848, and
the second January 2, 1849. During the latter fight the
archives of Budatin, which today undoubtedly could have
shed some light on the foggy history of ancient Slovakia,
were destroyed by fire. In 1922-23, the lower part of the
castle was restored which was adorned with a typical Budatin
tower.
In the castle there are two spacious rooms, one on the
ground floor and the other on the upper floor, which are
adorned with numerous pictures, most of them portraits of
former owners of the castle. In one of the side rooms is a
portrait of Ludmila Lazansky, to whom the Slovaks even
today refer to as "our good Ludmila." The people still recall that the mistresses of Budatin Castle treated the Slovaks rather decently and that one of them even had a bridge
built across the Vah river at a time when there was no work
and people were starving. The rooms of the castle tower
are especially interesting, containing as they do many
precious antiquities. The view of the river and the vicinity
60
S LOVAKIA
from the tower is very beautiful. In the corridor of the tower
one can also see the memorable cell with the escutcheon
of the Sunog-Komar family, where the daughter of Gaspar
Sunog, Catherine, was walled in, according to popular
legend for refusing to marry the man of her father's choice.
From the highest point of Budatin one can see the topmost
parts of the ruins of Lieta va Castle.
Budatin is mentioned in history as early as 1250; at
that time the tower existed, but not the other adjacent buildings. That year the Budatin Chapter issued the document
which determined and defined the properties of the Dukes
of Zvolen. The village of "Wudatin" is also mentioned in the
thirteenth century. At the beginning of the following
century, Budatin became the property of the king.
It is interesting to note that although Matthew Cak,
"the lord of the Vah and the Tatras," ruled over thirty
castles, he never was the lord of Budatin. Maximilian, a loyal
adherent of Robert, was awarded Budatin shortly after it
came into royal possession.
During the r eign of King Zigmund of the House of
Luxembourg, the Czech Brethren from Tabor settled beneath Budatin. In 1431 they captured '~ ilina which was well
fortified at that time, according to a document left by Zigmund. Old documents mention a certain Ladislaus of Hatna,
a valiant warrior, who was called to Budatin from Bohemia
by King Zigmund. Undoubtedly he became the captain of
the castle because he served Zigmund well; he escorted the
king to Milan for a coronation and two years later (1433)
also to Rome. The widow of Ladislaus, Raphaela, married
Gaspar Sunog, a Slovak whose name really was Komar
(Magyar translation "Szunyok").
In the sixteenth century, there was a struggle for the
throne of Hungary between King Ferdinand and John Zap of sky, just when the Turks threatened to take everything.
While the rivals fought it out for the crown of Hungary,
the wealthy landowners exploited the situation to enhance
their own positions. Many castles were taken by the plunderers. The vicinity of ~ilina was terrorized by the notorious
John and Raphael of Podmanin, who finally even took Buda-
SLOVAKIA
61
tin away from the Sunog-Komar family. The castles Hricov
and Lednica, together with Budatin, became the feared residences of the robber knights. Zilina was their political centrum. The Podmanin brothers were apprehended and convicted by the regional court for their crimes, but when they
humbled themselves and begged forgiveness, the king
amnestied them and returned their properties. But they had
to give up Budatin to the Sunog-Komar clan. Later Budatin
came into the hands of Gaspar Sunog; the story of the
walled-in bride originated in his time.
At the beginning of December 1848, Joseph Miloslav
Hurban, Slovak patriot from Beckov, and emperor's officers
Bloudek, Zach and Janecek organized an expedition of
volunteers in Tesin, Silesia. This volunteer army joined with
a division of the Austrian army, which then took everything
along the Kysuca and stood before Budatin on December
11th. At that time, Budatin was guarded by a Magyar garrison, but the volunteers had little trouble in dispersing it.
When, however, they attempted to cross the bridge into
Zilina, they were surprised ·b y the Magyars who cannonaded
them and forced the expedition back to Budatin. With the
Magyar army was also the son of the mistress of the Budatin
Castle, Lady Caky, who in the meantime had fled from the
castle disguised as a peasant.
On January 2, 1849, another battle was staged at Budatin. The volunteers, led by Hurban, Zach and Bloudek, were
aided by the forces of General Gatz of Austria. After surprising the Magyars and taking the bridge over the Vah, the
volunteers rested in Zilina for six days and then moved
farther into the Trencin country. The archives of Budatin
Castle were destroyed by fire during this battle .
• • •
WHO SAID IT ?
"Some pussy-footing ostriches criticize the treaty between Soviet Russia rund Czechoslovakia Our close collaboration with the Soviet Union needs no explanation. We do
not want anything from the Russia,ns except protection
frOiffi the Germ8!Ils, a:nd the Russians want nothing 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
Castles of Slovakia: Budatín
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 4 (9), December 1953
pp. 59-61
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1953
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/a18dfa949f9139b796fb787da525bfe3.pdf
8ceabc1ae9653b3a3c11c0225762703a
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
43
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York have a goodly number
of Slqvak residents, that is, citizens whose ethnic background is Slovak. The study of Slovak - for itself and
as a preparation for the study of other Slovanic languages - should be given serious consideration by our educators. And Slovak parochial schools should place the study
of Slovak on their curriculums. We suggest that the children be taught at least four years (5-8 grades), though
the study can be offered earlier. Books are available. And
teachers would have little difficulty in learning and presenting the subject. Interested? Write to: Philip A. Hrobak, Jednota Printery, Middletown, Pa .
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
CACHTICE
By Hubert Maciko, 0.1S.B.
We know that the history of Castle Cachtice begins
with the 14th century because in a dooument, dated in
1319, there is mention of a certain Thomas Rufus as the
administrator of Cachtice.
In the year 13·92, King Zigmund gruve the fortress to
Ctilbor "for faithful and generous services rendered.." What
these services were we do not know, but we suppose they
were of a military nature. The same document states that
if Ct.i/b.or should die without children, the fortress automatically is to be inherited by hi.s two brothers, Nicholas
and Andrew. In the same document it was stated that the
fortress must be sold only to a fellow countryman, never
to a stranger.
Ctiibor died in 1414, and the fortress was inherited
by his ,son, Ctibor n, who was at that time high- commissioner otf Nitra. In 1430 Ctibor II was a captain in the
ami:y of King Zigmund which fought against the Czech
Hussites. He died rather suddenly shortly after, and, not
leaving a male descendant, the fortress was claimed by
King Zigmund. OObor's daughter, Kathryn, inherited the
fortress Beo'kov.
�44
SLOVAKIA
In 1436, King Zigmund gave Cachtice to the provincial
txeasurer, Michael Orsagh, whose family held the fortress
until 1567. The last of the Orsaghs was Christopher. During this period the Hussite leader Svehla was a prisoner in
the fortress; he was later put to death in Kostelany.
In 1569 King Maximilian rented the fortress for 50,000
Gold crowns to Ursula Kanifa:j and her son Francis Nadasdy,
with the stipulation that in case the fortress would be
put 111p for sa,Ie, Francis Nadasdy would have first option
to buy.
In the year 1602, N adasdy did buy the fortress from
king Rudolph II. Nada sdy was the unfortunate husband
of the infamous Alzbeta (Elizabeth) Bathoricka. The story
of Alz,beta Bathoricka, sordid in every detail, is nevertheless true. It begins on a morning of a beautiful day in
May. Alzbeta had many servants, girl servants, who took
care of her every whim. She was a proud and haughty
woman, but no,t beautiful. A young girl servant, com'bing
her mistress's hair, accidentally pulled out a small tuft.
Alzbeta became infuriated and struck the girl across the
mouth, drawing blood. Few drops of the young girl's blood
happened to fall on the uplifted face of the cruel mistress.
Looking into the mirror, she imagined that where the drops
of blood fell, the skin seemed much smoother and more
youthful. Suddenly an insane idea began to germinate in
her mind: if the drops of blood did maJke her skin smoother
and younger loolking, why not enhance her beauty, by
bathing in the blood of young girls? It could be that the
blood of young maidens was the long sought for fountain
of youth, she thought, and the more she thought rubout
it, the stronger her dete:r,mination became to use the blood
bath. She needed accomplices, but it was not di'5ficult to
enlist the services of some of her serivants for a consiideraJble grant of money and special pri'Vileges.
1
BLOOD OF 600 SLOVAK GffiLS
The serwants went out into the neighboring villages
and towns and by means fair and foul, by promises and
intimidations, brought many young girls to the Castle.
The girls ,w ere treated ,very nicely for a time, and then mur-
�SLOVAKIA
45
dered in the most cruel manner, their blood supplying the
"fountain of yO'llth" for the ghou1ish mistress. It 1s said
that some 600 young girls were murdered by the mistress
of Cachtice.
Of course the disruppearance of these girls could not
be kept secret forever. Rumors began to circulate, but
Bathorio'ka was a mighty lady. She was mistress not only
of many thousand acres of land, but mistress of many thousands of lives. She had the power of life or death over
her underlings. And so the people under her dared not
e~press in words the fears that were in their hearts. They
suffered mutely, seeing their daughters disappear one by
one. Bathorioka had powerful connections; she was a favorite friend of the Palatine, being invited to the marriage
feast af his daughter, Judith. The feast lasted for a whole
year.
But there was one person who did not fear the infamous woman. He was the parish priest of Cachtice. After
dbtaining all the proof he could, he set out for Bratislava,
where the court was then in session. The priest had little
success at that time, but in the year 1610 the Palatine
George Thurzo, due to pressure of public o,pinion, decided
to investigate. With two nephews of Bathori cka, Zrinsky
and Drugeth respectively, he set out for the fortress, where
he learned the bitter truth. Entering the fortress unheralded, he caught Bathoricka in the act olf killing two young
maidens. He found other corpses on a manure pile outside
the fortress. He oroered the siezure of the castle and put
Alzbeta in a dungeon together with her helpers John FickoUjvary, Helen Jo, Kathryn Benicka, and Dorothy Szentes.
These last were taken to the Palatine's Castle and condemned to death.
On January 7, 1611, the court in Bytca handed down
this decree: "We, Theodosius Strmsky of Sul'oiv, the highest magistrate of his Majesty the King, Gaspar Orodoy
of Trencin, John David of St. Peter, George Lehotsky,
Nicholas Hrabovsky, John Zaturecky, John Borsic'ky, Grubriel Hlinidky, Michael Tusins:ky, Raiphael Kasoivsky, Benedict Kozar, Stephen Marsfovsky, Stephen Alkay, John
1
�46
SLOVAKIA
MedNedky, all members of thl,s august court, maike public
to a1l whom it may concern that we were called together
by the Palatine George Thurzo to the city of Bytca this
day, January 7, in the year 1611, to sit in judgment over
the deeds of John Fidko and the women Helen, Kathryn,
and Dorothy, and found the following to be true:
Whereas it is known that Palatine George Thurzo has
been constituted to guard the persons and the property
of those under his care as Palatine of the county of
Ora,,va, to punish the guilty and reward the deserving,
amd wishing to do his duty, he could not be deaf and blind
to the deeds of one AliJbeta Bathoric!ka., the widow of
Flrancis Nadasdy, who was an honoraJble man, deserving
much from his country, but whose widow committed
deeds of tyranny unheard of since the birth of mran!kind,
having done away with innumeralble young girls for the
pur,pose of bathing in their blood, he, therefore, caused
an investigation to be made of the deeds of one Alzbeta
Bathorioka, the investigation based on evidence presented
against her by the townsipoople. The truth of the accusations were subsequently sulbstantiated by her own servants,
accomplices in her many crimes.
Hearing of the cruelties, supposedJy committed in
the Cachtice Castle; His Highness, Pafatine George
Th1ll"IZo, returning from celebrations in Presporok (now
Bratisla,,va) in company of the two nephews of Al2Jb.e ta
Bathoricka, Nicholas Zrinsky and Juraj Drugeth, and a
large following of friends and ~oldiers, unexpectedly visited Cachtice, and at the very entrance to the Castle was
confronted by mute evidence in the form of the mutHated
bodies of two young girls, prOIVing beyond the shadow of
doubt that the rumors aJbout Cachtice were true. Alhta
Bathoricka was immediately sentenced to life imprisonment in her own Castle. John Fidko, Helen, Dorothy, and
Kathryn we,r e ordered to be tried elsewhere, and if proven
guilty, to be given sentences commensurate with the
hideousness of their crimes so that others may be deterred
from committing the same.
The accused confessed, particularly Dorothy, who was
�SLOVAKIA
47
the chief offender next to her mistre,ss, that they took
part in the awful deaths of innocent young girls. The
court, finding them guilty imposed the foNowing sentences:
Dorothy and Helen shall have their ringers pulled off
their hands with burning pincers, then be burned at the
staJke. John Ficko, who tOOlk a minor part in the bloody
orgies and on account of his ad!vanced age, shall not be
tortured, but shall be beheaded and his body burned at
the stalke. And since Dorothy and Helen pleaded for Kathryn, and only John F'i.cko witnessed against her, she ~hall
be put into prison until such time as her innocence or guilt
shall be proven ,b eyond a possible doUJbt. These sentences
to be carried out immediately."
A~ta BMhorioka was not tried publicly. She was
sentenced by George Thurzo to life imprisonment in the
dungeons of the Cachtice castle where she died in the
year 1614. After her death, the fortress was inherited
by her two children, Paul Nadasdy and Kathryn, who
was married to Jan Drugeth. A third child, Anna, wife
of Nicholas Zrinsky inherited nothing. Paul Nadasdy received the title of Count in the year 1625. After the death
of Paul and Anna Nadasdy, the fortress became the
property of the many heirs. In the yerur 1703, the fortress was the property of Count Paul Forgaic. In 1707,
for reasons not girven, the fortress was besieged by the
army of the king and truken. The following year it was
wrested from the king by the followers of Francis Rak6czi II. The fortress commanded a beautiful view of the
Povazie and Zahorie area. Hrad Cachtice is classed among
the larger fortresses of SloJVakia; it had two large towers
and three courts. It has been uninhabita:ble since the beginning of the 18th ceI11tury.
The people of the vicinity give the old ruins a wide
berth. They are superstitious and will bless themselves
when passing the ruins. They will tell you that if you listen
on a summer's evening, ju.s-t before a sto:rm, you will hear
the wailings of the young maidens who were sacrificed
to a woman's vrunity. They whisper a ;prayer for them and
utter a curse for Ambeta Bathorioka.
�
SLOVAKIA
43
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York have a goodly number
of Slqvak residents, that is, citizens whose ethnic background is Slovak. The study of Slovak - for itself and
as a preparation for the study of other Slovanic languages - should be given serious consideration by our educators. And Slovak parochial schools should place the study
of Slovak on their curriculums. We suggest that the children be taught at least four years (5-8 grades), though
the study can be offered earlier. Books are available. And
teachers would have little difficulty in learning and presenting the subject. Interested? Write to: Philip A. Hrobak, Jednota Printery, Middletown, Pa .
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
CACHTICE
By Hubert Maciko, 0.1S.B.
We know that the history of Castle Cachtice begins
with the 14th century because in a dooument, dated in
1319, there is mention of a certain Thomas Rufus as the
administrator of Cachtice.
In the year 13·92, King Zigmund gruve the fortress to
Ctilbor "for faithful and generous services rendered.." What
these services were we do not know, but we suppose they
were of a military nature. The same document states that
if Ct.i/b.or should die without children, the fortress automatically is to be inherited by hi.s two brothers, Nicholas
and Andrew. In the same document it was stated that the
fortress must be sold only to a fellow countryman, never
to a stranger.
Ctiibor died in 1414, and the fortress was inherited
by his ,son, Ctibor n, who was at that time high- commissioner otf Nitra. In 1430 Ctibor II was a captain in the
ami:y of King Zigmund which fought against the Czech
Hussites. He died rather suddenly shortly after, and, not
leaving a male descendant, the fortress was claimed by
King Zigmund. OObor's daughter, Kathryn, inherited the
fortress Beo'kov.
�44
SLOVAKIA
In 1436, King Zigmund gave Cachtice to the provincial
txeasurer, Michael Orsagh, whose family held the fortress
until 1567. The last of the Orsaghs was Christopher. During this period the Hussite leader Svehla was a prisoner in
the fortress; he was later put to death in Kostelany.
In 1569 King Maximilian rented the fortress for 50,000
Gold crowns to Ursula Kanifa:j and her son Francis Nadasdy,
with the stipulation that in case the fortress would be
put 111p for sa,Ie, Francis Nadasdy would have first option
to buy.
In the year 1602, N adasdy did buy the fortress from
king Rudolph II. Nada sdy was the unfortunate husband
of the infamous Alzbeta (Elizabeth) Bathoricka. The story
of Alz,beta Bathoricka, sordid in every detail, is nevertheless true. It begins on a morning of a beautiful day in
May. Alzbeta had many servants, girl servants, who took
care of her every whim. She was a proud and haughty
woman, but no,t beautiful. A young girl servant, com'bing
her mistress's hair, accidentally pulled out a small tuft.
Alzbeta became infuriated and struck the girl across the
mouth, drawing blood. Few drops of the young girl's blood
happened to fall on the uplifted face of the cruel mistress.
Looking into the mirror, she imagined that where the drops
of blood fell, the skin seemed much smoother and more
youthful. Suddenly an insane idea began to germinate in
her mind: if the drops of blood did maJke her skin smoother
and younger loolking, why not enhance her beauty, by
bathing in the blood of young girls? It could be that the
blood of young maidens was the long sought for fountain
of youth, she thought, and the more she thought rubout
it, the stronger her dete:r,mination became to use the blood
bath. She needed accomplices, but it was not di'5ficult to
enlist the services of some of her serivants for a consiideraJble grant of money and special pri'Vileges.
1
BLOOD OF 600 SLOVAK GffiLS
The serwants went out into the neighboring villages
and towns and by means fair and foul, by promises and
intimidations, brought many young girls to the Castle.
The girls ,w ere treated ,very nicely for a time, and then mur-
�SLOVAKIA
45
dered in the most cruel manner, their blood supplying the
"fountain of yO'llth" for the ghou1ish mistress. It 1s said
that some 600 young girls were murdered by the mistress
of Cachtice.
Of course the disruppearance of these girls could not
be kept secret forever. Rumors began to circulate, but
Bathorio'ka was a mighty lady. She was mistress not only
of many thousand acres of land, but mistress of many thousands of lives. She had the power of life or death over
her underlings. And so the people under her dared not
e~press in words the fears that were in their hearts. They
suffered mutely, seeing their daughters disappear one by
one. Bathorioka had powerful connections; she was a favorite friend of the Palatine, being invited to the marriage
feast af his daughter, Judith. The feast lasted for a whole
year.
But there was one person who did not fear the infamous woman. He was the parish priest of Cachtice. After
dbtaining all the proof he could, he set out for Bratislava,
where the court was then in session. The priest had little
success at that time, but in the year 1610 the Palatine
George Thurzo, due to pressure of public o,pinion, decided
to investigate. With two nephews of Bathori cka, Zrinsky
and Drugeth respectively, he set out for the fortress, where
he learned the bitter truth. Entering the fortress unheralded, he caught Bathoricka in the act olf killing two young
maidens. He found other corpses on a manure pile outside
the fortress. He oroered the siezure of the castle and put
Alzbeta in a dungeon together with her helpers John FickoUjvary, Helen Jo, Kathryn Benicka, and Dorothy Szentes.
These last were taken to the Palatine's Castle and condemned to death.
On January 7, 1611, the court in Bytca handed down
this decree: "We, Theodosius Strmsky of Sul'oiv, the highest magistrate of his Majesty the King, Gaspar Orodoy
of Trencin, John David of St. Peter, George Lehotsky,
Nicholas Hrabovsky, John Zaturecky, John Borsic'ky, Grubriel Hlinidky, Michael Tusins:ky, Raiphael Kasoivsky, Benedict Kozar, Stephen Marsfovsky, Stephen Alkay, John
1
�46
SLOVAKIA
MedNedky, all members of thl,s august court, maike public
to a1l whom it may concern that we were called together
by the Palatine George Thurzo to the city of Bytca this
day, January 7, in the year 1611, to sit in judgment over
the deeds of John Fidko and the women Helen, Kathryn,
and Dorothy, and found the following to be true:
Whereas it is known that Palatine George Thurzo has
been constituted to guard the persons and the property
of those under his care as Palatine of the county of
Ora,,va, to punish the guilty and reward the deserving,
amd wishing to do his duty, he could not be deaf and blind
to the deeds of one AliJbeta Bathoric!ka., the widow of
Flrancis Nadasdy, who was an honoraJble man, deserving
much from his country, but whose widow committed
deeds of tyranny unheard of since the birth of mran!kind,
having done away with innumeralble young girls for the
pur,pose of bathing in their blood, he, therefore, caused
an investigation to be made of the deeds of one Alzbeta
Bathorioka, the investigation based on evidence presented
against her by the townsipoople. The truth of the accusations were subsequently sulbstantiated by her own servants,
accomplices in her many crimes.
Hearing of the cruelties, supposedJy committed in
the Cachtice Castle; His Highness, Pafatine George
Th1ll"IZo, returning from celebrations in Presporok (now
Bratisla,,va) in company of the two nephews of Al2Jb.e ta
Bathoricka, Nicholas Zrinsky and Juraj Drugeth, and a
large following of friends and ~oldiers, unexpectedly visited Cachtice, and at the very entrance to the Castle was
confronted by mute evidence in the form of the mutHated
bodies of two young girls, prOIVing beyond the shadow of
doubt that the rumors aJbout Cachtice were true. Alhta
Bathoricka was immediately sentenced to life imprisonment in her own Castle. John Fidko, Helen, Dorothy, and
Kathryn we,r e ordered to be tried elsewhere, and if proven
guilty, to be given sentences commensurate with the
hideousness of their crimes so that others may be deterred
from committing the same.
The accused confessed, particularly Dorothy, who was
�SLOVAKIA
47
the chief offender next to her mistre,ss, that they took
part in the awful deaths of innocent young girls. The
court, finding them guilty imposed the foNowing sentences:
Dorothy and Helen shall have their ringers pulled off
their hands with burning pincers, then be burned at the
staJke. John Ficko, who tOOlk a minor part in the bloody
orgies and on account of his ad!vanced age, shall not be
tortured, but shall be beheaded and his body burned at
the stalke. And since Dorothy and Helen pleaded for Kathryn, and only John F'i.cko witnessed against her, she ~hall
be put into prison until such time as her innocence or guilt
shall be proven ,b eyond a possible doUJbt. These sentences
to be carried out immediately."
A~ta BMhorioka was not tried publicly. She was
sentenced by George Thurzo to life imprisonment in the
dungeons of the Cachtice castle where she died in the
year 1614. After her death, the fortress was inherited
by her two children, Paul Nadasdy and Kathryn, who
was married to Jan Drugeth. A third child, Anna, wife
of Nicholas Zrinsky inherited nothing. Paul Nadasdy received the title of Count in the year 1625. After the death
of Paul and Anna Nadasdy, the fortress became the
property of the many heirs. In the yerur 1703, the fortress was the property of Count Paul Forgaic. In 1707,
for reasons not girven, the fortress was besieged by the
army of the king and truken. The following year it was
wrested from the king by the followers of Francis Rak6czi II. The fortress commanded a beautiful view of the
Povazie and Zahorie area. Hrad Cachtice is classed among
the larger fortresses of SloJVakia; it had two large towers
and three courts. It has been uninhabita:ble since the beginning of the 18th ceI11tury.
The people of the vicinity give the old ruins a wide
berth. They are superstitious and will bless themselves
when passing the ruins. They will tell you that if you listen
on a summer's evening, ju.s-t before a sto:rm, you will hear
the wailings of the young maidens who were sacrificed
to a woman's vrunity. They whisper a ;prayer for them and
utter a curse for Ambeta Bathorioka.
�
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
43
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York have a goodly number
of Slqvak residents, that is, citizens whose ethnic background is Slovak. The study of Slovak - for itself and
as a preparation for the study of other Slovanic languages - should be given serious consideration by our educators. And Slovak parochial schools should place the study
of Slovak on their curriculums. We suggest that the children be taught at least four years (5-8 grades), though
the study can be offered earlier. Books are available. And
teachers would have little difficulty in learning and presenting the subject. Interested? Write to: Philip A. Hrobak, Jednota Printery, Middletown, Pa .
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
CACHTICE
By Hubert Maciko, 0.1S.B.
We know that the history of Castle Cachtice begins
with the 14th century because in a dooument, dated in
1319, there is mention of a certain Thomas Rufus as the
administrator of Cachtice.
In the year 13·92, King Zigmund gruve the fortress to
Ctilbor "for faithful and generous services rendered.." What
these services were we do not know, but we suppose they
were of a military nature. The same document states that
if Ct.i/b.or should die without children, the fortress automatically is to be inherited by hi.s two brothers, Nicholas
and Andrew. In the same document it was stated that the
fortress must be sold only to a fellow countryman, never
to a stranger.
Ctiibor died in 1414, and the fortress was inherited
by his ,son, Ctibor n, who was at that time high- commissioner otf Nitra. In 1430 Ctibor II was a captain in the
ami:y of King Zigmund which fought against the Czech
Hussites. He died rather suddenly shortly after, and, not
leaving a male descendant, the fortress was claimed by
King Zigmund. OObor's daughter, Kathryn, inherited the
fortress Beo'kov.
44
SLOVAKIA
In 1436, King Zigmund gave Cachtice to the provincial
txeasurer, Michael Orsagh, whose family held the fortress
until 1567. The last of the Orsaghs was Christopher. During this period the Hussite leader Svehla was a prisoner in
the fortress; he was later put to death in Kostelany.
In 1569 King Maximilian rented the fortress for 50,000
Gold crowns to Ursula Kanifa:j and her son Francis Nadasdy,
with the stipulation that in case the fortress would be
put 111p for sa,Ie, Francis Nadasdy would have first option
to buy.
In the year 1602, N adasdy did buy the fortress from
king Rudolph II. Nada sdy was the unfortunate husband
of the infamous Alzbeta (Elizabeth) Bathoricka. The story
of Alz,beta Bathoricka, sordid in every detail, is nevertheless true. It begins on a morning of a beautiful day in
May. Alzbeta had many servants, girl servants, who took
care of her every whim. She was a proud and haughty
woman, but no,t beautiful. A young girl servant, com'bing
her mistress's hair, accidentally pulled out a small tuft.
Alzbeta became infuriated and struck the girl across the
mouth, drawing blood. Few drops of the young girl's blood
happened to fall on the uplifted face of the cruel mistress.
Looking into the mirror, she imagined that where the drops
of blood fell, the skin seemed much smoother and more
youthful. Suddenly an insane idea began to germinate in
her mind: if the drops of blood did maJke her skin smoother
and younger loolking, why not enhance her beauty, by
bathing in the blood of young girls? It could be that the
blood of young maidens was the long sought for fountain
of youth, she thought, and the more she thought rubout
it, the stronger her dete:r,mination became to use the blood
bath. She needed accomplices, but it was not di'5ficult to
enlist the services of some of her serivants for a consiideraJble grant of money and special pri'Vileges.
1
BLOOD OF 600 SLOVAK GffiLS
The serwants went out into the neighboring villages
and towns and by means fair and foul, by promises and
intimidations, brought many young girls to the Castle.
The girls ,w ere treated ,very nicely for a time, and then mur-
SLOVAKIA
45
dered in the most cruel manner, their blood supplying the
"fountain of yO'llth" for the ghou1ish mistress. It 1s said
that some 600 young girls were murdered by the mistress
of Cachtice.
Of course the disruppearance of these girls could not
be kept secret forever. Rumors began to circulate, but
Bathorio'ka was a mighty lady. She was mistress not only
of many thousand acres of land, but mistress of many thousands of lives. She had the power of life or death over
her underlings. And so the people under her dared not
e~press in words the fears that were in their hearts. They
suffered mutely, seeing their daughters disappear one by
one. Bathorioka had powerful connections; she was a favorite friend of the Palatine, being invited to the marriage
feast af his daughter, Judith. The feast lasted for a whole
year.
But there was one person who did not fear the infamous woman. He was the parish priest of Cachtice. After
dbtaining all the proof he could, he set out for Bratislava,
where the court was then in session. The priest had little
success at that time, but in the year 1610 the Palatine
George Thurzo, due to pressure of public o,pinion, decided
to investigate. With two nephews of Bathori cka, Zrinsky
and Drugeth respectively, he set out for the fortress, where
he learned the bitter truth. Entering the fortress unheralded, he caught Bathoricka in the act olf killing two young
maidens. He found other corpses on a manure pile outside
the fortress. He oroered the siezure of the castle and put
Alzbeta in a dungeon together with her helpers John FickoUjvary, Helen Jo, Kathryn Benicka, and Dorothy Szentes.
These last were taken to the Palatine's Castle and condemned to death.
On January 7, 1611, the court in Bytca handed down
this decree: "We, Theodosius Strmsky of Sul'oiv, the highest magistrate of his Majesty the King, Gaspar Orodoy
of Trencin, John David of St. Peter, George Lehotsky,
Nicholas Hrabovsky, John Zaturecky, John Borsic'ky, Grubriel Hlinidky, Michael Tusins:ky, Raiphael Kasoivsky, Benedict Kozar, Stephen Marsfovsky, Stephen Alkay, John
1
46
SLOVAKIA
MedNedky, all members of thl,s august court, maike public
to a1l whom it may concern that we were called together
by the Palatine George Thurzo to the city of Bytca this
day, January 7, in the year 1611, to sit in judgment over
the deeds of John Fidko and the women Helen, Kathryn,
and Dorothy, and found the following to be true:
Whereas it is known that Palatine George Thurzo has
been constituted to guard the persons and the property
of those under his care as Palatine of the county of
Ora,,va, to punish the guilty and reward the deserving,
amd wishing to do his duty, he could not be deaf and blind
to the deeds of one AliJbeta Bathoric!ka., the widow of
Flrancis Nadasdy, who was an honoraJble man, deserving
much from his country, but whose widow committed
deeds of tyranny unheard of since the birth of mran!kind,
having done away with innumeralble young girls for the
pur,pose of bathing in their blood, he, therefore, caused
an investigation to be made of the deeds of one Alzbeta
Bathorioka, the investigation based on evidence presented
against her by the townsipoople. The truth of the accusations were subsequently sulbstantiated by her own servants,
accomplices in her many crimes.
Hearing of the cruelties, supposedJy committed in
the Cachtice Castle; His Highness, Pafatine George
Th1ll"IZo, returning from celebrations in Presporok (now
Bratisla,,va) in company of the two nephews of Al2Jb.e ta
Bathoricka, Nicholas Zrinsky and Juraj Drugeth, and a
large following of friends and ~oldiers, unexpectedly visited Cachtice, and at the very entrance to the Castle was
confronted by mute evidence in the form of the mutHated
bodies of two young girls, prOIVing beyond the shadow of
doubt that the rumors aJbout Cachtice were true. Alhta
Bathoricka was immediately sentenced to life imprisonment in her own Castle. John Fidko, Helen, Dorothy, and
Kathryn we,r e ordered to be tried elsewhere, and if proven
guilty, to be given sentences commensurate with the
hideousness of their crimes so that others may be deterred
from committing the same.
The accused confessed, particularly Dorothy, who was
SLOVAKIA
47
the chief offender next to her mistre,ss, that they took
part in the awful deaths of innocent young girls. The
court, finding them guilty imposed the foNowing sentences:
Dorothy and Helen shall have their ringers pulled off
their hands with burning pincers, then be burned at the
staJke. John Ficko, who tOOlk a minor part in the bloody
orgies and on account of his ad!vanced age, shall not be
tortured, but shall be beheaded and his body burned at
the stalke. And since Dorothy and Helen pleaded for Kathryn, and only John F'i.cko witnessed against her, she ~hall
be put into prison until such time as her innocence or guilt
shall be proven ,b eyond a possible doUJbt. These sentences
to be carried out immediately."
A~ta BMhorioka was not tried publicly. She was
sentenced by George Thurzo to life imprisonment in the
dungeons of the Cachtice castle where she died in the
year 1614. After her death, the fortress was inherited
by her two children, Paul Nadasdy and Kathryn, who
was married to Jan Drugeth. A third child, Anna, wife
of Nicholas Zrinsky inherited nothing. Paul Nadasdy received the title of Count in the year 1625. After the death
of Paul and Anna Nadasdy, the fortress became the
property of the many heirs. In the yerur 1703, the fortress was the property of Count Paul Forgaic. In 1707,
for reasons not girven, the fortress was besieged by the
army of the king and truken. The following year it was
wrested from the king by the followers of Francis Rak6czi II. The fortress commanded a beautiful view of the
Povazie and Zahorie area. Hrad Cachtice is classed among
the larger fortresses of SloJVakia; it had two large towers
and three courts. It has been uninhabita:ble since the beginning of the 18th ceI11tury.
The people of the vicinity give the old ruins a wide
berth. They are superstitious and will bless themselves
when passing the ruins. They will tell you that if you listen
on a summer's evening, ju.s-t before a sto:rm, you will hear
the wailings of the young maidens who were sacrificed
to a woman's vrunity. They whisper a ;prayer for them and
utter a curse for Ambeta Bathorioka.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Čachtice
Description
An account of the resource
Hubert Macko, O.S.B.
Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 7 (32), September-December 1960
pp. 43-47
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macko, Hubert
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1960
castles
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cc5da19c756175994df02b515c92e008.pdf
6b86170de436bd3268e0d249815d2636
PDF Text
Text
61
SLOVAKIA
For the Slovak nation statehood is a vital question not so
much because of the need to put an end to the injustices
suffered at the hands of other nations in alien state formations, but largely because it is striving to attain a new
political order suited to its own national individuality and
mentality. Such a positive viewpoint prevails over negative
arguments. Czech internationalism, Schweik opportunism,
and the honoring of foreign prophets from Marx to Chruscev are all alien to the Slovak national character. The Slovaks did not go beyond the boundaries of Hungary so that
they might get stuck in the swamps of Czech imperialism.
The Slovak nation wants cultural and political freedom,
because ultimately it wants to be itself - a national entity
interested in its preservation.
It is in this that the substance of Martin Razus's political message manifests itself to us for our generation.
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
HUBERT MACKO, 0.5.B.
CASTLE GELNICA
There is not much to tell about Gelnica; all that remains of it is a .pile of stone and the bare foundation of
what was perhaps once the "ne:'bojsa v e z·a " (Do not be
afraid Tower). 'Dhere can be ,f ound no authentic data aJbout
the founder of hrad Gelnica. However, it is known for certain Juraj (George) Beibek, who also owned the neighboring and vastly more importaTut fortress "Krasna Horka"
(Beautiful Mount) . In the year 1527 Zapofisky tooik Geinica
from Bebeik by force. Later on Thurzo beeame its master,
the same Thurzo whose family played such an important
part in the early history of Slo;va:kia.
During the very trying, uncertain, and bloody years
of the great uprisings of Stephen Bocskay, Stephen Bethlen, GeoPge RaJk6czi, Imrich Th6kbly and Francis Ra!lrnczi ,
lasting upwards of 150 years, Gelnica changed hands many
times. From each successive exchange, Gelnica suffered,
and, since it was never too important strategically few re1
�62
SLOVAKIA
pairs were made, finally it became uninh abitable and was
abandoned to time and the elements.
As about all other castles, so aibout Gelnica people
wove a legend, which could be entitled: "The last days of
Gelnica." The last owner of the castle people say, was a
very beautiful widow. Her husband died a hero's death on
the field of glory and left her with only a small garrison
for protection. 1Soon wo.rd s.pread among the greedy soldiers
of the king that Gelnica contained untold treasures - gold,
silver, precious stones - and no soldiers to guard this treasure. Thin!king that no opposition would be met with, the
king's army advanced on the fortress in a disorderly fashion. To their suriprise, a salvo of shots greeted them and
moved down the advance guard. After reorganizing, the
soldiers attacked. 'Ehe small garrison inside fortress Gelnica gave a good account of itself. Wave after wa'Ve of the
enemy was thrown back with great losses. However, with
each enemy onslaught, the ranks of the garrison dwindled.
After many days of hard fighting, hungry and tired unto
death, the garriJSon was over.powered. The castle was destroyed and every living creature in it killed.
B efore the fatal hour, however, the beautiful wido,w,
seeing that a11 was lost, had her valuables gathered and
thrown into the castle's deep well. And lest a fate wors-e
than death befall her, she jumped into the well. The king's
army found neither treasure nor the beautiful widow.
Not far from the castle flo,w s the sma:11 river Gelnica,
which in some way was connected underground with the
castle's deep well. After a time fishermen found the 1body
of the owner of Gelnica and, in the presence of the people
of the neighborhood , buried her under the ruins of the
castle. These then, according to the legend. were the last
days of Gelnica. From the pile of stones that was once
fortress Gelnica, one has a fine view of the surrounding
hills and valleys. And if one listens attentively when the
wind is low, one can hear a soft sobbing. People will teU
you it is the beautiful widow, sobbing for her beloved husband, who died on the field of g}ory. You will bless yourself and murmur a fervent: "Requiescant in peace!"
�SLOVAKIA
63
HRAD BACKOV
In the old Zemplin province, in a northwes terly direction from the beautiful town of Secovce, and not far from
the small vallIDge of Backov, stood in the ancent fortress
of Ba{!1kov. AH that we can S8iy about i,t is that it was once
a fortress of some proportio ns. Now only a few ditches and
small piles of lichened stone mark the spot. The only reason
we write albout it is that Slovak people wove around it a
legend from pre-sChristian times, when many of our forefathers still worshipp ed Parom, Morena, and the other Slav
pagan gods.
It is not known when the fortress was erected, but
during the Tatar invasions , it was the prQPerty of the king.
Many of the fortresse s in those hectic days were held in
fief by so-called "hrnciari ", frontiersm en, who were in the
service of the <king as guardsme n of the frontiers and were
responsib le for the upikeep and repairs of the fo.rbress. Some
times for outstandi ng services, the :king would grant to
such a frontiersm an a smal[ ipiece of ground, conferrin g on
him the questiona ble title of "zeman" (landown er), making him the boss of the fortress.
When the "Order of Frontiers men" was aJbolished, the
kings gave these fortresses , with much land, to individua ls
usually as a compensa tion for services rendered. These
services were either in money for the prosecuti on of war
against neighbori ng !kings, or for military he'1p against the
enemy.
At the beginning of the 14th century, the king ga•ve
Bacikov to a family named Petenovec . When, for some unrecoo-ded reason, the family fell from grace, the king confiscated the castle. Im the year 1321, King Robert Charles
traded Bookov for another castle to a family named Macko.
Ba,,okov then passed into the possessio n of the Bycksove c
family and with the fortress the villages of Sefovce, Ve~' ky a Maly Backov, KerepYa, Tri ¥isnove, Kahainovce. Pol'anka, Petrusovc e, Parno, Albin, and many others.
Members of this family divided the estate in the year
1329, Baokov with a few villages becoming the property
�64
SLOVAKIA
of Done. During the next 270 years the o·Nnership of Backov changed hands many times, becoming in the year 1598
the property of four men: Bockaj, Francis Rak6czi, Stephen
Kecera, and Peter Sokol. In the 17th century we find as
owners of Baakov: Fischer, Semer, Mari.as, Puky, Kolnas,
and Forgac. The last name figured largely in the history of
many Slovak castles, as also the name Rak6czi, and others.
In the year 1688 BMkov was destroyed and abandoned.
Its glory passed. forever. Where once was heard the clang
of armor, jingle of the sword, the hoofbeats of the finest
horses; where once the wealthy masters lived vigorously
but riotously - today reigns a depressing emptiness and
quiet, disturbed only by the raven and the oiwl.
The people of the vicinity will tell you the following
legend, S1Wearing by all that is holy that what they say is
the truth. At one time the owner of the fortress was a certain DU'ke Draik. He was a cruel master to the hapless
people who toiled in the fields for him. He was a miser
and nothing could be hidden from him. Woe to the unfortunate who would take so much as a handful of grain from
the field! Drak found everything and took everything,
whether it belonged to him or not. Although e~tremely
rich, he wais never satisfied. When merchants from other
countries 1passed in the vicinity, Drak would swoop upon
them like a bird of prey and they were fortunate if they
got away with their lives. Consequently merchants gavE:r
wide berth to BackOJV.
People will tell you that when Drak was dying, lightning struck the fortress thirty times, as if the devil was
impatient to carry off the soul of the tyrant Drak to the
deepest pit in hell. When Drak finally died, the people
sacked the fortress and carried away everything that could
be carried. The devil was not satisfied merely with the soul
of Dralk, the people will tell you, but he also wanted some
of Drruk's possessions. Not knowing that the castle was
sacked and destroyed, the devil returned one dark night to
carry olff some of its treas,ures. He soon fiHed his sack with
what he thought was gold, but in reality large pieces of
stone from the destroyed castle. Since the stones were very
heavy, the devil rested not far from the village of Vihorl'at
�SLOVAKIA
66
and soon fell asleep. When the bright rays of the rising
sun awalkened him, he was so startled that he jumped into
the valley below. The ground where he fell, opened and
swallowed him up, leaving a huge hole which soon filled
with water. Even to this day the ,people of Vihorl'at wiU
show the traveller the bottomless laike, "morsike oko," to
them.
• • •
HRA.'D JELSAVA
The Jelsava Castle was in reality two fortresses. The
older one was ,probaJbly an ancient Slovak provincial fortress made of wood. Nothing remains of it except several
large moats and there are no signs oif any stone.
The first mention of the older Jelsava fortress is contained in a document of King Bela IV, in 1243, to Bebek
whose holdings bordered on Jelsava, which belonged to
the king. In the year 1283 the fortress was given to one
Dezider Ra1boldi, whose family came from Ita,l y in 1109.
The family name was later changed to Tisvai. Later the
fortress was besieged by John Jisikra of Brandys, and since
that time no other mention ,w as made of it. It was ,proba:bly
destroyed during that rsiege and never rebuilt.
In the chronicles of the Hussite wars, there is mention
made of another "hrad Je1sava," situated about one half
hour's journey from the town ,b earing the same name. This
fortress was made of stone. It wais not a large fortress,
but in places the walls were over two meters in thickness.
It is not known exactly when this second fortress was built,
but in 1299 it is referred to as a "destroyed" fortress. It
was rebuilt and passed into possession of the Knights
Templars. Eventually, for some unrecorded reason, the
Templars were driven out. They built a monastery on the
site where the Palace now stands.
King Louis of Anjou gave the fortress as gift to his
court-chancellor, Lestar of Jelsava, who repaired the fortress and moved into it, leaving the court of Louis, which
did not please the king at all. Being a man of enterprising
spirit, his motto being "nothing ventured, nothing gained,"
he invited tradesmen, businessmen, miners, and craftsmen
�SLOVAKIA
66
to Je1sava. Soon Je1sava became a thriving community and
Lestar became immensely wealthy.
Upon Lestar's deaJth the fortress passed into the possession. of one George Jolsavy, a very fickle and scatterbrained bachelor, who cared more for a bottle of wine and
gay company than he did for affairs of buisness. He was
surrounded at all times with men and women of his ilk,
who lived rioutously and spent friend Jolsavy's money in
quick order. When the last gold piece was gone, Jolsvay
mortgaged the fortress to Dominic Bebek for 7,707 pieces of
mortgaged money. Since he died without heirs, the family
name died with him, a name which played some very important roles in the early history of Slovakia.
After Jolsvay's death, litigatio!l1 was started against
Bebek by Perenyi, who also claimed possession of Jelsava.
Queen :IDlizwbeth did not recognize the claims of Beibek or
Perenyi and confiscated the fortress. Later she leased it to
Perenyi for a yearly rental of 6,007 gold pieces.
In 1440 John Jiskra conquered a greated part of
Gerner and took control of aJ.l the fortresses on the territory he occupied. Among them was hrad Jelsava. In 1453,
after Jiskra was defeated, King Ladislav V gave the fortress to Perenyi. Here the history of Jelsava is somewhat
muddled. Although Perenyi is said to have rebuilt JelsaJVa
in the year 1461, it is mentioned in the chronicles as a
"castellum" belonging to Bebek. For five moire years the
two families fought for the possession of the fortress. In
1466 Bebek won the suit, and the family remained in possession of J elsava until it died out.
During the Turkish invasions, Jelsava was destroyed
and never again rebuilt. The land passed into the possession
of the owners of Muran Castle. In 1720, King Charles ID
gave Muran and all the land to the Kohany family. By marriage the land passed into the ·p ossession of the present
Coburg family.
•
•
•
WANT TO LEARN SLOVAK? Order the "-SLOVAK
LESSONS" {$3.50) and the ENGLlSH-SLOVAK DICTIONARY {$4.00) by Hrobak today!
�
61
SLOVAKIA
For the Slovak nation statehood is a vital question not so
much because of the need to put an end to the injustices
suffered at the hands of other nations in alien state formations, but largely because it is striving to attain a new
political order suited to its own national individuality and
mentality. Such a positive viewpoint prevails over negative
arguments. Czech internationalism, Schweik opportunism,
and the honoring of foreign prophets from Marx to Chruscev are all alien to the Slovak national character. The Slovaks did not go beyond the boundaries of Hungary so that
they might get stuck in the swamps of Czech imperialism.
The Slovak nation wants cultural and political freedom,
because ultimately it wants to be itself - a national entity
interested in its preservation.
It is in this that the substance of Martin Razus's political message manifests itself to us for our generation.
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
HUBERT MACKO, 0.5.B.
CASTLE GELNICA
There is not much to tell about Gelnica; all that remains of it is a .pile of stone and the bare foundation of
what was perhaps once the "ne:'bojsa v e z·a " (Do not be
afraid Tower). 'Dhere can be ,f ound no authentic data aJbout
the founder of hrad Gelnica. However, it is known for certain Juraj (George) Beibek, who also owned the neighboring and vastly more importaTut fortress "Krasna Horka"
(Beautiful Mount) . In the year 1527 Zapofisky tooik Geinica
from Bebeik by force. Later on Thurzo beeame its master,
the same Thurzo whose family played such an important
part in the early history of Slo;va:kia.
During the very trying, uncertain, and bloody years
of the great uprisings of Stephen Bocskay, Stephen Bethlen, GeoPge RaJk6czi, Imrich Th6kbly and Francis Ra!lrnczi ,
lasting upwards of 150 years, Gelnica changed hands many
times. From each successive exchange, Gelnica suffered,
and, since it was never too important strategically few re1
�62
SLOVAKIA
pairs were made, finally it became uninh abitable and was
abandoned to time and the elements.
As about all other castles, so aibout Gelnica people
wove a legend, which could be entitled: "The last days of
Gelnica." The last owner of the castle people say, was a
very beautiful widow. Her husband died a hero's death on
the field of glory and left her with only a small garrison
for protection. 1Soon wo.rd s.pread among the greedy soldiers
of the king that Gelnica contained untold treasures - gold,
silver, precious stones - and no soldiers to guard this treasure. Thin!king that no opposition would be met with, the
king's army advanced on the fortress in a disorderly fashion. To their suriprise, a salvo of shots greeted them and
moved down the advance guard. After reorganizing, the
soldiers attacked. 'Ehe small garrison inside fortress Gelnica gave a good account of itself. Wave after wa'Ve of the
enemy was thrown back with great losses. However, with
each enemy onslaught, the ranks of the garrison dwindled.
After many days of hard fighting, hungry and tired unto
death, the garriJSon was over.powered. The castle was destroyed and every living creature in it killed.
B efore the fatal hour, however, the beautiful wido,w,
seeing that a11 was lost, had her valuables gathered and
thrown into the castle's deep well. And lest a fate wors-e
than death befall her, she jumped into the well. The king's
army found neither treasure nor the beautiful widow.
Not far from the castle flo,w s the sma:11 river Gelnica,
which in some way was connected underground with the
castle's deep well. After a time fishermen found the 1body
of the owner of Gelnica and, in the presence of the people
of the neighborhood , buried her under the ruins of the
castle. These then, according to the legend. were the last
days of Gelnica. From the pile of stones that was once
fortress Gelnica, one has a fine view of the surrounding
hills and valleys. And if one listens attentively when the
wind is low, one can hear a soft sobbing. People will teU
you it is the beautiful widow, sobbing for her beloved husband, who died on the field of g}ory. You will bless yourself and murmur a fervent: "Requiescant in peace!"
�SLOVAKIA
63
HRAD BACKOV
In the old Zemplin province, in a northwes terly direction from the beautiful town of Secovce, and not far from
the small vallIDge of Backov, stood in the ancent fortress
of Ba{!1kov. AH that we can S8iy about i,t is that it was once
a fortress of some proportio ns. Now only a few ditches and
small piles of lichened stone mark the spot. The only reason
we write albout it is that Slovak people wove around it a
legend from pre-sChristian times, when many of our forefathers still worshipp ed Parom, Morena, and the other Slav
pagan gods.
It is not known when the fortress was erected, but
during the Tatar invasions , it was the prQPerty of the king.
Many of the fortresse s in those hectic days were held in
fief by so-called "hrnciari ", frontiersm en, who were in the
service of the <king as guardsme n of the frontiers and were
responsib le for the upikeep and repairs of the fo.rbress. Some
times for outstandi ng services, the :king would grant to
such a frontiersm an a smal[ ipiece of ground, conferrin g on
him the questiona ble title of "zeman" (landown er), making him the boss of the fortress.
When the "Order of Frontiers men" was aJbolished, the
kings gave these fortresses , with much land, to individua ls
usually as a compensa tion for services rendered. These
services were either in money for the prosecuti on of war
against neighbori ng !kings, or for military he'1p against the
enemy.
At the beginning of the 14th century, the king ga•ve
Bacikov to a family named Petenovec . When, for some unrecoo-ded reason, the family fell from grace, the king confiscated the castle. Im the year 1321, King Robert Charles
traded Bookov for another castle to a family named Macko.
Ba,,okov then passed into the possessio n of the Bycksove c
family and with the fortress the villages of Sefovce, Ve~' ky a Maly Backov, KerepYa, Tri ¥isnove, Kahainovce. Pol'anka, Petrusovc e, Parno, Albin, and many others.
Members of this family divided the estate in the year
1329, Baokov with a few villages becoming the property
�64
SLOVAKIA
of Done. During the next 270 years the o·Nnership of Backov changed hands many times, becoming in the year 1598
the property of four men: Bockaj, Francis Rak6czi, Stephen
Kecera, and Peter Sokol. In the 17th century we find as
owners of Baakov: Fischer, Semer, Mari.as, Puky, Kolnas,
and Forgac. The last name figured largely in the history of
many Slovak castles, as also the name Rak6czi, and others.
In the year 1688 BMkov was destroyed and abandoned.
Its glory passed. forever. Where once was heard the clang
of armor, jingle of the sword, the hoofbeats of the finest
horses; where once the wealthy masters lived vigorously
but riotously - today reigns a depressing emptiness and
quiet, disturbed only by the raven and the oiwl.
The people of the vicinity will tell you the following
legend, S1Wearing by all that is holy that what they say is
the truth. At one time the owner of the fortress was a certain DU'ke Draik. He was a cruel master to the hapless
people who toiled in the fields for him. He was a miser
and nothing could be hidden from him. Woe to the unfortunate who would take so much as a handful of grain from
the field! Drak found everything and took everything,
whether it belonged to him or not. Although e~tremely
rich, he wais never satisfied. When merchants from other
countries 1passed in the vicinity, Drak would swoop upon
them like a bird of prey and they were fortunate if they
got away with their lives. Consequently merchants gavE:r
wide berth to BackOJV.
People will tell you that when Drak was dying, lightning struck the fortress thirty times, as if the devil was
impatient to carry off the soul of the tyrant Drak to the
deepest pit in hell. When Drak finally died, the people
sacked the fortress and carried away everything that could
be carried. The devil was not satisfied merely with the soul
of Dralk, the people will tell you, but he also wanted some
of Drruk's possessions. Not knowing that the castle was
sacked and destroyed, the devil returned one dark night to
carry olff some of its treas,ures. He soon fiHed his sack with
what he thought was gold, but in reality large pieces of
stone from the destroyed castle. Since the stones were very
heavy, the devil rested not far from the village of Vihorl'at
�SLOVAKIA
66
and soon fell asleep. When the bright rays of the rising
sun awalkened him, he was so startled that he jumped into
the valley below. The ground where he fell, opened and
swallowed him up, leaving a huge hole which soon filled
with water. Even to this day the ,people of Vihorl'at wiU
show the traveller the bottomless laike, "morsike oko," to
them.
• • •
HRA.'D JELSAVA
The Jelsava Castle was in reality two fortresses. The
older one was ,probaJbly an ancient Slovak provincial fortress made of wood. Nothing remains of it except several
large moats and there are no signs oif any stone.
The first mention of the older Jelsava fortress is contained in a document of King Bela IV, in 1243, to Bebek
whose holdings bordered on Jelsava, which belonged to
the king. In the year 1283 the fortress was given to one
Dezider Ra1boldi, whose family came from Ita,l y in 1109.
The family name was later changed to Tisvai. Later the
fortress was besieged by John Jisikra of Brandys, and since
that time no other mention ,w as made of it. It was ,proba:bly
destroyed during that rsiege and never rebuilt.
In the chronicles of the Hussite wars, there is mention
made of another "hrad Je1sava," situated about one half
hour's journey from the town ,b earing the same name. This
fortress was made of stone. It wais not a large fortress,
but in places the walls were over two meters in thickness.
It is not known exactly when this second fortress was built,
but in 1299 it is referred to as a "destroyed" fortress. It
was rebuilt and passed into possession of the Knights
Templars. Eventually, for some unrecorded reason, the
Templars were driven out. They built a monastery on the
site where the Palace now stands.
King Louis of Anjou gave the fortress as gift to his
court-chancellor, Lestar of Jelsava, who repaired the fortress and moved into it, leaving the court of Louis, which
did not please the king at all. Being a man of enterprising
spirit, his motto being "nothing ventured, nothing gained,"
he invited tradesmen, businessmen, miners, and craftsmen
�SLOVAKIA
66
to Je1sava. Soon Je1sava became a thriving community and
Lestar became immensely wealthy.
Upon Lestar's deaJth the fortress passed into the possession. of one George Jolsavy, a very fickle and scatterbrained bachelor, who cared more for a bottle of wine and
gay company than he did for affairs of buisness. He was
surrounded at all times with men and women of his ilk,
who lived rioutously and spent friend Jolsavy's money in
quick order. When the last gold piece was gone, Jolsvay
mortgaged the fortress to Dominic Bebek for 7,707 pieces of
mortgaged money. Since he died without heirs, the family
name died with him, a name which played some very important roles in the early history of Slovakia.
After Jolsvay's death, litigatio!l1 was started against
Bebek by Perenyi, who also claimed possession of Jelsava.
Queen :IDlizwbeth did not recognize the claims of Beibek or
Perenyi and confiscated the fortress. Later she leased it to
Perenyi for a yearly rental of 6,007 gold pieces.
In 1440 John Jiskra conquered a greated part of
Gerner and took control of aJ.l the fortresses on the territory he occupied. Among them was hrad Jelsava. In 1453,
after Jiskra was defeated, King Ladislav V gave the fortress to Perenyi. Here the history of Jelsava is somewhat
muddled. Although Perenyi is said to have rebuilt JelsaJVa
in the year 1461, it is mentioned in the chronicles as a
"castellum" belonging to Bebek. For five moire years the
two families fought for the possession of the fortress. In
1466 Bebek won the suit, and the family remained in possession of J elsava until it died out.
During the Turkish invasions, Jelsava was destroyed
and never again rebuilt. The land passed into the possession
of the owners of Muran Castle. In 1720, King Charles ID
gave Muran and all the land to the Kohany family. By marriage the land passed into the ·p ossession of the present
Coburg family.
•
•
•
WANT TO LEARN SLOVAK? Order the "-SLOVAK
LESSONS" {$3.50) and the ENGLlSH-SLOVAK DICTIONARY {$4.00) by Hrobak today!
�
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
61
SLOVAKIA
For the Slovak nation statehood is a vital question not so
much because of the need to put an end to the injustices
suffered at the hands of other nations in alien state formations, but largely because it is striving to attain a new
political order suited to its own national individuality and
mentality. Such a positive viewpoint prevails over negative
arguments. Czech internationalism, Schweik opportunism,
and the honoring of foreign prophets from Marx to Chruscev are all alien to the Slovak national character. The Slovaks did not go beyond the boundaries of Hungary so that
they might get stuck in the swamps of Czech imperialism.
The Slovak nation wants cultural and political freedom,
because ultimately it wants to be itself - a national entity
interested in its preservation.
It is in this that the substance of Martin Razus's political message manifests itself to us for our generation.
•
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
HUBERT MACKO, 0.5.B.
CASTLE GELNICA
There is not much to tell about Gelnica; all that remains of it is a .pile of stone and the bare foundation of
what was perhaps once the "ne:'bojsa v e z·a " (Do not be
afraid Tower). 'Dhere can be ,f ound no authentic data aJbout
the founder of hrad Gelnica. However, it is known for certain Juraj (George) Beibek, who also owned the neighboring and vastly more importaTut fortress "Krasna Horka"
(Beautiful Mount) . In the year 1527 Zapofisky tooik Geinica
from Bebeik by force. Later on Thurzo beeame its master,
the same Thurzo whose family played such an important
part in the early history of Slo;va:kia.
During the very trying, uncertain, and bloody years
of the great uprisings of Stephen Bocskay, Stephen Bethlen, GeoPge RaJk6czi, Imrich Th6kbly and Francis Ra!lrnczi ,
lasting upwards of 150 years, Gelnica changed hands many
times. From each successive exchange, Gelnica suffered,
and, since it was never too important strategically few re1
62
SLOVAKIA
pairs were made, finally it became uninh abitable and was
abandoned to time and the elements.
As about all other castles, so aibout Gelnica people
wove a legend, which could be entitled: "The last days of
Gelnica." The last owner of the castle people say, was a
very beautiful widow. Her husband died a hero's death on
the field of glory and left her with only a small garrison
for protection. 1Soon wo.rd s.pread among the greedy soldiers
of the king that Gelnica contained untold treasures - gold,
silver, precious stones - and no soldiers to guard this treasure. Thin!king that no opposition would be met with, the
king's army advanced on the fortress in a disorderly fashion. To their suriprise, a salvo of shots greeted them and
moved down the advance guard. After reorganizing, the
soldiers attacked. 'Ehe small garrison inside fortress Gelnica gave a good account of itself. Wave after wa'Ve of the
enemy was thrown back with great losses. However, with
each enemy onslaught, the ranks of the garrison dwindled.
After many days of hard fighting, hungry and tired unto
death, the garriJSon was over.powered. The castle was destroyed and every living creature in it killed.
B efore the fatal hour, however, the beautiful wido,w,
seeing that a11 was lost, had her valuables gathered and
thrown into the castle's deep well. And lest a fate wors-e
than death befall her, she jumped into the well. The king's
army found neither treasure nor the beautiful widow.
Not far from the castle flo,w s the sma:11 river Gelnica,
which in some way was connected underground with the
castle's deep well. After a time fishermen found the 1body
of the owner of Gelnica and, in the presence of the people
of the neighborhood , buried her under the ruins of the
castle. These then, according to the legend. were the last
days of Gelnica. From the pile of stones that was once
fortress Gelnica, one has a fine view of the surrounding
hills and valleys. And if one listens attentively when the
wind is low, one can hear a soft sobbing. People will teU
you it is the beautiful widow, sobbing for her beloved husband, who died on the field of g}ory. You will bless yourself and murmur a fervent: "Requiescant in peace!"
SLOVAKIA
63
HRAD BACKOV
In the old Zemplin province, in a northwes terly direction from the beautiful town of Secovce, and not far from
the small vallIDge of Backov, stood in the ancent fortress
of Ba{!1kov. AH that we can S8iy about i,t is that it was once
a fortress of some proportio ns. Now only a few ditches and
small piles of lichened stone mark the spot. The only reason
we write albout it is that Slovak people wove around it a
legend from pre-sChristian times, when many of our forefathers still worshipp ed Parom, Morena, and the other Slav
pagan gods.
It is not known when the fortress was erected, but
during the Tatar invasions , it was the prQPerty of the king.
Many of the fortresse s in those hectic days were held in
fief by so-called "hrnciari ", frontiersm en, who were in the
service of the <king as guardsme n of the frontiers and were
responsib le for the upikeep and repairs of the fo.rbress. Some
times for outstandi ng services, the :king would grant to
such a frontiersm an a smal[ ipiece of ground, conferrin g on
him the questiona ble title of "zeman" (landown er), making him the boss of the fortress.
When the "Order of Frontiers men" was aJbolished, the
kings gave these fortresses , with much land, to individua ls
usually as a compensa tion for services rendered. These
services were either in money for the prosecuti on of war
against neighbori ng !kings, or for military he'1p against the
enemy.
At the beginning of the 14th century, the king ga•ve
Bacikov to a family named Petenovec . When, for some unrecoo-ded reason, the family fell from grace, the king confiscated the castle. Im the year 1321, King Robert Charles
traded Bookov for another castle to a family named Macko.
Ba,,okov then passed into the possessio n of the Bycksove c
family and with the fortress the villages of Sefovce, Ve~' ky a Maly Backov, KerepYa, Tri ¥isnove, Kahainovce. Pol'anka, Petrusovc e, Parno, Albin, and many others.
Members of this family divided the estate in the year
1329, Baokov with a few villages becoming the property
64
SLOVAKIA
of Done. During the next 270 years the o·Nnership of Backov changed hands many times, becoming in the year 1598
the property of four men: Bockaj, Francis Rak6czi, Stephen
Kecera, and Peter Sokol. In the 17th century we find as
owners of Baakov: Fischer, Semer, Mari.as, Puky, Kolnas,
and Forgac. The last name figured largely in the history of
many Slovak castles, as also the name Rak6czi, and others.
In the year 1688 BMkov was destroyed and abandoned.
Its glory passed. forever. Where once was heard the clang
of armor, jingle of the sword, the hoofbeats of the finest
horses; where once the wealthy masters lived vigorously
but riotously - today reigns a depressing emptiness and
quiet, disturbed only by the raven and the oiwl.
The people of the vicinity will tell you the following
legend, S1Wearing by all that is holy that what they say is
the truth. At one time the owner of the fortress was a certain DU'ke Draik. He was a cruel master to the hapless
people who toiled in the fields for him. He was a miser
and nothing could be hidden from him. Woe to the unfortunate who would take so much as a handful of grain from
the field! Drak found everything and took everything,
whether it belonged to him or not. Although e~tremely
rich, he wais never satisfied. When merchants from other
countries 1passed in the vicinity, Drak would swoop upon
them like a bird of prey and they were fortunate if they
got away with their lives. Consequently merchants gavE:r
wide berth to BackOJV.
People will tell you that when Drak was dying, lightning struck the fortress thirty times, as if the devil was
impatient to carry off the soul of the tyrant Drak to the
deepest pit in hell. When Drak finally died, the people
sacked the fortress and carried away everything that could
be carried. The devil was not satisfied merely with the soul
of Dralk, the people will tell you, but he also wanted some
of Drruk's possessions. Not knowing that the castle was
sacked and destroyed, the devil returned one dark night to
carry olff some of its treas,ures. He soon fiHed his sack with
what he thought was gold, but in reality large pieces of
stone from the destroyed castle. Since the stones were very
heavy, the devil rested not far from the village of Vihorl'at
SLOVAKIA
66
and soon fell asleep. When the bright rays of the rising
sun awalkened him, he was so startled that he jumped into
the valley below. The ground where he fell, opened and
swallowed him up, leaving a huge hole which soon filled
with water. Even to this day the ,people of Vihorl'at wiU
show the traveller the bottomless laike, "morsike oko," to
them.
• • •
HRA.'D JELSAVA
The Jelsava Castle was in reality two fortresses. The
older one was ,probaJbly an ancient Slovak provincial fortress made of wood. Nothing remains of it except several
large moats and there are no signs oif any stone.
The first mention of the older Jelsava fortress is contained in a document of King Bela IV, in 1243, to Bebek
whose holdings bordered on Jelsava, which belonged to
the king. In the year 1283 the fortress was given to one
Dezider Ra1boldi, whose family came from Ita,l y in 1109.
The family name was later changed to Tisvai. Later the
fortress was besieged by John Jisikra of Brandys, and since
that time no other mention ,w as made of it. It was ,proba:bly
destroyed during that rsiege and never rebuilt.
In the chronicles of the Hussite wars, there is mention
made of another "hrad Je1sava," situated about one half
hour's journey from the town ,b earing the same name. This
fortress was made of stone. It wais not a large fortress,
but in places the walls were over two meters in thickness.
It is not known exactly when this second fortress was built,
but in 1299 it is referred to as a "destroyed" fortress. It
was rebuilt and passed into possession of the Knights
Templars. Eventually, for some unrecorded reason, the
Templars were driven out. They built a monastery on the
site where the Palace now stands.
King Louis of Anjou gave the fortress as gift to his
court-chancellor, Lestar of Jelsava, who repaired the fortress and moved into it, leaving the court of Louis, which
did not please the king at all. Being a man of enterprising
spirit, his motto being "nothing ventured, nothing gained,"
he invited tradesmen, businessmen, miners, and craftsmen
SLOVAKIA
66
to Je1sava. Soon Je1sava became a thriving community and
Lestar became immensely wealthy.
Upon Lestar's deaJth the fortress passed into the possession. of one George Jolsavy, a very fickle and scatterbrained bachelor, who cared more for a bottle of wine and
gay company than he did for affairs of buisness. He was
surrounded at all times with men and women of his ilk,
who lived rioutously and spent friend Jolsavy's money in
quick order. When the last gold piece was gone, Jolsvay
mortgaged the fortress to Dominic Bebek for 7,707 pieces of
mortgaged money. Since he died without heirs, the family
name died with him, a name which played some very important roles in the early history of Slovakia.
After Jolsvay's death, litigatio!l1 was started against
Bebek by Perenyi, who also claimed possession of Jelsava.
Queen :IDlizwbeth did not recognize the claims of Beibek or
Perenyi and confiscated the fortress. Later she leased it to
Perenyi for a yearly rental of 6,007 gold pieces.
In 1440 John Jiskra conquered a greated part of
Gerner and took control of aJ.l the fortresses on the territory he occupied. Among them was hrad Jelsava. In 1453,
after Jiskra was defeated, King Ladislav V gave the fortress to Perenyi. Here the history of Jelsava is somewhat
muddled. Although Perenyi is said to have rebuilt JelsaJVa
in the year 1461, it is mentioned in the chronicles as a
"castellum" belonging to Bebek. For five moire years the
two families fought for the possession of the fortress. In
1466 Bebek won the suit, and the family remained in possession of J elsava until it died out.
During the Turkish invasions, Jelsava was destroyed
and never again rebuilt. The land passed into the possession
of the owners of Muran Castle. In 1720, King Charles ID
gave Muran and all the land to the Kohany family. By marriage the land passed into the ·p ossession of the present
Coburg family.
•
•
•
WANT TO LEARN SLOVAK? Order the "-SLOVAK
LESSONS" {$3.50) and the ENGLlSH-SLOVAK DICTIONARY {$4.00) by Hrobak today!
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Castle Gelnica - Hrad Báčkov - Hrad Jelšava
Description
An account of the resource
Hubert Macko, O.S.B.
Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), September-December 1957
pp. 61-66
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macko, Hubert
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1957
castles
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/897116960dab5f9b4d9855af6c6c4ab7.pdf
fa85b96fb9aaef7f59a38563e06e5135
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
37
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
HRICOV
The ruins of Hni 001v (IHiritcllov) Castle m the Trencin
Distriot aire the smallest orf thO'se which stud the Vah vialley. At ()IIl.e time it was connected with the Sul'O!V Castle by a
road whildh sna'ked i'ts way over tlhe ,rMJge:s of mountains.
The ruins of Hiri.1co,v rest on a steep roc:k wit!h whi:c!h the rem'a ins of the waJ111s are. grown toge'fuer. The rulins are almlQls't ih'atelcess;iJble. The s,u mmiit on which the :mins rest is
one of the last sipll'I's orf the St'.rl'ov Roiciks, and tlhe castle
reaUy loolks like a ,rOlbber's hideout.
1
Hric·ov, it seems did not m'8Jke history, thoUJgh a document from 1'265 mentions it and chronicles say that the
castle wa'S buHt iby one Kia1i:jan, .the manager of the Bytca
Castile. The story goes tihia t t!he Lehar robber clan took it
from Kriliijan arud held it for many years. When the widOIW
of the la;st ~har d!ied, the caJSt'le rpassed on to her adopted
son, Franiciis Thur,zo. ~rom rtJhe time of Blazej Podmanin
(1496) 1Jhe f1ate of Htiicloiv was closely tied up wi'th 1Jhat of
Byitca and: the Lieitav<a Castle.
After the deatih of the 1'ast Lehar, his widow ,r emained
in SO'l'rOW for three years, as. it wrus ouistorrl'ary in those
time!S. Hricoiv was a s;aJd and mournfu1l place. But rufter three
years the gates orf Hricoiv weire thrown open to receive
guests. Among the hopeifo1 caillers, who exipeeted to wed the
widow of Hriicov, was Frandis Tht1ir210, t!he you~g and gallant
owner of ithe neig1hlbo,r ing Lietaiva •s ltronghold. Thrur,zo had
his eye on Hricov for some time and wrus de'term'ine'd to get
i,t even if 'he had to marry the aging Leharr wiidow. The widow took a f1aney to 'Dhruirz•o, ,b ut told him t!hait marriage
was out af the questi'()IIl becalllSe orf her age. But she did
ad'opt him as her son and maJde him heir of her possessions .
'DhuJ:1zo, it seeims, soon became tired of waiting for hi's "mother" to die, so he decided to truke possession of Hricov by
foul means.
One ni.ghlt he oirdered his men to seize her and imprison her in the dungeon. The following morning Francis an-
�38
SLOVAKIA
nOUDJCed that the wlidow had become mental11y unbalanced
and had ito be placed in the dungeon. But Ftranci's Thurzo,
to keep his evil deed wvered Ulp at all times, had to be oo
glll'ard am.d ,t hat v.irtuiailly made him a prisoner in the castle
also. And so the years roB.e!d. on.
The legend has it thait a monk approached the castle
pO!rtaJls, made knolW'Il his ,p resence with his stafd', and begged
a mght''S lodging. Thwrzo ordered the monk away. The latter ,t urned Ulpon Thuma and threatened to di,sdose th€
haugfu..ty lard's orime. Thu11"2Jo flared up and 'Set his dogs on
the monk. Bult the moolk returned and toid Thurzo to do
penance. Thunzo, in turn, ordered his men to seize the monk,
beat him Ulp, cast lhfilll into the dungeon and starved him to
death. In the meantime fea:r .ruled Hlrifov and Thurao himself was losing his nerwe. While ,t he monlk was starving, his
ima;ge ilil stone ,beg,an to grow before the castle entrance.
Thwrzo had the petrified monk smashed to bits, but the
following mornmg the same petrified monk stood guard at
his door. This was too mucih even for Tihuirzo. Overcome by
compurnc,tion and fear, he decided to iet the Lehar widow
h•aive !her freediom. He set out for the dungeon with hisserv,anits - on1y to find the widow dead.
Thurno .became 1Jhe sole owner of Hricov at last. But
he did not stay for 1ong; his servants fled one by one and,
fina['ly, evern 'J:1hurzo aibantloned the haunlted castle. In time
H11icov foll into de-caiy. Bu:t the legend goes on to say th'at
the peitrifd.ed monlk stilil stands witness to 1:Jhe crime of F,rancis Thuirzo at the castle entrance. The S1~wa:ks liiV'i!ng in the
vioiruty of HricolV, however, say that Thurzo did not get
away so easily with hls crime. T.hey claim that he actually
did lO'Se his mind and committed suicide by jumipin!g off the
ca$tle wa'tl into the precipice below. At nd,g1ht the pitifll!l
cries anrl screams cxf tJhe imprisoned widow coulld be heard
by the V'fill:agers below. And Thnrr:z:o, beca:u:se o,f his crime,
evern rur.ter death wandered restlessly aJbout the vicinri:ty od'
Hr.icov . .Alf1ter Tihurno's death, the 1100k on whkh Hricov was
built burst into flames which ruined everything. That is the
st'Olry being passed on by generrutlions of Slovaks from
Hrioov.
�
SLOVAKIA
37
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
HRICOV
The ruins of Hni 001v (IHiritcllov) Castle m the Trencin
Distriot aire the smallest orf thO'se which stud the Vah vialley. At ()IIl.e time it was connected with the Sul'O!V Castle by a
road whildh sna'ked i'ts way over tlhe ,rMJge:s of mountains.
The ruins of Hiri.1co,v rest on a steep roc:k wit!h whi:c!h the rem'a ins of the waJ111s are. grown toge'fuer. The rulins are almlQls't ih'atelcess;iJble. The s,u mmiit on which the :mins rest is
one of the last sipll'I's orf the St'.rl'ov Roiciks, and tlhe castle
reaUy loolks like a ,rOlbber's hideout.
1
Hric·ov, it seems did not m'8Jke history, thoUJgh a document from 1'265 mentions it and chronicles say that the
castle wa'S buHt iby one Kia1i:jan, .the manager of the Bytca
Castile. The story goes tihia t t!he Lehar robber clan took it
from Kriliijan arud held it for many years. When the widOIW
of the la;st ~har d!ied, the caJSt'le rpassed on to her adopted
son, Franiciis Thur,zo. ~rom rtJhe time of Blazej Podmanin
(1496) 1Jhe f1ate of Htiicloiv was closely tied up wi'th 1Jhat of
Byitca and: the Lieitav<a Castle.
After the deatih of the 1'ast Lehar, his widow ,r emained
in SO'l'rOW for three years, as. it wrus ouistorrl'ary in those
time!S. Hricoiv was a s;aJd and mournfu1l place. But rufter three
years the gates orf Hricoiv weire thrown open to receive
guests. Among the hopeifo1 caillers, who exipeeted to wed the
widow of Hriicov, was Frandis Tht1ir210, t!he you~g and gallant
owner of ithe neig1hlbo,r ing Lietaiva •s ltronghold. Thrur,zo had
his eye on Hricov for some time and wrus de'term'ine'd to get
i,t even if 'he had to marry the aging Leharr wiidow. The widow took a f1aney to 'Dhruirz•o, ,b ut told him t!hait marriage
was out af the questi'()IIl becalllSe orf her age. But she did
ad'opt him as her son and maJde him heir of her possessions .
'DhuJ:1zo, it seeims, soon became tired of waiting for hi's "mother" to die, so he decided to truke possession of Hricov by
foul means.
One ni.ghlt he oirdered his men to seize her and imprison her in the dungeon. The following morning Francis an-
�38
SLOVAKIA
nOUDJCed that the wlidow had become mental11y unbalanced
and had ito be placed in the dungeon. But Ftranci's Thurzo,
to keep his evil deed wvered Ulp at all times, had to be oo
glll'ard am.d ,t hat v.irtuiailly made him a prisoner in the castle
also. And so the years roB.e!d. on.
The legend has it thait a monk approached the castle
pO!rtaJls, made knolW'Il his ,p resence with his stafd', and begged
a mght''S lodging. Thwrzo ordered the monk away. The latter ,t urned Ulpon Thuma and threatened to di,sdose th€
haugfu..ty lard's orime. Thu11"2Jo flared up and 'Set his dogs on
the monk. Bult the moolk returned and toid Thurzo to do
penance. Thunzo, in turn, ordered his men to seize the monk,
beat him Ulp, cast lhfilll into the dungeon and starved him to
death. In the meantime fea:r .ruled Hlrifov and Thurao himself was losing his nerwe. While ,t he monlk was starving, his
ima;ge ilil stone ,beg,an to grow before the castle entrance.
Thwrzo had the petrified monk smashed to bits, but the
following mornmg the same petrified monk stood guard at
his door. This was too mucih even for Tihuirzo. Overcome by
compurnc,tion and fear, he decided to iet the Lehar widow
h•aive !her freediom. He set out for the dungeon with hisserv,anits - on1y to find the widow dead.
Thurno .became 1Jhe sole owner of Hricov at last. But
he did not stay for 1ong; his servants fled one by one and,
fina['ly, evern 'J:1hurzo aibantloned the haunlted castle. In time
H11icov foll into de-caiy. Bu:t the legend goes on to say th'at
the peitrifd.ed monlk stilil stands witness to 1:Jhe crime of F,rancis Thuirzo at the castle entrance. The S1~wa:ks liiV'i!ng in the
vioiruty of HricolV, however, say that Thurzo did not get
away so easily with hls crime. T.hey claim that he actually
did lO'Se his mind and committed suicide by jumipin!g off the
ca$tle wa'tl into the precipice below. At nd,g1ht the pitifll!l
cries anrl screams cxf tJhe imprisoned widow coulld be heard
by the V'fill:agers below. And Thnrr:z:o, beca:u:se o,f his crime,
evern rur.ter death wandered restlessly aJbout the vicinri:ty od'
Hr.icov . .Alf1ter Tihurno's death, the 1100k on whkh Hricov was
built burst into flames which ruined everything. That is the
st'Olry being passed on by generrutlions of Slovaks from
Hrioov.
�
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
SLOVAKIA
37
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
HRICOV
The ruins of Hni 001v (IHiritcllov) Castle m the Trencin
Distriot aire the smallest orf thO'se which stud the Vah vialley. At ()IIl.e time it was connected with the Sul'O!V Castle by a
road whildh sna'ked i'ts way over tlhe ,rMJge:s of mountains.
The ruins of Hiri.1co,v rest on a steep roc:k wit!h whi:c!h the rem'a ins of the waJ111s are. grown toge'fuer. The rulins are almlQls't ih'atelcess;iJble. The s,u mmiit on which the :mins rest is
one of the last sipll'I's orf the St'.rl'ov Roiciks, and tlhe castle
reaUy loolks like a ,rOlbber's hideout.
1
Hric·ov, it seems did not m'8Jke history, thoUJgh a document from 1'265 mentions it and chronicles say that the
castle wa'S buHt iby one Kia1i:jan, .the manager of the Bytca
Castile. The story goes tihia t t!he Lehar robber clan took it
from Kriliijan arud held it for many years. When the widOIW
of the la;st ~har d!ied, the caJSt'le rpassed on to her adopted
son, Franiciis Thur,zo. ~rom rtJhe time of Blazej Podmanin
(1496) 1Jhe f1ate of Htiicloiv was closely tied up wi'th 1Jhat of
Byitca and: the Lieitav<a Castle.
After the deatih of the 1'ast Lehar, his widow ,r emained
in SO'l'rOW for three years, as. it wrus ouistorrl'ary in those
time!S. Hricoiv was a s;aJd and mournfu1l place. But rufter three
years the gates orf Hricoiv weire thrown open to receive
guests. Among the hopeifo1 caillers, who exipeeted to wed the
widow of Hriicov, was Frandis Tht1ir210, t!he you~g and gallant
owner of ithe neig1hlbo,r ing Lietaiva •s ltronghold. Thrur,zo had
his eye on Hricov for some time and wrus de'term'ine'd to get
i,t even if 'he had to marry the aging Leharr wiidow. The widow took a f1aney to 'Dhruirz•o, ,b ut told him t!hait marriage
was out af the questi'()IIl becalllSe orf her age. But she did
ad'opt him as her son and maJde him heir of her possessions .
'DhuJ:1zo, it seeims, soon became tired of waiting for hi's "mother" to die, so he decided to truke possession of Hricov by
foul means.
One ni.ghlt he oirdered his men to seize her and imprison her in the dungeon. The following morning Francis an-
38
SLOVAKIA
nOUDJCed that the wlidow had become mental11y unbalanced
and had ito be placed in the dungeon. But Ftranci's Thurzo,
to keep his evil deed wvered Ulp at all times, had to be oo
glll'ard am.d ,t hat v.irtuiailly made him a prisoner in the castle
also. And so the years roB.e!d. on.
The legend has it thait a monk approached the castle
pO!rtaJls, made knolW'Il his ,p resence with his stafd', and begged
a mght''S lodging. Thwrzo ordered the monk away. The latter ,t urned Ulpon Thuma and threatened to di,sdose th€
haugfu..ty lard's orime. Thu11"2Jo flared up and 'Set his dogs on
the monk. Bult the moolk returned and toid Thurzo to do
penance. Thunzo, in turn, ordered his men to seize the monk,
beat him Ulp, cast lhfilll into the dungeon and starved him to
death. In the meantime fea:r .ruled Hlrifov and Thurao himself was losing his nerwe. While ,t he monlk was starving, his
ima;ge ilil stone ,beg,an to grow before the castle entrance.
Thwrzo had the petrified monk smashed to bits, but the
following mornmg the same petrified monk stood guard at
his door. This was too mucih even for Tihuirzo. Overcome by
compurnc,tion and fear, he decided to iet the Lehar widow
h•aive !her freediom. He set out for the dungeon with hisserv,anits - on1y to find the widow dead.
Thurno .became 1Jhe sole owner of Hricov at last. But
he did not stay for 1ong; his servants fled one by one and,
fina['ly, evern 'J:1hurzo aibantloned the haunlted castle. In time
H11icov foll into de-caiy. Bu:t the legend goes on to say th'at
the peitrifd.ed monlk stilil stands witness to 1:Jhe crime of F,rancis Thuirzo at the castle entrance. The S1~wa:ks liiV'i!ng in the
vioiruty of HricolV, however, say that Thurzo did not get
away so easily with hls crime. T.hey claim that he actually
did lO'Se his mind and committed suicide by jumipin!g off the
ca$tle wa'tl into the precipice below. At nd,g1ht the pitifll!l
cries anrl screams cxf tJhe imprisoned widow coulld be heard
by the V'fill:agers below. And Thnrr:z:o, beca:u:se o,f his crime,
evern rur.ter death wandered restlessly aJbout the vicinri:ty od'
Hr.icov . .Alf1ter Tihurno's death, the 1100k on whkh Hricov was
built burst into flames which ruined everything. That is the
st'Olry being passed on by generrutlions of Slovaks from
Hrioov.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Hričov
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 2 (7), July 1953
pp. 37-38
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
July 1953
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1780c8c8875468092d608726118d7938.pdf
79be0422d89a74320eb8e0e71e5d30a9
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
50
(27)
(28)
(29)
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
"Slovak" 1941, 105.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1938, 243.
"Slovak" 1938, 283.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Kultura" 1933, 9.
"Slovak" 1932, 237.
"Slovak" 1941, 17.
Vatican Radio April 28, 1947.
Congressman Alvin O'Konski May 31, 1948, at Bedford, 0 .
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
ILA VA
The name Ila va may be more familar to the outside
world, because it has been mentioned more frequently than
names of other castles and citadels of Slovakia. Political
prisoners, "enemies of the state," are confined within its
walls today by the communist regime of Prague.
Just when the Ilava Castle was built is not definitely
known; but we do know that it already existed at the end
of the twelfth century. The first known written account of
Ilava from that time states that "Castrum Ilava" was the
property of the Knights Templars, who also occupied other
castles in the Vah Valley. Ilava (Trencin County) was held
by the Templars until the Order was abolished in 1312. The
castle is situated on the left bank of the Vah near the railroad station. Its origin may go back to the times of the
Great Moravian Empire.
After the dissolution of the Knights Templars, Ilava
Castle passed into the hands of the "mighty Lord of the
Vah and the Tatras," Matthew Cak (Tchak) of Trencin, who
made of it a mighty fortress. It remained in his possession
to his death, when all of Ca.k's holdings were seized by the
�51
SLOVAKIA
king. Thomas Transilvanus, one of the imperial "castle captains," resided in Ilava in about 1339, according to historical
records, which also state that about fifty years later, the
king donated Ilava to one Bukovec, whose son Henry (Imrich) joined up with Ladislaus of Naples against the king.
As a result, the king seized all of Henry's holdings, including !lava.
The Hussites under Procopius Holy plundered northern
sections of Slovakia and took !lava, but did not hold it long.
The army of King Sigmond under Nicholas Rozhanovsky
stormed the castle and seized it after a bloody battle in
which 5000 men perished. Sigmond ordered !lava demolished. Several years later, however, the !lava Castale was
rebuilt and presented to Queen Barbara; after her Queen
Elizabeth resided there.
During the second invasion of Slovakia by the Hussites, under John Jiskra of Brandys, !lava was besieged
and then taken. The Hussites, however, were again evicted
and !lava enjoyed a comparatively peaceful time even
though its owners were changed often. Ladislaus Hunady,
Blaze Mad'ar and Stephen Zapol'sky occupied it in that order. At the end of the 15th century, angered at John Zapol'sky, Stephen's son, the king sent General Katzianer to
take over !lava. After a short siege !lava fell. In 1571, Ilava
and its suroundings were given to the Ostrozic brothers, who
were of Croatian origin; the king, however, won this back
after the rebellion in which the Ostrozic brothers participated was squelched.
General Heister of the imperial army stormed !lava in
1670 and shortly thereafter sold it to Count Braeuner for
80,00 Goldens. The Count added a twin-towered church and
had the upper part of !lava rebuilt into a monastery and
then called in the Trinitarian Monks to occupy it, keeping
the lower part of the castle for himself. The Trinitarians
resided in the !lava Castle until their Order was dissolved
in 1725. After the defeat of Count Braeuner, his heirs sold
Ilava to the Hungarian State, which converted it into a
state prison; more additions to !lava have been made since
that time. Ilava is the "Alcatraz" of Slovakia .
•
•
•
�
SLOVAKIA
50
(27)
(28)
(29)
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
"Slovak" 1941, 105.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1938, 243.
"Slovak" 1938, 283.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Kultura" 1933, 9.
"Slovak" 1932, 237.
"Slovak" 1941, 17.
Vatican Radio April 28, 1947.
Congressman Alvin O'Konski May 31, 1948, at Bedford, 0 .
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
ILA VA
The name Ila va may be more familar to the outside
world, because it has been mentioned more frequently than
names of other castles and citadels of Slovakia. Political
prisoners, "enemies of the state," are confined within its
walls today by the communist regime of Prague.
Just when the Ilava Castle was built is not definitely
known; but we do know that it already existed at the end
of the twelfth century. The first known written account of
Ilava from that time states that "Castrum Ilava" was the
property of the Knights Templars, who also occupied other
castles in the Vah Valley. Ilava (Trencin County) was held
by the Templars until the Order was abolished in 1312. The
castle is situated on the left bank of the Vah near the railroad station. Its origin may go back to the times of the
Great Moravian Empire.
After the dissolution of the Knights Templars, Ilava
Castle passed into the hands of the "mighty Lord of the
Vah and the Tatras," Matthew Cak (Tchak) of Trencin, who
made of it a mighty fortress. It remained in his possession
to his death, when all of Ca.k's holdings were seized by the
�51
SLOVAKIA
king. Thomas Transilvanus, one of the imperial "castle captains," resided in Ilava in about 1339, according to historical
records, which also state that about fifty years later, the
king donated Ilava to one Bukovec, whose son Henry (Imrich) joined up with Ladislaus of Naples against the king.
As a result, the king seized all of Henry's holdings, including !lava.
The Hussites under Procopius Holy plundered northern
sections of Slovakia and took !lava, but did not hold it long.
The army of King Sigmond under Nicholas Rozhanovsky
stormed the castle and seized it after a bloody battle in
which 5000 men perished. Sigmond ordered !lava demolished. Several years later, however, the !lava Castale was
rebuilt and presented to Queen Barbara; after her Queen
Elizabeth resided there.
During the second invasion of Slovakia by the Hussites, under John Jiskra of Brandys, !lava was besieged
and then taken. The Hussites, however, were again evicted
and !lava enjoyed a comparatively peaceful time even
though its owners were changed often. Ladislaus Hunady,
Blaze Mad'ar and Stephen Zapol'sky occupied it in that order. At the end of the 15th century, angered at John Zapol'sky, Stephen's son, the king sent General Katzianer to
take over !lava. After a short siege !lava fell. In 1571, Ilava
and its suroundings were given to the Ostrozic brothers, who
were of Croatian origin; the king, however, won this back
after the rebellion in which the Ostrozic brothers participated was squelched.
General Heister of the imperial army stormed !lava in
1670 and shortly thereafter sold it to Count Braeuner for
80,00 Goldens. The Count added a twin-towered church and
had the upper part of !lava rebuilt into a monastery and
then called in the Trinitarian Monks to occupy it, keeping
the lower part of the castle for himself. The Trinitarians
resided in the !lava Castle until their Order was dissolved
in 1725. After the defeat of Count Braeuner, his heirs sold
Ilava to the Hungarian State, which converted it into a
state prison; more additions to !lava have been made since
that time. Ilava is the "Alcatraz" of 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
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
50
(27)
(28)
(29)
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
"Slovak" 1941, 105.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1938, 243.
"Slovak" 1938, 283.
"Slovak" 1940, 186.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Slovak" 1939, 44.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
"Slovak" 1941, 37.
"Kultura" 1933, 9.
"Slovak" 1932, 237.
"Slovak" 1941, 17.
Vatican Radio April 28, 1947.
Congressman Alvin O'Konski May 31, 1948, at Bedford, 0 .
•
•
Castles of Slovakia:
ILA VA
The name Ila va may be more familar to the outside
world, because it has been mentioned more frequently than
names of other castles and citadels of Slovakia. Political
prisoners, "enemies of the state," are confined within its
walls today by the communist regime of Prague.
Just when the Ilava Castle was built is not definitely
known; but we do know that it already existed at the end
of the twelfth century. The first known written account of
Ilava from that time states that "Castrum Ilava" was the
property of the Knights Templars, who also occupied other
castles in the Vah Valley. Ilava (Trencin County) was held
by the Templars until the Order was abolished in 1312. The
castle is situated on the left bank of the Vah near the railroad station. Its origin may go back to the times of the
Great Moravian Empire.
After the dissolution of the Knights Templars, Ilava
Castle passed into the hands of the "mighty Lord of the
Vah and the Tatras," Matthew Cak (Tchak) of Trencin, who
made of it a mighty fortress. It remained in his possession
to his death, when all of Ca.k's holdings were seized by the
51
SLOVAKIA
king. Thomas Transilvanus, one of the imperial "castle captains," resided in Ilava in about 1339, according to historical
records, which also state that about fifty years later, the
king donated Ilava to one Bukovec, whose son Henry (Imrich) joined up with Ladislaus of Naples against the king.
As a result, the king seized all of Henry's holdings, including !lava.
The Hussites under Procopius Holy plundered northern
sections of Slovakia and took !lava, but did not hold it long.
The army of King Sigmond under Nicholas Rozhanovsky
stormed the castle and seized it after a bloody battle in
which 5000 men perished. Sigmond ordered !lava demolished. Several years later, however, the !lava Castale was
rebuilt and presented to Queen Barbara; after her Queen
Elizabeth resided there.
During the second invasion of Slovakia by the Hussites, under John Jiskra of Brandys, !lava was besieged
and then taken. The Hussites, however, were again evicted
and !lava enjoyed a comparatively peaceful time even
though its owners were changed often. Ladislaus Hunady,
Blaze Mad'ar and Stephen Zapol'sky occupied it in that order. At the end of the 15th century, angered at John Zapol'sky, Stephen's son, the king sent General Katzianer to
take over !lava. After a short siege !lava fell. In 1571, Ilava
and its suroundings were given to the Ostrozic brothers, who
were of Croatian origin; the king, however, won this back
after the rebellion in which the Ostrozic brothers participated was squelched.
General Heister of the imperial army stormed !lava in
1670 and shortly thereafter sold it to Count Braeuner for
80,00 Goldens. The Count added a twin-towered church and
had the upper part of !lava rebuilt into a monastery and
then called in the Trinitarian Monks to occupy it, keeping
the lower part of the castle for himself. The Trinitarians
resided in the !lava Castle until their Order was dissolved
in 1725. After the defeat of Count Braeuner, his heirs sold
Ilava to the Hungarian State, which converted it into a
state prison; more additions to !lava have been made since
that time. Ilava is the "Alcatraz" of 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
Castles of Slovakia: Ilava
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 7, No. 2 (23), June 1957
pp. 50-51
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
June 1957
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2d14e30f0105888799fed57587d3616e.pdf
f630c65d43bdf6cc14322441540bc6e6
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
44
there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the
Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the
common interests of all free peoples.
In Conclusion
It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks
always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize
that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and
simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned,
but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the
Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering
under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a
whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are
a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our
time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that!
•
• •
(K. S.)
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
KRASNA HORKA
By Hubert Macko, OSB.
Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few
fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As
the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and
Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a
very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time
and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days
that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress).
Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned
in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was
called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the
ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50
�SLOVAKIA
45
years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because
he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family
took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and,
from time to time, added new buildings.
In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for
some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who
took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the
fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514
Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna
Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells
that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped
in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle.
When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he
informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of
the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was
caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death.
When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and
fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as
counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy
of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent
his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal
army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and
took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The
mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus
Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with
the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557.
In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the
Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a
prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King
Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was
freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he
gave up his high position and again began to worm himself
�46
SLOVAKIA
into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed.
He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died
the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka
for some 300 years.
In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown,
and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well
known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv•
ing there.
During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped
Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again
repaired and fortified, but the management was turned
over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children.
After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy
died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct
descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his
nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of
Maria Theresa with the title of Count.
In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning
and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius
Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married
a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both
were very good to their subjects and showed great concern
for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the
fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days
gone by.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are
rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph
of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for
him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak
daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943.
�
SLOVAKIA
44
there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the
Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the
common interests of all free peoples.
In Conclusion
It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks
always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize
that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and
simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned,
but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the
Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering
under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a
whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are
a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our
time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that!
•
• •
(K. S.)
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
KRASNA HORKA
By Hubert Macko, OSB.
Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few
fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As
the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and
Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a
very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time
and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days
that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress).
Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned
in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was
called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the
ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50
�SLOVAKIA
45
years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because
he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family
took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and,
from time to time, added new buildings.
In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for
some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who
took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the
fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514
Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna
Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells
that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped
in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle.
When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he
informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of
the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was
caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death.
When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and
fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as
counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy
of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent
his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal
army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and
took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The
mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus
Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with
the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557.
In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the
Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a
prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King
Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was
freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he
gave up his high position and again began to worm himself
�46
SLOVAKIA
into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed.
He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died
the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka
for some 300 years.
In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown,
and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well
known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv•
ing there.
During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped
Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again
repaired and fortified, but the management was turned
over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children.
After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy
died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct
descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his
nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of
Maria Theresa with the title of Count.
In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning
and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius
Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married
a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both
were very good to their subjects and showed great concern
for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the
fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days
gone by.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are
rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph
of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for
him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak
daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
1958, Vol. 8
Description
An account of the resource
<ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li>
<li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li>
<li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li>
</ul>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Slovak League of America
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1958
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
SLOVAKIA
44
there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the
Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the
common interests of all free peoples.
In Conclusion
It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks
always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize
that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and
simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned,
but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the
Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering
under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a
whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are
a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our
time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that!
•
• •
(K. S.)
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
KRASNA HORKA
By Hubert Macko, OSB.
Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few
fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As
the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and
Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a
very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time
and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days
that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress).
Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned
in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was
called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the
ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50
SLOVAKIA
45
years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because
he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family
took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and,
from time to time, added new buildings.
In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for
some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who
took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the
fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514
Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna
Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells
that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped
in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle.
When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he
informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of
the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was
caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death.
When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and
fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as
counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy
of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent
his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal
army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and
took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The
mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus
Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with
the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557.
In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the
Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a
prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King
Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was
freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he
gave up his high position and again began to worm himself
46
SLOVAKIA
into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed.
He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died
the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka
for some 300 years.
In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown,
and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well
known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv•
ing there.
During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped
Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again
repaired and fortified, but the management was turned
over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children.
After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy
died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct
descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his
nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of
Maria Theresa with the title of Count.
In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning
and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius
Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married
a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both
were very good to their subjects and showed great concern
for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the
fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days
gone by.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are
rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph
of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for
him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak
daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Krásna Hôrka
Description
An account of the resource
Hubert Macko, OSB.
Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958
pp. 44-46
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macko, Hubert
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1958
castles
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/15031c10663fc3f090a16d5383329955.pdf
031657d391a1e38901fafc0f4f842c2a
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
65
Castles of Slovakia:
KREMNICA
BY HUBERT MACKO, O.S.B.
Rome was built on ,seive:n hiHs. Kremnica is situated
in a valley surrounded by seiven hills and is cal•led .t he
"queen of the mining cities," 1because of its gold and silver
mines. The city has a mint, a Franciscan monastery, dating ba:clk to. the 1'7th century, and the famous fortress
which is still in fair state of preservation.
The history of the fortress is the history of the town
of Kxemnica. It was built to jprotect the town and its gold
and si!Jver mines. When the fortress was bui1lrt, no one can
say. Some historians claim that the fortress dates from
the time of the Romans, others say the Goths built it.
But this we do know: in the time of King Charles Robert,
in the year 1328, the fortress was important.
Some historians claim that Kremnica was of Slovalk
origin, built therefoTe in the 9th or 10th century. They
·b ase theiT claim on the name itself, whkh is deri1ved from
the word "kremeii," meaning .flint or quartz. ln old documents, Kremnica is designated by V1arious names: Cremnychlbana, Cremnyc'Z, Kremnica, Cremnich, Cremic, Keormeocz and Cremnicha.
The fortress, aside from protecting the town and the
gold mines, also contained the mint, which made the money
for twelve countries. It is difficult to believe, but there
are no records either albout the town of Kremnioa or the
fortress for about a hundred years, from about 1339 to
the death of King ALbert in 1439.
It has been estalblished, hoM1e1Ver, that at the dawn
of the 15th century, after the death of Jan ~izka, Hussite
armies began their depradations in Slovalkia. One :part of
the army came through Poland as fa,r as Spis, thence
through Liptov to Turciansky Svaty Martin, which was
burned to the ground, thence toward Tekov and Kremnica.
It i:s the opinion of many historians that Kremnioa was
besieged •b y this arnny. However, there are no historical
documents to support this claim.
�66
SLOVAKIA
After the death of King Albert (1439) his widow
Elizaibeth, g3/Ve ibirth to a son, Ladislaiv V., caUed the
''Posthumous", whom only one part of the country acknowledged as king. He was crowned king, but the other
faction acknowledged the Polish King Ladislav as king.
Ladislav's chief supporter was Jan Hunady. It is understandalble that great confusion per:vaded the country with.
two existing kings and two opposing armies.
The widowed queen ElizaJbeth, to def'end the rights of
her son, enlisted the support of the Hussite leader; John.
Jiskra of Brandys. The importaint mining towns backed
Elizalbeth's son; among these W8$ Kremnica. Jiskra was
a great military leader and in a short time many towns
and fortresses in Gerner county fell before his victorious
army and pledged allegiance to young King Ladislav. Hasko
of Schellendorf, the right hand man of Jislkra, became the
caiptain in Kremnica.
In the year 1442 the army orf Jan Hunady's •u nder the
leadership of the hunter...bishop Simon Rozgon, laid siege
to Kremnica. For four weeks the soldiers pillaged the
neighiboring towns. When news reached Simon Rozgon
that John Jiskra was hastening to help Kremnica, the
hunter-bishop withdrew his army.
Then in 1451, Hunady himself led an army against
Kremnica, but he was no match for Jiskra and had to
withdraw. In 1455 King Mathias Corvin made peace with
Jiskra, and Kremnica beoome the property of the crown.
After the death of King Louis IT. in the historic battle of Mohac, Kremnica became the property of Queen
Mary. When she died Kremnica passed into the possession
of her brother, Ferdinand I, exchequer of the king.
Between the yeara 1528 and 1533 Kremnica was the
scene of many 1battles. It was during those turbulent times
that ibands of predatory ik,n ights were born. Raiphael
Podmanicky and Mathias Baso attacked the gold city and
stole much of its gold. To protect itself and its .gold, a
meetin!g was called of the lords of all the suTTOunding
fortresses, on October 4, 1537, where it was decided to
outfit an army of 700 men. King Ferdinand I wais asked
to .gilV'e his consent and to appoint a commander, 'but he
�SLOVAKIA
67
saiw a threat to the cro!Wil from such a pooling of forces.
He neither consented nor did he appoint a commander,
leaving Kremnica to defend itself as best it could, which
it prOm1ptly did by fortifying not only the fortress, but the
town as well.
H01Wever, in the year 1560 a fire destroyed much of
the to1WI1 and the fortress. The fire was so hot that the
very bells in the towers of the fortress and the canon on
the walls melted like wax. The buHd.ing housing the
airchi,ves ,w as destroyed completely. It took a long time and
much effort to rebuild the town and the fortress.
Du:rfag the Turkish invasion both the town and the
fortress were besieged, but neiver taken. In 1604 Stefan
Bockay besieged the town, succeeded in entering and burning pa;rt off it, but the fortre.ss proved impregnable. Since
Bockay was a great menace to Kremnica, the town offered
him 4000 pieces of gold to sign a treaty, which he accepted.
In 1620 fortress Kremnica joined with Gabriel Bethlen,
and in 1622 capitulated to King Ferdinand II. During
Veselini's uprising in the neighboring fortress of Muran
against King Leopold, the master of fortress Kremnica and
the townspeople were accused by archbishop Juraj Szelepcsenyi of partisanship. Many were taken to Bratislava,
tried, and convicted.
Kremn!ica suffered much from fire.s. Besides the fires
already mentioned, there were four other major fires: in
1690, 1707, 1716, and 1777. As the science of warfare became perfected fortress Kremnica lost much of its defense
value foo- the town and consequently was left to the elements. However, even today a great deal of the fortress
remains. It is one of the proud possessions of the town.
Amidst its ruins there WatS until recently a chapel and a
library of the Franciscan Fathers, connecting with the
monastery itself.
It is noteworthy to state that peacocks were a1ways
raised in the fortress firom the time when one of them
sounded the alwrm during the Turldsh invasion thus frustrating a sneak attack and :perh3lPS disaster, something
akin to the geese of Rome, frustrating the attacks of the
Gauls upon the capital of the Roman Empire.
�
SLOVAKIA
65
Castles of Slovakia:
KREMNICA
BY HUBERT MACKO, O.S.B.
Rome was built on ,seive:n hiHs. Kremnica is situated
in a valley surrounded by seiven hills and is cal•led .t he
"queen of the mining cities," 1because of its gold and silver
mines. The city has a mint, a Franciscan monastery, dating ba:clk to. the 1'7th century, and the famous fortress
which is still in fair state of preservation.
The history of the fortress is the history of the town
of Kxemnica. It was built to jprotect the town and its gold
and si!Jver mines. When the fortress was bui1lrt, no one can
say. Some historians claim that the fortress dates from
the time of the Romans, others say the Goths built it.
But this we do know: in the time of King Charles Robert,
in the year 1328, the fortress was important.
Some historians claim that Kremnica was of Slovalk
origin, built therefoTe in the 9th or 10th century. They
·b ase theiT claim on the name itself, whkh is deri1ved from
the word "kremeii," meaning .flint or quartz. ln old documents, Kremnica is designated by V1arious names: Cremnychlbana, Cremnyc'Z, Kremnica, Cremnich, Cremic, Keormeocz and Cremnicha.
The fortress, aside from protecting the town and the
gold mines, also contained the mint, which made the money
for twelve countries. It is difficult to believe, but there
are no records either albout the town of Kremnioa or the
fortress for about a hundred years, from about 1339 to
the death of King ALbert in 1439.
It has been estalblished, hoM1e1Ver, that at the dawn
of the 15th century, after the death of Jan ~izka, Hussite
armies began their depradations in Slovalkia. One :part of
the army came through Poland as fa,r as Spis, thence
through Liptov to Turciansky Svaty Martin, which was
burned to the ground, thence toward Tekov and Kremnica.
It i:s the opinion of many historians that Kremnioa was
besieged •b y this arnny. However, there are no historical
documents to support this claim.
�66
SLOVAKIA
After the death of King Albert (1439) his widow
Elizaibeth, g3/Ve ibirth to a son, Ladislaiv V., caUed the
''Posthumous", whom only one part of the country acknowledged as king. He was crowned king, but the other
faction acknowledged the Polish King Ladislav as king.
Ladislav's chief supporter was Jan Hunady. It is understandalble that great confusion per:vaded the country with.
two existing kings and two opposing armies.
The widowed queen ElizaJbeth, to def'end the rights of
her son, enlisted the support of the Hussite leader; John.
Jiskra of Brandys. The importaint mining towns backed
Elizalbeth's son; among these W8$ Kremnica. Jiskra was
a great military leader and in a short time many towns
and fortresses in Gerner county fell before his victorious
army and pledged allegiance to young King Ladislav. Hasko
of Schellendorf, the right hand man of Jislkra, became the
caiptain in Kremnica.
In the year 1442 the army orf Jan Hunady's •u nder the
leadership of the hunter...bishop Simon Rozgon, laid siege
to Kremnica. For four weeks the soldiers pillaged the
neighiboring towns. When news reached Simon Rozgon
that John Jiskra was hastening to help Kremnica, the
hunter-bishop withdrew his army.
Then in 1451, Hunady himself led an army against
Kremnica, but he was no match for Jiskra and had to
withdraw. In 1455 King Mathias Corvin made peace with
Jiskra, and Kremnica beoome the property of the crown.
After the death of King Louis IT. in the historic battle of Mohac, Kremnica became the property of Queen
Mary. When she died Kremnica passed into the possession
of her brother, Ferdinand I, exchequer of the king.
Between the yeara 1528 and 1533 Kremnica was the
scene of many 1battles. It was during those turbulent times
that ibands of predatory ik,n ights were born. Raiphael
Podmanicky and Mathias Baso attacked the gold city and
stole much of its gold. To protect itself and its .gold, a
meetin!g was called of the lords of all the suTTOunding
fortresses, on October 4, 1537, where it was decided to
outfit an army of 700 men. King Ferdinand I wais asked
to .gilV'e his consent and to appoint a commander, 'but he
�SLOVAKIA
67
saiw a threat to the cro!Wil from such a pooling of forces.
He neither consented nor did he appoint a commander,
leaving Kremnica to defend itself as best it could, which
it prOm1ptly did by fortifying not only the fortress, but the
town as well.
H01Wever, in the year 1560 a fire destroyed much of
the to1WI1 and the fortress. The fire was so hot that the
very bells in the towers of the fortress and the canon on
the walls melted like wax. The buHd.ing housing the
airchi,ves ,w as destroyed completely. It took a long time and
much effort to rebuild the town and the fortress.
Du:rfag the Turkish invasion both the town and the
fortress were besieged, but neiver taken. In 1604 Stefan
Bockay besieged the town, succeeded in entering and burning pa;rt off it, but the fortre.ss proved impregnable. Since
Bockay was a great menace to Kremnica, the town offered
him 4000 pieces of gold to sign a treaty, which he accepted.
In 1620 fortress Kremnica joined with Gabriel Bethlen,
and in 1622 capitulated to King Ferdinand II. During
Veselini's uprising in the neighboring fortress of Muran
against King Leopold, the master of fortress Kremnica and
the townspeople were accused by archbishop Juraj Szelepcsenyi of partisanship. Many were taken to Bratislava,
tried, and convicted.
Kremn!ica suffered much from fire.s. Besides the fires
already mentioned, there were four other major fires: in
1690, 1707, 1716, and 1777. As the science of warfare became perfected fortress Kremnica lost much of its defense
value foo- the town and consequently was left to the elements. However, even today a great deal of the fortress
remains. It is one of the proud possessions of the town.
Amidst its ruins there WatS until recently a chapel and a
library of the Franciscan Fathers, connecting with the
monastery itself.
It is noteworthy to state that peacocks were a1ways
raised in the fortress firom the time when one of them
sounded the alwrm during the Turldsh invasion thus frustrating a sneak attack and :perh3lPS disaster, something
akin to the geese of Rome, frustrating the attacks of the
Gauls upon the capital of the Roman Empire.
�
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
65
Castles of Slovakia:
KREMNICA
BY HUBERT MACKO, O.S.B.
Rome was built on ,seive:n hiHs. Kremnica is situated
in a valley surrounded by seiven hills and is cal•led .t he
"queen of the mining cities," 1because of its gold and silver
mines. The city has a mint, a Franciscan monastery, dating ba:clk to. the 1'7th century, and the famous fortress
which is still in fair state of preservation.
The history of the fortress is the history of the town
of Kxemnica. It was built to jprotect the town and its gold
and si!Jver mines. When the fortress was bui1lrt, no one can
say. Some historians claim that the fortress dates from
the time of the Romans, others say the Goths built it.
But this we do know: in the time of King Charles Robert,
in the year 1328, the fortress was important.
Some historians claim that Kremnica was of Slovalk
origin, built therefoTe in the 9th or 10th century. They
·b ase theiT claim on the name itself, whkh is deri1ved from
the word "kremeii," meaning .flint or quartz. ln old documents, Kremnica is designated by V1arious names: Cremnychlbana, Cremnyc'Z, Kremnica, Cremnich, Cremic, Keormeocz and Cremnicha.
The fortress, aside from protecting the town and the
gold mines, also contained the mint, which made the money
for twelve countries. It is difficult to believe, but there
are no records either albout the town of Kremnioa or the
fortress for about a hundred years, from about 1339 to
the death of King ALbert in 1439.
It has been estalblished, hoM1e1Ver, that at the dawn
of the 15th century, after the death of Jan ~izka, Hussite
armies began their depradations in Slovalkia. One :part of
the army came through Poland as fa,r as Spis, thence
through Liptov to Turciansky Svaty Martin, which was
burned to the ground, thence toward Tekov and Kremnica.
It i:s the opinion of many historians that Kremnioa was
besieged •b y this arnny. However, there are no historical
documents to support this claim.
66
SLOVAKIA
After the death of King Albert (1439) his widow
Elizaibeth, g3/Ve ibirth to a son, Ladislaiv V., caUed the
''Posthumous", whom only one part of the country acknowledged as king. He was crowned king, but the other
faction acknowledged the Polish King Ladislav as king.
Ladislav's chief supporter was Jan Hunady. It is understandalble that great confusion per:vaded the country with.
two existing kings and two opposing armies.
The widowed queen ElizaJbeth, to def'end the rights of
her son, enlisted the support of the Hussite leader; John.
Jiskra of Brandys. The importaint mining towns backed
Elizalbeth's son; among these W8$ Kremnica. Jiskra was
a great military leader and in a short time many towns
and fortresses in Gerner county fell before his victorious
army and pledged allegiance to young King Ladislav. Hasko
of Schellendorf, the right hand man of Jislkra, became the
caiptain in Kremnica.
In the year 1442 the army orf Jan Hunady's •u nder the
leadership of the hunter...bishop Simon Rozgon, laid siege
to Kremnica. For four weeks the soldiers pillaged the
neighiboring towns. When news reached Simon Rozgon
that John Jiskra was hastening to help Kremnica, the
hunter-bishop withdrew his army.
Then in 1451, Hunady himself led an army against
Kremnica, but he was no match for Jiskra and had to
withdraw. In 1455 King Mathias Corvin made peace with
Jiskra, and Kremnica beoome the property of the crown.
After the death of King Louis IT. in the historic battle of Mohac, Kremnica became the property of Queen
Mary. When she died Kremnica passed into the possession
of her brother, Ferdinand I, exchequer of the king.
Between the yeara 1528 and 1533 Kremnica was the
scene of many 1battles. It was during those turbulent times
that ibands of predatory ik,n ights were born. Raiphael
Podmanicky and Mathias Baso attacked the gold city and
stole much of its gold. To protect itself and its .gold, a
meetin!g was called of the lords of all the suTTOunding
fortresses, on October 4, 1537, where it was decided to
outfit an army of 700 men. King Ferdinand I wais asked
to .gilV'e his consent and to appoint a commander, 'but he
SLOVAKIA
67
saiw a threat to the cro!Wil from such a pooling of forces.
He neither consented nor did he appoint a commander,
leaving Kremnica to defend itself as best it could, which
it prOm1ptly did by fortifying not only the fortress, but the
town as well.
H01Wever, in the year 1560 a fire destroyed much of
the to1WI1 and the fortress. The fire was so hot that the
very bells in the towers of the fortress and the canon on
the walls melted like wax. The buHd.ing housing the
airchi,ves ,w as destroyed completely. It took a long time and
much effort to rebuild the town and the fortress.
Du:rfag the Turkish invasion both the town and the
fortress were besieged, but neiver taken. In 1604 Stefan
Bockay besieged the town, succeeded in entering and burning pa;rt off it, but the fortre.ss proved impregnable. Since
Bockay was a great menace to Kremnica, the town offered
him 4000 pieces of gold to sign a treaty, which he accepted.
In 1620 fortress Kremnica joined with Gabriel Bethlen,
and in 1622 capitulated to King Ferdinand II. During
Veselini's uprising in the neighboring fortress of Muran
against King Leopold, the master of fortress Kremnica and
the townspeople were accused by archbishop Juraj Szelepcsenyi of partisanship. Many were taken to Bratislava,
tried, and convicted.
Kremn!ica suffered much from fire.s. Besides the fires
already mentioned, there were four other major fires: in
1690, 1707, 1716, and 1777. As the science of warfare became perfected fortress Kremnica lost much of its defense
value foo- the town and consequently was left to the elements. However, even today a great deal of the fortress
remains. It is one of the proud possessions of the town.
Amidst its ruins there WatS until recently a chapel and a
library of the Franciscan Fathers, connecting with the
monastery itself.
It is noteworthy to state that peacocks were a1ways
raised in the fortress firom the time when one of them
sounded the alwrm during the Turldsh invasion thus frustrating a sneak attack and :perh3lPS disaster, something
akin to the geese of Rome, frustrating the attacks of the
Gauls upon the capital of the Roman Empire.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Kremnica
Description
An account of the resource
Hubert Macko, O.S.B.
Slovakia, Vol. 11, No. 2 (34), September-December 1961
pp. 65-67
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macko, Hubert
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1961
castles
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/96d04a4a837ae0e45ee85998b4dff11a.pdf
9e5e206f00cb0421dba1339b2a117ae2
PDF Text
Text
60
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIETAVA
Li etava was one of the most extensive castles of the
V ah region and ,pro\baibly one of the largest orf Slovakia.
With its locati,on and structure it al1s o is one of lthe most beautiful of ruins. Like Hricov and Sul'ov, Lieta,va was buHt on
hu1g e sandstone roicks which not only made a firm foundation, but also provided exceHent buiiding ma,terial. Because
it was practkally inaiccessilble, it afforded good protection
for its masters. The ea stern and northern sides orf Lietava
Castle espeicially are so steep that an approach from those
sides i,s whoHy impossi'ble . And this · characteristic most
likely gruve rise to the legend for the origin of the name
of the castle. Louis the Great, ,Slovaiks will teJl you, ordered
his burlders to !build him a new castle 1in about 1360 on such
a spot that would lbe inaccessible to an enemy who did not
know how to fly. Hence, the name LietaJVa from the, SlO!Vak
"lietat'" (to fily). Liefa'Va was one of a number of fortresses
and castles built at that time.
1
Lietawa is mosrt accessilble from the southern side, where
one can enter the castle grounds through the main gate.
At the western and eastern ends of the spacious courtyard
we see the remains of two ,s quare towers ,w ith gun oipeinings.
To gert to the 1inner courtyard, which housed the inhalbitants
of the castle, one has to pass throll1gh anotherr massive gate.
Here we <find ,a huge cistern carved inrto the rO'ck, into which
flowed the rainwater from the rooftops of the !buildings
close by through wooden and clay troughs.
,
In the center orf the yard there stood a mighty tower
with walls two meterrs thi,ok ; its circumference was 36
meters,. Accoroing to experts this was the oldest part of the
Lietava fortress - the last ref'll!ge of those, besieged by an
enemy. On the southern side of the dwelling pl~es ~an be
seen even today the escutcheon of the Kostka clan, i.e, a
hand gvilpipirng a siword with a half-moon and a 1brachial
star. On the eastern side there iprotrudes a mighty semicircU'lar -bastion with many gun-holes; on the ground floor
�SLOVAKIA
61
'large ones for cannons and small ones for musk~ts on the
upper floor.
At the foot of the castle, aJb,o ve the town of Lietava,
stands a historic churich with a Gothic tower, which probably was a ,g uard tower, since it was 'buult on the slope of the
hill. When the caSitle 1perished, two paintings, two, painted
and richly caTVed chureh pews and three bells were brought
to this ,c hurch from the castle chaipeJ. During Worrld War I,
the Hungarian government had these relics removed. According to an ancient story, there was a precious altar
painting in this chur,ch, whi-ch also had its origin in the
LietaJVa Castle. The painting depfoted a multitude o:f people
surrounding an old ,priest who was being thrown oiver the
cliff onto prepared siprked-lpoles by wi1d Tatars.
An · ancient legend teHs us that the painting originated
in the fol1lowi.nig imaniner. Aifter the historic battle near
Saj,wa, the Tataric hordes ,s cattered all o;ver the country.
One of their groUJps 1ca;me to Lietava, and the residents, fled
in terror before them, many hiding in the hills, while the
rest, mostly dlder men, ,w omen and ohildren, barric·a ded
themsel,ves :in the church. In those days, chu11ches were
fortified with walls so that in ti:me of need they did offer
some measure of ,protection. Among the unfortunates in the
chmch, wa;s a!lso an old priest who encouraged his fait:hfol
to ,prepare to defend themselves. As ,s oon as the Tatars
came to the chur,ch, they called out to the defende:ris to surrender the church willingly and then all wou1d 1b e free to go
their way. The old priest admonished his 1people not to believe the heathen ter,rorists, but the faithful eventually
gruve UJP and surrendered the church. They were basely
deceived. The Tatars rounded them all up and marched
them to the edge of a high rock: below, in the albyss, spilked
poles were driven in the ,g round. The wild Tatars screamed
at their prisoners to renounce their Christian fruith or be
thrown off the cliff onto the, spiked poles. The wged priest
pleaded with his faithfol to. remain true to Chri.st, and true
they did remain. The · enraged Tatars forced many oiver
the cliff with their ·spears and knives. When the rest would
not renounce their faith, the Tatars seized the old priest and
�SLOVAKIA
62
t!hrew him headlong into .the a:byss. But, lo and behold, a
miracle happened! T.he ,priest did not fall on ,t he spikes belorw. He siim:ply dis111Ppeared. The heathen Tatar brutes were
ama;zed and fri,gihtened; it did not ta:ke them long to clear
out of Lietava and the country.
What really happened to the aged ·priest? His fall to
certain doom was checked ·~ a staunch bush which projected out of the cliff and he mana;ged to hang on, out of
s~ght of the Tatars. When the residents of Lietava ireturned
f.rom the ,hills shortl,y after, they freed thek heroic and
saintly priest and buried the victims of Tatar brutality. Lietaiva commemorated the memo,ry of this. miraculous liberation for centuries. The paintiing resulted; it was hUIIlg above
the altar of the church.
'-'
According to tradition, long before the wills of Lieta va
Castle were built on the steep rock, a pagan shrine was built
on the site. It was. made of wood, and, hence, in time disaippeared completely. .Aibove the entrance to the shrine, on
a hU1ge beam, theire was caI"Ved an image of the sun, which
meant that the forefathers orf ,the Slo1vaJks. worrs.hiipped the
sun as the giver of life. Pagan priestesses: lived beneath the
shrine; it was 1Jhedr duty to bring honey water, ripened
grains and f,rurits, wreaths and other airtioles of sa;crifice to
their gods. Many years later a Christian church repl-a,ced the
pa:gan shrine.
History tells us that Lo:u.is the Great donated the Lieta;va stronghold in 1360 to Stephen Bwbek from Plesivec for
sel'!Vices rendered him during his wars in Italy. In 1403,
however, one of his descendants, Henry (Im.ro), fought
a;gainst King Zigimund, and because of this both Strecno
and Lietava were given to some Polisih nobleman by Zigmund. Later, however, the Bubelk clan was amnestied by the
king, who returned Lietwva to them. One of the Bubeiks
died near Luicenec in the, battle a:gaiinst Jiskra. Later, when
the castle •b ecame the ;property of the Zfupol'skys, John Zapol'sky donated it to Nkholas Kostka, a Bohemian nobleman. In 1538, General Ntcholas Turi ()(f Ferdinand I's army
SU!ITounded the castle, lb ut was not able to take it; Kostka
defended it successfully.
1
�63
SLOVAKIA
Lieta:va ,p robably witnessed its most glorious day at the
time when Francis Thul'zo mrurried Kostika's daughter and
received Lietava as a dowry. Thurzo, however, ;preferred to
live in the Orava Castle. When he left Lletava without an
occupant, it gradually 1beca.me neglected and the teeth of
time and weather toolk their toll. During the time od: Francis Raik6czi M, the stronghold of Lletaiva wa·s ,partly repaired, ibut shortly thererufter was completely abandoned
to its sad fate.
• • •
WIDTE MOUNTAIN -
IDSTOR'ICAL FORGERY
Soone Czechs, Ozech historians and their aipologists indulge in descrilbing tJhe anti-Hussite .crusades as national
swppression and the "Hussite Century" as a period of enlightemnent and Czech "national" rule in BO'hemia. Their
claim that the Czechs lost their "national" independence
in 1620 (Battle of White Mountain) has 1been rnpeated so
often that finally most Ozechs have come to believe it. T. G.
Masaryik, Dr. Edward Benes and their !followers haive propagated this legend consistently sin.ce the foundation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. It is a singular example of historkal
forgery.
The overthrow of Hussitism has been consciously misinterpreted as a siUippress:ion of the Czech n1a tion lby the
Czechs th~se1ves to gain the symaipthy of other nations.
The White Mountain !battle was not a nationaJl, but strictly
a religious allld dynastic a,ffair.. After the battle was O'Ver,
the emperor had some 27 od: the "relbel" :l eaders decapitated.
Six were of German odgin. But none was executed because
of his nationality.
1
We know that the Thirty Years' War started in Bohemia in 1'618, when the Pmtestant aristocraits there refused
to elect Feroinand of Austria, iHoly Roman IDmipe;ror, to the
vrucant throne od: Bohem'ia, 1preforring yo1Un,g Fredericlk,
Elector Palatine, instead. This rularmed the Protestant
princes, especially John George of Saxony, to such an. extent that they declared themselves neutral and let Frederick
�
60
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIETAVA
Li etava was one of the most extensive castles of the
V ah region and ,pro\baibly one of the largest orf Slovakia.
With its locati,on and structure it al1s o is one of lthe most beautiful of ruins. Like Hricov and Sul'ov, Lieta,va was buHt on
hu1g e sandstone roicks which not only made a firm foundation, but also provided exceHent buiiding ma,terial. Because
it was practkally inaiccessilble, it afforded good protection
for its masters. The ea stern and northern sides orf Lietava
Castle espeicially are so steep that an approach from those
sides i,s whoHy impossi'ble . And this · characteristic most
likely gruve rise to the legend for the origin of the name
of the castle. Louis the Great, ,Slovaiks will teJl you, ordered
his burlders to !build him a new castle 1in about 1360 on such
a spot that would lbe inaccessible to an enemy who did not
know how to fly. Hence, the name LietaJVa from the, SlO!Vak
"lietat'" (to fily). Liefa'Va was one of a number of fortresses
and castles built at that time.
1
Lietawa is mosrt accessilble from the southern side, where
one can enter the castle grounds through the main gate.
At the western and eastern ends of the spacious courtyard
we see the remains of two ,s quare towers ,w ith gun oipeinings.
To gert to the 1inner courtyard, which housed the inhalbitants
of the castle, one has to pass throll1gh anotherr massive gate.
Here we <find ,a huge cistern carved inrto the rO'ck, into which
flowed the rainwater from the rooftops of the !buildings
close by through wooden and clay troughs.
,
In the center orf the yard there stood a mighty tower
with walls two meterrs thi,ok ; its circumference was 36
meters,. Accoroing to experts this was the oldest part of the
Lietava fortress - the last ref'll!ge of those, besieged by an
enemy. On the southern side of the dwelling pl~es ~an be
seen even today the escutcheon of the Kostka clan, i.e, a
hand gvilpipirng a siword with a half-moon and a 1brachial
star. On the eastern side there iprotrudes a mighty semicircU'lar -bastion with many gun-holes; on the ground floor
�SLOVAKIA
61
'large ones for cannons and small ones for musk~ts on the
upper floor.
At the foot of the castle, aJb,o ve the town of Lietava,
stands a historic churich with a Gothic tower, which probably was a ,g uard tower, since it was 'buult on the slope of the
hill. When the caSitle 1perished, two paintings, two, painted
and richly caTVed chureh pews and three bells were brought
to this ,c hurch from the castle chaipeJ. During Worrld War I,
the Hungarian government had these relics removed. According to an ancient story, there was a precious altar
painting in this chur,ch, whi-ch also had its origin in the
LietaJVa Castle. The painting depfoted a multitude o:f people
surrounding an old ,priest who was being thrown oiver the
cliff onto prepared siprked-lpoles by wi1d Tatars.
An · ancient legend teHs us that the painting originated
in the fol1lowi.nig imaniner. Aifter the historic battle near
Saj,wa, the Tataric hordes ,s cattered all o;ver the country.
One of their groUJps 1ca;me to Lietava, and the residents, fled
in terror before them, many hiding in the hills, while the
rest, mostly dlder men, ,w omen and ohildren, barric·a ded
themsel,ves :in the church. In those days, chu11ches were
fortified with walls so that in ti:me of need they did offer
some measure of ,protection. Among the unfortunates in the
chmch, wa;s a!lso an old priest who encouraged his fait:hfol
to ,prepare to defend themselves. As ,s oon as the Tatars
came to the chur,ch, they called out to the defende:ris to surrender the church willingly and then all wou1d 1b e free to go
their way. The old priest admonished his 1people not to believe the heathen ter,rorists, but the faithful eventually
gruve UJP and surrendered the church. They were basely
deceived. The Tatars rounded them all up and marched
them to the edge of a high rock: below, in the albyss, spilked
poles were driven in the ,g round. The wild Tatars screamed
at their prisoners to renounce their Christian fruith or be
thrown off the cliff onto the, spiked poles. The wged priest
pleaded with his faithfol to. remain true to Chri.st, and true
they did remain. The · enraged Tatars forced many oiver
the cliff with their ·spears and knives. When the rest would
not renounce their faith, the Tatars seized the old priest and
�SLOVAKIA
62
t!hrew him headlong into .the a:byss. But, lo and behold, a
miracle happened! T.he ,priest did not fall on ,t he spikes belorw. He siim:ply dis111Ppeared. The heathen Tatar brutes were
ama;zed and fri,gihtened; it did not ta:ke them long to clear
out of Lietava and the country.
What really happened to the aged ·priest? His fall to
certain doom was checked ·~ a staunch bush which projected out of the cliff and he mana;ged to hang on, out of
s~ght of the Tatars. When the residents of Lietava ireturned
f.rom the ,hills shortl,y after, they freed thek heroic and
saintly priest and buried the victims of Tatar brutality. Lietaiva commemorated the memo,ry of this. miraculous liberation for centuries. The paintiing resulted; it was hUIIlg above
the altar of the church.
'-'
According to tradition, long before the wills of Lieta va
Castle were built on the steep rock, a pagan shrine was built
on the site. It was. made of wood, and, hence, in time disaippeared completely. .Aibove the entrance to the shrine, on
a hU1ge beam, theire was caI"Ved an image of the sun, which
meant that the forefathers orf ,the Slo1vaJks. worrs.hiipped the
sun as the giver of life. Pagan priestesses: lived beneath the
shrine; it was 1Jhedr duty to bring honey water, ripened
grains and f,rurits, wreaths and other airtioles of sa;crifice to
their gods. Many years later a Christian church repl-a,ced the
pa:gan shrine.
History tells us that Lo:u.is the Great donated the Lieta;va stronghold in 1360 to Stephen Bwbek from Plesivec for
sel'!Vices rendered him during his wars in Italy. In 1403,
however, one of his descendants, Henry (Im.ro), fought
a;gainst King Zigimund, and because of this both Strecno
and Lietava were given to some Polisih nobleman by Zigmund. Later, however, the Bubelk clan was amnestied by the
king, who returned Lietwva to them. One of the Bubeiks
died near Luicenec in the, battle a:gaiinst Jiskra. Later, when
the castle •b ecame the ;property of the Zfupol'skys, John Zapol'sky donated it to Nkholas Kostka, a Bohemian nobleman. In 1538, General Ntcholas Turi ()(f Ferdinand I's army
SU!ITounded the castle, lb ut was not able to take it; Kostka
defended it successfully.
1
�63
SLOVAKIA
Lieta:va ,p robably witnessed its most glorious day at the
time when Francis Thul'zo mrurried Kostika's daughter and
received Lietava as a dowry. Thurzo, however, ;preferred to
live in the Orava Castle. When he left Lletava without an
occupant, it gradually 1beca.me neglected and the teeth of
time and weather toolk their toll. During the time od: Francis Raik6czi M, the stronghold of Lletaiva wa·s ,partly repaired, ibut shortly thererufter was completely abandoned
to its sad fate.
• • •
WIDTE MOUNTAIN -
IDSTOR'ICAL FORGERY
Soone Czechs, Ozech historians and their aipologists indulge in descrilbing tJhe anti-Hussite .crusades as national
swppression and the "Hussite Century" as a period of enlightemnent and Czech "national" rule in BO'hemia. Their
claim that the Czechs lost their "national" independence
in 1620 (Battle of White Mountain) has 1been rnpeated so
often that finally most Ozechs have come to believe it. T. G.
Masaryik, Dr. Edward Benes and their !followers haive propagated this legend consistently sin.ce the foundation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. It is a singular example of historkal
forgery.
The overthrow of Hussitism has been consciously misinterpreted as a siUippress:ion of the Czech n1a tion lby the
Czechs th~se1ves to gain the symaipthy of other nations.
The White Mountain !battle was not a nationaJl, but strictly
a religious allld dynastic a,ffair.. After the battle was O'Ver,
the emperor had some 27 od: the "relbel" :l eaders decapitated.
Six were of German odgin. But none was executed because
of his nationality.
1
We know that the Thirty Years' War started in Bohemia in 1'618, when the Pmtestant aristocraits there refused
to elect Feroinand of Austria, iHoly Roman IDmipe;ror, to the
vrucant throne od: Bohem'ia, 1preforring yo1Un,g Fredericlk,
Elector Palatine, instead. This rularmed the Protestant
princes, especially John George of Saxony, to such an. extent that they declared themselves neutral and let Frederick
�
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
60
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIETAVA
Li etava was one of the most extensive castles of the
V ah region and ,pro\baibly one of the largest orf Slovakia.
With its locati,on and structure it al1s o is one of lthe most beautiful of ruins. Like Hricov and Sul'ov, Lieta,va was buHt on
hu1g e sandstone roicks which not only made a firm foundation, but also provided exceHent buiiding ma,terial. Because
it was practkally inaiccessilble, it afforded good protection
for its masters. The ea stern and northern sides orf Lietava
Castle espeicially are so steep that an approach from those
sides i,s whoHy impossi'ble . And this · characteristic most
likely gruve rise to the legend for the origin of the name
of the castle. Louis the Great, ,Slovaiks will teJl you, ordered
his burlders to !build him a new castle 1in about 1360 on such
a spot that would lbe inaccessible to an enemy who did not
know how to fly. Hence, the name LietaJVa from the, SlO!Vak
"lietat'" (to fily). Liefa'Va was one of a number of fortresses
and castles built at that time.
1
Lietawa is mosrt accessilble from the southern side, where
one can enter the castle grounds through the main gate.
At the western and eastern ends of the spacious courtyard
we see the remains of two ,s quare towers ,w ith gun oipeinings.
To gert to the 1inner courtyard, which housed the inhalbitants
of the castle, one has to pass throll1gh anotherr massive gate.
Here we <find ,a huge cistern carved inrto the rO'ck, into which
flowed the rainwater from the rooftops of the !buildings
close by through wooden and clay troughs.
,
In the center orf the yard there stood a mighty tower
with walls two meterrs thi,ok ; its circumference was 36
meters,. Accoroing to experts this was the oldest part of the
Lietava fortress - the last ref'll!ge of those, besieged by an
enemy. On the southern side of the dwelling pl~es ~an be
seen even today the escutcheon of the Kostka clan, i.e, a
hand gvilpipirng a siword with a half-moon and a 1brachial
star. On the eastern side there iprotrudes a mighty semicircU'lar -bastion with many gun-holes; on the ground floor
SLOVAKIA
61
'large ones for cannons and small ones for musk~ts on the
upper floor.
At the foot of the castle, aJb,o ve the town of Lietava,
stands a historic churich with a Gothic tower, which probably was a ,g uard tower, since it was 'buult on the slope of the
hill. When the caSitle 1perished, two paintings, two, painted
and richly caTVed chureh pews and three bells were brought
to this ,c hurch from the castle chaipeJ. During Worrld War I,
the Hungarian government had these relics removed. According to an ancient story, there was a precious altar
painting in this chur,ch, whi-ch also had its origin in the
LietaJVa Castle. The painting depfoted a multitude o:f people
surrounding an old ,priest who was being thrown oiver the
cliff onto prepared siprked-lpoles by wi1d Tatars.
An · ancient legend teHs us that the painting originated
in the fol1lowi.nig imaniner. Aifter the historic battle near
Saj,wa, the Tataric hordes ,s cattered all o;ver the country.
One of their groUJps 1ca;me to Lietava, and the residents, fled
in terror before them, many hiding in the hills, while the
rest, mostly dlder men, ,w omen and ohildren, barric·a ded
themsel,ves :in the church. In those days, chu11ches were
fortified with walls so that in ti:me of need they did offer
some measure of ,protection. Among the unfortunates in the
chmch, wa;s a!lso an old priest who encouraged his fait:hfol
to ,prepare to defend themselves. As ,s oon as the Tatars
came to the chur,ch, they called out to the defende:ris to surrender the church willingly and then all wou1d 1b e free to go
their way. The old priest admonished his 1people not to believe the heathen ter,rorists, but the faithful eventually
gruve UJP and surrendered the church. They were basely
deceived. The Tatars rounded them all up and marched
them to the edge of a high rock: below, in the albyss, spilked
poles were driven in the ,g round. The wild Tatars screamed
at their prisoners to renounce their Christian fruith or be
thrown off the cliff onto the, spiked poles. The wged priest
pleaded with his faithfol to. remain true to Chri.st, and true
they did remain. The · enraged Tatars forced many oiver
the cliff with their ·spears and knives. When the rest would
not renounce their faith, the Tatars seized the old priest and
SLOVAKIA
62
t!hrew him headlong into .the a:byss. But, lo and behold, a
miracle happened! T.he ,priest did not fall on ,t he spikes belorw. He siim:ply dis111Ppeared. The heathen Tatar brutes were
ama;zed and fri,gihtened; it did not ta:ke them long to clear
out of Lietava and the country.
What really happened to the aged ·priest? His fall to
certain doom was checked ·~ a staunch bush which projected out of the cliff and he mana;ged to hang on, out of
s~ght of the Tatars. When the residents of Lietava ireturned
f.rom the ,hills shortl,y after, they freed thek heroic and
saintly priest and buried the victims of Tatar brutality. Lietaiva commemorated the memo,ry of this. miraculous liberation for centuries. The paintiing resulted; it was hUIIlg above
the altar of the church.
'-'
According to tradition, long before the wills of Lieta va
Castle were built on the steep rock, a pagan shrine was built
on the site. It was. made of wood, and, hence, in time disaippeared completely. .Aibove the entrance to the shrine, on
a hU1ge beam, theire was caI"Ved an image of the sun, which
meant that the forefathers orf ,the Slo1vaJks. worrs.hiipped the
sun as the giver of life. Pagan priestesses: lived beneath the
shrine; it was 1Jhedr duty to bring honey water, ripened
grains and f,rurits, wreaths and other airtioles of sa;crifice to
their gods. Many years later a Christian church repl-a,ced the
pa:gan shrine.
History tells us that Lo:u.is the Great donated the Lieta;va stronghold in 1360 to Stephen Bwbek from Plesivec for
sel'!Vices rendered him during his wars in Italy. In 1403,
however, one of his descendants, Henry (Im.ro), fought
a;gainst King Zigimund, and because of this both Strecno
and Lietava were given to some Polisih nobleman by Zigmund. Later, however, the Bubelk clan was amnestied by the
king, who returned Lietwva to them. One of the Bubeiks
died near Luicenec in the, battle a:gaiinst Jiskra. Later, when
the castle •b ecame the ;property of the Zfupol'skys, John Zapol'sky donated it to Nkholas Kostka, a Bohemian nobleman. In 1538, General Ntcholas Turi ()(f Ferdinand I's army
SU!ITounded the castle, lb ut was not able to take it; Kostka
defended it successfully.
1
63
SLOVAKIA
Lieta:va ,p robably witnessed its most glorious day at the
time when Francis Thul'zo mrurried Kostika's daughter and
received Lietava as a dowry. Thurzo, however, ;preferred to
live in the Orava Castle. When he left Lletava without an
occupant, it gradually 1beca.me neglected and the teeth of
time and weather toolk their toll. During the time od: Francis Raik6czi M, the stronghold of Lletaiva wa·s ,partly repaired, ibut shortly thererufter was completely abandoned
to its sad fate.
• • •
WIDTE MOUNTAIN -
IDSTOR'ICAL FORGERY
Soone Czechs, Ozech historians and their aipologists indulge in descrilbing tJhe anti-Hussite .crusades as national
swppression and the "Hussite Century" as a period of enlightemnent and Czech "national" rule in BO'hemia. Their
claim that the Czechs lost their "national" independence
in 1620 (Battle of White Mountain) has 1been rnpeated so
often that finally most Ozechs have come to believe it. T. G.
Masaryik, Dr. Edward Benes and their !followers haive propagated this legend consistently sin.ce the foundation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. It is a singular example of historkal
forgery.
The overthrow of Hussitism has been consciously misinterpreted as a siUippress:ion of the Czech n1a tion lby the
Czechs th~se1ves to gain the symaipthy of other nations.
The White Mountain !battle was not a nationaJl, but strictly
a religious allld dynastic a,ffair.. After the battle was O'Ver,
the emperor had some 27 od: the "relbel" :l eaders decapitated.
Six were of German odgin. But none was executed because
of his nationality.
1
We know that the Thirty Years' War started in Bohemia in 1'618, when the Pmtestant aristocraits there refused
to elect Feroinand of Austria, iHoly Roman IDmipe;ror, to the
vrucant throne od: Bohem'ia, 1preforring yo1Un,g Fredericlk,
Elector Palatine, instead. This rularmed the Protestant
princes, especially John George of Saxony, to such an. extent that they declared themselves neutral and let Frederick
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Lietava
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 1 (10), March 1954
pp. 60-63
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 1954
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/c1b4c01c282a23f5617c662b2dcfb47b.pdf
5183f4c90973d838c6d2636b069c1b04
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
15
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIKAVA
'I'he ruins of this ancient castle are situated, on an isolated rook aibove the toiwn of Lilkarva, near Ruwmlberok, in
LiptO'V County. In the bax::kgroiund it is surrounded by mountains, the nearest of wlhich is caUed Cebrat,. while memoraJble ChOlc rises northeast and fogenda.ry Mnich soutih of the
castle. On Mt. Mnich (Monk) there was at one time a monastery of the Red MonJk-lremp18!rs. Legend has it that this
monastery was conneioted with the 'V'illage of Llkaiva lby underground passages.
It has not been definitely estaJblished when Likav a
Castle was !built; some historians say that it was 1built during the time of Mojmir or Svatop'h.1.ik, while others olaim that
the Red Monks, the Templars, who had occuJpied a whole
series of 1Slovruk castles, built it in the 13th century to preveillt the wHd Tatars from coming into Ora,iva.
The ruins of Liikaiva iare very interesting even today. Its
mam walls reach heaivenward, forming the image oif a ship.
The buildings of Li!kaNa were quite extensive and in some
places as high as five . .stories. Traces of :p aintings, histOI1ical
dates and various decorations on the walls are stilil faintly
vi,silble, as are evidences of several gates and underground
store rooms. Soutlh and west of the castle were two extensive gardens; below the castle a yard and a fishpond north
of it. The iview from the castle is ivery 1bea,wtifuL On the south
one can see the ,w hite ho1Uses of Liik,a va, ~ond which lies
Ruzomberok, the city of Father Andrew llli.nika, champion
of justice and Slo1vaJk freedom.
When danger threatened, the people of Gerner, UptOIV
and Turiec usually fled to the hills and mountains. The
Likava Castle was a sarfe pla-ce of refuge when 500,000 Tatars itore into Hungary in 1241 ; in the battle a/bove the Sajava River some 100,000 soldiers perished. The people
of those regions fled not only into the mountains and
castles, but also sought refuge in the many caives for which
�16
SLOVAKIA
Slovakia is noted. Plroof od: this exists in the carves of Liptov and those orf Mt. Mnich and Mt. Choe.
After the depa:riture of the Tata.Ts, Likava passed into
the hands of Genman calonirers who were called in by King
Bela IV of HUil!gary. In 1312, the lord of Lrkaiva Castle was
Radomir, the last Prior Of Cerveny Klastor (Red . Monastery) on Mt. Mnich. Three years later (1'31'5) Ki:ng Charles
RdbeTt •donated Lilkava to Miatusv Done, administrator of
Li-pto1V Oounty, for aid giiven him in 1:Jhe battle near Rozhanovce. Later, the casble 1belonged to George Buibek (Bebek ?) , King Zigmll!l1d, John Jiskra (1441), Peter Komorovsky (1449); the la;tter also awned the Oraiva Castle. Other
owners of Likava included Andrew Bathory, John Krusie,
the Hunady's, Zaipol'skys, Illeshazis and, finaMy the Tokolys.
While the latteT family held it, Litkava ,p robably sa;w its most
glorious days. Of course, the owners and the people connected with the castle never had any long, peaceful periods.;
the never-ending struggle for 1:Jhe crown of Hungary brought
misery and suffering to the p01pU1lation; the throne of Hungary was seldom gained without bloodshed. Many of the
battles for the throne took place ,b eneath the Lilkaiva Castle.
'Dhe Tokoly clan became a ,power in Hungary and rebelled a:gainst the thTOne. In 1670, when the imperial anny
besieged the Orava Castle, whi-ch was held by 1:Jhe elder Toko1y, his so.n Emevich, disguised as a woman, fled Likava
and organiized a rebellion against the HaJb$burgs. When
Francis Raikoczi ordered the old castle demol,ished in 1707,
the people undertook the task enthusiastically, but the
walls would not go down. No one became interested in re building the old Lika1Va 'bastion, so tJhe bleak walls remain
a silent and ominous witness to a troubled past.
•
•
•
DEFINITION OF A CZECHOSLOVAK: A Czechoslo vak is a Czech
or renegade Slovak who claims that the Slovak nation does not want
to be free and independent, but prefers to be under the domination
of the Czechs, who are, according to him, the only peuple in the
world who can safeguard the national existence of the Slovak people
and promote its national welfare better than the Slovaks themselves.
In short: A LIAR!
�
SLOVAKIA
15
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIKAVA
'I'he ruins of this ancient castle are situated, on an isolated rook aibove the toiwn of Lilkarva, near Ruwmlberok, in
LiptO'V County. In the bax::kgroiund it is surrounded by mountains, the nearest of wlhich is caUed Cebrat,. while memoraJble ChOlc rises northeast and fogenda.ry Mnich soutih of the
castle. On Mt. Mnich (Monk) there was at one time a monastery of the Red MonJk-lremp18!rs. Legend has it that this
monastery was conneioted with the 'V'illage of Llkaiva lby underground passages.
It has not been definitely estaJblished when Likav a
Castle was !built; some historians say that it was 1built during the time of Mojmir or Svatop'h.1.ik, while others olaim that
the Red Monks, the Templars, who had occuJpied a whole
series of 1Slovruk castles, built it in the 13th century to preveillt the wHd Tatars from coming into Ora,iva.
The ruins of Liikaiva iare very interesting even today. Its
mam walls reach heaivenward, forming the image oif a ship.
The buildings of Li!kaNa were quite extensive and in some
places as high as five . .stories. Traces of :p aintings, histOI1ical
dates and various decorations on the walls are stilil faintly
vi,silble, as are evidences of several gates and underground
store rooms. Soutlh and west of the castle were two extensive gardens; below the castle a yard and a fishpond north
of it. The iview from the castle is ivery 1bea,wtifuL On the south
one can see the ,w hite ho1Uses of Liik,a va, ~ond which lies
Ruzomberok, the city of Father Andrew llli.nika, champion
of justice and Slo1vaJk freedom.
When danger threatened, the people of Gerner, UptOIV
and Turiec usually fled to the hills and mountains. The
Likava Castle was a sarfe pla-ce of refuge when 500,000 Tatars itore into Hungary in 1241 ; in the battle a/bove the Sajava River some 100,000 soldiers perished. The people
of those regions fled not only into the mountains and
castles, but also sought refuge in the many caives for which
�16
SLOVAKIA
Slovakia is noted. Plroof od: this exists in the carves of Liptov and those orf Mt. Mnich and Mt. Choe.
After the depa:riture of the Tata.Ts, Likava passed into
the hands of Genman calonirers who were called in by King
Bela IV of HUil!gary. In 1312, the lord of Lrkaiva Castle was
Radomir, the last Prior Of Cerveny Klastor (Red . Monastery) on Mt. Mnich. Three years later (1'31'5) Ki:ng Charles
RdbeTt •donated Lilkava to Miatusv Done, administrator of
Li-pto1V Oounty, for aid giiven him in 1:Jhe battle near Rozhanovce. Later, the casble 1belonged to George Buibek (Bebek ?) , King Zigmll!l1d, John Jiskra (1441), Peter Komorovsky (1449); the la;tter also awned the Oraiva Castle. Other
owners of Likava included Andrew Bathory, John Krusie,
the Hunady's, Zaipol'skys, Illeshazis and, finaMy the Tokolys.
While the latteT family held it, Litkava ,p robably sa;w its most
glorious days. Of course, the owners and the people connected with the castle never had any long, peaceful periods.;
the never-ending struggle for 1:Jhe crown of Hungary brought
misery and suffering to the p01pU1lation; the throne of Hungary was seldom gained without bloodshed. Many of the
battles for the throne took place ,b eneath the Lilkaiva Castle.
'Dhe Tokoly clan became a ,power in Hungary and rebelled a:gainst the thTOne. In 1670, when the imperial anny
besieged the Orava Castle, whi-ch was held by 1:Jhe elder Toko1y, his so.n Emevich, disguised as a woman, fled Likava
and organiized a rebellion against the HaJb$burgs. When
Francis Raikoczi ordered the old castle demol,ished in 1707,
the people undertook the task enthusiastically, but the
walls would not go down. No one became interested in re building the old Lika1Va 'bastion, so tJhe bleak walls remain
a silent and ominous witness to a troubled past.
•
•
•
DEFINITION OF A CZECHOSLOVAK: A Czechoslo vak is a Czech
or renegade Slovak who claims that the Slovak nation does not want
to be free and independent, but prefers to be under the domination
of the Czechs, who are, according to him, the only peuple in the
world who can safeguard the national existence of the Slovak people
and promote its national welfare better than the Slovaks themselves.
In short: A LIAR!
�
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
15
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
LIKAVA
'I'he ruins of this ancient castle are situated, on an isolated rook aibove the toiwn of Lilkarva, near Ruwmlberok, in
LiptO'V County. In the bax::kgroiund it is surrounded by mountains, the nearest of wlhich is caUed Cebrat,. while memoraJble ChOlc rises northeast and fogenda.ry Mnich soutih of the
castle. On Mt. Mnich (Monk) there was at one time a monastery of the Red MonJk-lremp18!rs. Legend has it that this
monastery was conneioted with the 'V'illage of Llkaiva lby underground passages.
It has not been definitely estaJblished when Likav a
Castle was !built; some historians say that it was 1built during the time of Mojmir or Svatop'h.1.ik, while others olaim that
the Red Monks, the Templars, who had occuJpied a whole
series of 1Slovruk castles, built it in the 13th century to preveillt the wHd Tatars from coming into Ora,iva.
The ruins of Liikaiva iare very interesting even today. Its
mam walls reach heaivenward, forming the image oif a ship.
The buildings of Li!kaNa were quite extensive and in some
places as high as five . .stories. Traces of :p aintings, histOI1ical
dates and various decorations on the walls are stilil faintly
vi,silble, as are evidences of several gates and underground
store rooms. Soutlh and west of the castle were two extensive gardens; below the castle a yard and a fishpond north
of it. The iview from the castle is ivery 1bea,wtifuL On the south
one can see the ,w hite ho1Uses of Liik,a va, ~ond which lies
Ruzomberok, the city of Father Andrew llli.nika, champion
of justice and Slo1vaJk freedom.
When danger threatened, the people of Gerner, UptOIV
and Turiec usually fled to the hills and mountains. The
Likava Castle was a sarfe pla-ce of refuge when 500,000 Tatars itore into Hungary in 1241 ; in the battle a/bove the Sajava River some 100,000 soldiers perished. The people
of those regions fled not only into the mountains and
castles, but also sought refuge in the many caives for which
16
SLOVAKIA
Slovakia is noted. Plroof od: this exists in the carves of Liptov and those orf Mt. Mnich and Mt. Choe.
After the depa:riture of the Tata.Ts, Likava passed into
the hands of Genman calonirers who were called in by King
Bela IV of HUil!gary. In 1312, the lord of Lrkaiva Castle was
Radomir, the last Prior Of Cerveny Klastor (Red . Monastery) on Mt. Mnich. Three years later (1'31'5) Ki:ng Charles
RdbeTt •donated Lilkava to Miatusv Done, administrator of
Li-pto1V Oounty, for aid giiven him in 1:Jhe battle near Rozhanovce. Later, the casble 1belonged to George Buibek (Bebek ?) , King Zigmll!l1d, John Jiskra (1441), Peter Komorovsky (1449); the la;tter also awned the Oraiva Castle. Other
owners of Likava included Andrew Bathory, John Krusie,
the Hunady's, Zaipol'skys, Illeshazis and, finaMy the Tokolys.
While the latteT family held it, Litkava ,p robably sa;w its most
glorious days. Of course, the owners and the people connected with the castle never had any long, peaceful periods.;
the never-ending struggle for 1:Jhe crown of Hungary brought
misery and suffering to the p01pU1lation; the throne of Hungary was seldom gained without bloodshed. Many of the
battles for the throne took place ,b eneath the Lilkaiva Castle.
'Dhe Tokoly clan became a ,power in Hungary and rebelled a:gainst the thTOne. In 1670, when the imperial anny
besieged the Orava Castle, whi-ch was held by 1:Jhe elder Toko1y, his so.n Emevich, disguised as a woman, fled Likava
and organiized a rebellion against the HaJb$burgs. When
Francis Raikoczi ordered the old castle demol,ished in 1707,
the people undertook the task enthusiastically, but the
walls would not go down. No one became interested in re building the old Lika1Va 'bastion, so tJhe bleak walls remain
a silent and ominous witness to a troubled past.
•
•
•
DEFINITION OF A CZECHOSLOVAK: A Czechoslo vak is a Czech
or renegade Slovak who claims that the Slovak nation does not want
to be free and independent, but prefers to be under the domination
of the Czechs, who are, according to him, the only peuple in the
world who can safeguard the national existence of the Slovak people
and promote its national welfare better than the Slovaks themselves.
In short: A LIAR!
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Likava
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 2 (10), June 1954
pp. 15-16
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
June 1954
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/da3f2ca94d04ff9e5d213069e50cef64.pdf
37bf27089082f711bbb586f539324490
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
23
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
ORAVA
The Orava Castle, one o! the most beautiful in Slovakla, nestles
some 360 feet a bove the Orava River. The stronghold ls made up or
three parts, bullt at different ti mes: the lower, centra), and upper.
The centra) portlon is the oldest. Thls castle wa.,; royal property as
early as 1010, and lts foundation goes back to the pagan perlod of
Slovakia. lt is recorded that tbe castle sent aid to Trenčín In 1069,
wben tbe Czeebs attacked the city, and t hat it was a safe refuge for
tbe people in 1241, when the barbaric Tatars invaded Hungary.
If you would enter the lower courtyard, you must pass througb a
gate and a tower. On the gate you (Ind the inscription, "I. Z. C. 1543"
and two beautlful escutcheons: one of George Thurzo and the other
of Francis Zichy. Inside tbe lower courtyard are the residences of
officers, tbe record room, a well, and a chapel. Members of tbe Thurzo
and Tokoly families, as well as those of other notables, are buried
witbin the cbapel walls. As you pass on, you pause before a beautlful stairease to vlew the two sculptured lions on columns stationed at
the foot of the stalrs. You ascend the stairs, pass through a heavy gate,
and enter the oldest part of the Orava Castle, tbe courtyard and the
castle proper.
In the courtyard is a well which flows lnto the Orava river b eneatb the Castle. To the rlght of the welI is a cave, within which, a
Iegend says, Peter Varday, Archblshop of Kaloča, was imprlsoned in
l 484, because he spoke too freely against higher taxes. Then you
enter the castle, which was once occupled by the Thurzo family, and
find the portraits of al-1 the administrators of Orava, trom George
Thurzo down to Zichy. Odd, worn stairs In the wall and ladders take
you to a long narrow bridge, wbich extends to the entrance of the
upper. castle. This courtyard is quite small compared to the others. The
chapel !s the highest point of this castle. Beneatb this are small narrow
rooms or cells in wblch, the Oravans telI you, "the Red Monks once llved."
The castle has passed through many hands. Records show that
Peter Balaša, administrator of Hont, occupied it in 1267. The dauntless Matúš Čák - "the mightly lord of the Vah and the Tatras" became the owner in 1298, and some time Iater a man named Donč.
In 1320 the King exchanged two other castles for Orava. Lambert
became the .admlnlstrator in 1322, and Hypolytus, Count of Kremnica,
succeeded bim in 1335. During the relgn of Louis (1342-1382), Stephen
Katy (135(>), Dletricb Bebek (1379), Vladlslaus and Jobn Kakas (1380),
and Count Nlcbolas (1382) were admlnistrators of Orava and occupled
the Castle. Louis was a Crequent visitor at the castle; it was bere that
he beld counsel wlth bis uncie Casimir, King of Poland. When Caslmir
dled in 1370, Louls succeeded bim as· regent ot Poland and passed
througb Orava many limes on bis way to Polnnd.
·
In 1398 King Zigmond gave the castle to Ctibor. who ruled over
Bečkov and several otber castles in tbe upper Váb territory. Wben
Ctibor dled in 1424, Zlgmond gave tbe castle to Nlcbolas and Andrew
Dalucký, over the protests of Ct!bor's daugbter. Catherine. Jlskra, the
Hussite, took the castle In 1440. Tbe Russian Duke, Peter Odrovaž,
�24
SLOVAKIA
was imprisoned in tbe castle by Jiskra in 1442. Peter Komorovský,
who held Likava besides flve otber strongholds, became adn'linistrator of Orava in 1449. Komorovský Jost all except Orava to Matblas
Corvin, ~ause he allied hlmself witb Prince Casimir of Poland, wbo
sougbt to unseat Mathias as Regent of Hungary. Mathias could not
take the stronghold by force; Komorovský sold it to bim for 8000
ducats In 1474. Komorovský left for Poland, but bis army, "tbe Black
Regiment," joined · up wltb King Mathlas. Jobn Corvi:n, who succeeded
bis father as regent, marrled into tbe Zápoľský family. After bis
death in 1505, the castle became the property of the Zápoľský family.
In 1526, the two Kostkas, Peter and Nicholas, Czecb noblemen,
defended it in tbe name of Zápoľský so well, that Katzianer, commander of King Ferdinanďs army and the man who practlcally wlped
out Trenčín in 1528, could not capture ít. S6metime later the Kostkas
made up with Ferdinand, who recognized their possessions (Lietava
and Strečno, received from Zrupoľský for valoai>Je services rendered)
and gave Orava to the grandson of tbe Kostkas' sister, John of Dubová, in 15·34. The latter dled in 1545 without heirs and willed the
castle to Wenceslaus Sedlnlcký on the condition that the Kostkas
could have it on the payment of 9000 ducats, the sum expended in furnisblng the castle. Nicholas Kostka wanted tbe castle very mucb, but
did not bave the stipulated 9000 ducats. lt became bis, bowever,
ihdirectly some years later. Francis 'ľhurzo, adminlstrator of Nitra,
Celi in love witb Bal'bara Kostka, Nicbolas' daughter, and married ber
in 1554. Thurzo paid Sedlnický tbe requlred sum and became the next
owner of the castle. He built the lower part of the castle and the well
in tbe courtyard, furnlshed the rooms luxuriously, and planted fruit
trees in tbe vlcinlty. Hls wlfe dled about ten years Jater wltbout
bearing children, and Tburzo married Catherine Zrinský, who bore him
four sons and two daugbters. Thurzo wllled the castle to bis oldest '·s on
George when he died in 1576. Tbe Thurzo widow then married ·Emerich
l<'orgáč.
George Tburzo became palatinate. In 1611 he prnnounced judgment
against "the Bloody Countess Bathory" of Čachtrce. He died in 1616
and left the castle to bis son Henry. The Jatter dled flve years later
and the Orava stronghold passed lnto the hands of Catherine Tôkôly,
a Tburzo by birth. The seventeenth century was packéd wlth ~~ouble
for tbe occupants of tbe castle, whlch passed into the hands of klngs,
rebel.s, and brigands. Emrlch Tôkôly fortified the castle ánd Caspar
Pika was at the head of tbe garrlson stationed there. Tbe castle
was taken In 1674 by generals Špork and Heister through tbe treacbery of the Polis)?. dlvislon of tbe garrison. Pika was pinned tó a pole
and the otber defendants were sfaughtered. Tôkčily's four-year-old son
and bis tutor got a.way with their llves. The rebels under Rákoczy
won tbe castle 1back in 1703, only to lose lt to tbe EmJ?eror's anny In 1711.
The Orava Ca.stle was dam~ed by fire May 18, 1800, but was
partlally rebuilt soon after. In tbe first quarter of the twentleth century Orava came into the possession of tbe Zichy famlly, who restored
it . to lts present cÓnditlon.
If limes ever get norma! again and you wlll be allowed ·to travel
t o Slovakla., v-isit Orava Castle and vlew the beautiful, enchanted Orava
valley trom tbe castle heights.
�
SLOVAKIA
23
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
ORAVA
The Orava Castle, one o! the most beautiful in Slovakla, nestles
some 360 feet a bove the Orava River. The stronghold ls made up or
three parts, bullt at different ti mes: the lower, centra), and upper.
The centra) portlon is the oldest. Thls castle wa.,; royal property as
early as 1010, and lts foundation goes back to the pagan perlod of
Slovakia. lt is recorded that tbe castle sent aid to Trenčín In 1069,
wben tbe Czeebs attacked the city, and t hat it was a safe refuge for
tbe people in 1241, when the barbaric Tatars invaded Hungary.
If you would enter the lower courtyard, you must pass througb a
gate and a tower. On the gate you (Ind the inscription, "I. Z. C. 1543"
and two beautlful escutcheons: one of George Thurzo and the other
of Francis Zichy. Inside tbe lower courtyard are the residences of
officers, tbe record room, a well, and a chapel. Members of tbe Thurzo
and Tokoly families, as well as those of other notables, are buried
witbin the cbapel walls. As you pass on, you pause before a beautlful stairease to vlew the two sculptured lions on columns stationed at
the foot of the stalrs. You ascend the stairs, pass through a heavy gate,
and enter the oldest part of the Orava Castle, tbe courtyard and the
castle proper.
In the courtyard is a well which flows lnto the Orava river b eneatb the Castle. To the rlght of the welI is a cave, within which, a
Iegend says, Peter Varday, Archblshop of Kaloča, was imprlsoned in
l 484, because he spoke too freely against higher taxes. Then you
enter the castle, which was once occupled by the Thurzo family, and
find the portraits of al-1 the administrators of Orava, trom George
Thurzo down to Zichy. Odd, worn stairs In the wall and ladders take
you to a long narrow bridge, wbich extends to the entrance of the
upper. castle. This courtyard is quite small compared to the others. The
chapel !s the highest point of this castle. Beneatb this are small narrow
rooms or cells in wblch, the Oravans telI you, "the Red Monks once llved."
The castle has passed through many hands. Records show that
Peter Balaša, administrator of Hont, occupied it in 1267. The dauntless Matúš Čák - "the mightly lord of the Vah and the Tatras" became the owner in 1298, and some time Iater a man named Donč.
In 1320 the King exchanged two other castles for Orava. Lambert
became the .admlnlstrator in 1322, and Hypolytus, Count of Kremnica,
succeeded bim in 1335. During the relgn of Louis (1342-1382), Stephen
Katy (135(>), Dletricb Bebek (1379), Vladlslaus and Jobn Kakas (1380),
and Count Nlcbolas (1382) were admlnistrators of Orava and occupled
the Castle. Louis was a Crequent visitor at the castle; it was bere that
he beld counsel wlth bis uncie Casimir, King of Poland. When Caslmir
dled in 1370, Louls succeeded bim as· regent ot Poland and passed
througb Orava many limes on bis way to Polnnd.
·
In 1398 King Zigmond gave the castle to Ctibor. who ruled over
Bečkov and several otber castles in tbe upper Váb territory. Wben
Ctibor dled in 1424, Zlgmond gave tbe castle to Nlcbolas and Andrew
Dalucký, over the protests of Ct!bor's daugbter. Catherine. Jlskra, the
Hussite, took the castle In 1440. Tbe Russian Duke, Peter Odrovaž,
�24
SLOVAKIA
was imprisoned in tbe castle by Jiskra in 1442. Peter Komorovský,
who held Likava besides flve otber strongholds, became adn'linistrator of Orava in 1449. Komorovský Jost all except Orava to Matblas
Corvin, ~ause he allied hlmself witb Prince Casimir of Poland, wbo
sougbt to unseat Mathias as Regent of Hungary. Mathias could not
take the stronghold by force; Komorovský sold it to bim for 8000
ducats In 1474. Komorovský left for Poland, but bis army, "tbe Black
Regiment," joined · up wltb King Mathlas. Jobn Corvi:n, who succeeded
bis father as regent, marrled into tbe Zápoľský family. After bis
death in 1505, the castle became the property of the Zápoľský family.
In 1526, the two Kostkas, Peter and Nicholas, Czecb noblemen,
defended it in tbe name of Zápoľský so well, that Katzianer, commander of King Ferdinanďs army and the man who practlcally wlped
out Trenčín in 1528, could not capture ít. S6metime later the Kostkas
made up with Ferdinand, who recognized their possessions (Lietava
and Strečno, received from Zrupoľský for valoai>Je services rendered)
and gave Orava to the grandson of tbe Kostkas' sister, John of Dubová, in 15·34. The latter dled in 1545 without heirs and willed the
castle to Wenceslaus Sedlnlcký on the condition that the Kostkas
could have it on the payment of 9000 ducats, the sum expended in furnisblng the castle. Nicholas Kostka wanted tbe castle very mucb, but
did not bave the stipulated 9000 ducats. lt became bis, bowever,
ihdirectly some years later. Francis 'ľhurzo, adminlstrator of Nitra,
Celi in love witb Bal'bara Kostka, Nicbolas' daughter, and married ber
in 1554. Thurzo paid Sedlnický tbe requlred sum and became the next
owner of the castle. He built the lower part of the castle and the well
in tbe courtyard, furnlshed the rooms luxuriously, and planted fruit
trees in tbe vlcinlty. Hls wlfe dled about ten years Jater wltbout
bearing children, and Tburzo married Catherine Zrinský, who bore him
four sons and two daugbters. Thurzo wllled the castle to bis oldest '·s on
George when he died in 1576. Tbe Thurzo widow then married ·Emerich
l<'orgáč.
George Tburzo became palatinate. In 1611 he prnnounced judgment
against "the Bloody Countess Bathory" of Čachtrce. He died in 1616
and left the castle to bis son Henry. The Jatter dled flve years later
and the Orava stronghold passed lnto the hands of Catherine Tôkôly,
a Tburzo by birth. The seventeenth century was packéd wlth ~~ouble
for tbe occupants of tbe castle, whlch passed into the hands of klngs,
rebel.s, and brigands. Emrlch Tôkôly fortified the castle ánd Caspar
Pika was at the head of tbe garrlson stationed there. Tbe castle
was taken In 1674 by generals Špork and Heister through tbe treacbery of the Polis)?. dlvislon of tbe garrison. Pika was pinned tó a pole
and the otber defendants were sfaughtered. Tôkčily's four-year-old son
and bis tutor got a.way with their llves. The rebels under Rákoczy
won tbe castle 1back in 1703, only to lose lt to tbe EmJ?eror's anny In 1711.
The Orava Ca.stle was dam~ed by fire May 18, 1800, but was
partlally rebuilt soon after. In tbe first quarter of the twentleth century Orava came into the possession of tbe Zichy famlly, who restored
it . to lts present cÓnditlon.
If limes ever get norma! again and you wlll be allowed ·to travel
t o Slovakla., v-isit Orava Castle and vlew the beautiful, enchanted Orava
valley trom tbe castle heights.
�
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
23
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
ORAVA
The Orava Castle, one o! the most beautiful in Slovakla, nestles
some 360 feet a bove the Orava River. The stronghold ls made up or
three parts, bullt at different ti mes: the lower, centra), and upper.
The centra) portlon is the oldest. Thls castle wa.,; royal property as
early as 1010, and lts foundation goes back to the pagan perlod of
Slovakia. lt is recorded that tbe castle sent aid to Trenčín In 1069,
wben tbe Czeebs attacked the city, and t hat it was a safe refuge for
tbe people in 1241, when the barbaric Tatars invaded Hungary.
If you would enter the lower courtyard, you must pass througb a
gate and a tower. On the gate you (Ind the inscription, "I. Z. C. 1543"
and two beautlful escutcheons: one of George Thurzo and the other
of Francis Zichy. Inside tbe lower courtyard are the residences of
officers, tbe record room, a well, and a chapel. Members of tbe Thurzo
and Tokoly families, as well as those of other notables, are buried
witbin the cbapel walls. As you pass on, you pause before a beautlful stairease to vlew the two sculptured lions on columns stationed at
the foot of the stalrs. You ascend the stairs, pass through a heavy gate,
and enter the oldest part of the Orava Castle, tbe courtyard and the
castle proper.
In the courtyard is a well which flows lnto the Orava river b eneatb the Castle. To the rlght of the welI is a cave, within which, a
Iegend says, Peter Varday, Archblshop of Kaloča, was imprlsoned in
l 484, because he spoke too freely against higher taxes. Then you
enter the castle, which was once occupled by the Thurzo family, and
find the portraits of al-1 the administrators of Orava, trom George
Thurzo down to Zichy. Odd, worn stairs In the wall and ladders take
you to a long narrow bridge, wbich extends to the entrance of the
upper. castle. This courtyard is quite small compared to the others. The
chapel !s the highest point of this castle. Beneatb this are small narrow
rooms or cells in wblch, the Oravans telI you, "the Red Monks once llved."
The castle has passed through many hands. Records show that
Peter Balaša, administrator of Hont, occupied it in 1267. The dauntless Matúš Čák - "the mightly lord of the Vah and the Tatras" became the owner in 1298, and some time Iater a man named Donč.
In 1320 the King exchanged two other castles for Orava. Lambert
became the .admlnlstrator in 1322, and Hypolytus, Count of Kremnica,
succeeded bim in 1335. During the relgn of Louis (1342-1382), Stephen
Katy (135(>), Dletricb Bebek (1379), Vladlslaus and Jobn Kakas (1380),
and Count Nlcbolas (1382) were admlnistrators of Orava and occupled
the Castle. Louis was a Crequent visitor at the castle; it was bere that
he beld counsel wlth bis uncie Casimir, King of Poland. When Caslmir
dled in 1370, Louls succeeded bim as· regent ot Poland and passed
througb Orava many limes on bis way to Polnnd.
·
In 1398 King Zigmond gave the castle to Ctibor. who ruled over
Bečkov and several otber castles in tbe upper Váb territory. Wben
Ctibor dled in 1424, Zlgmond gave tbe castle to Nlcbolas and Andrew
Dalucký, over the protests of Ct!bor's daugbter. Catherine. Jlskra, the
Hussite, took the castle In 1440. Tbe Russian Duke, Peter Odrovaž,
24
SLOVAKIA
was imprisoned in tbe castle by Jiskra in 1442. Peter Komorovský,
who held Likava besides flve otber strongholds, became adn'linistrator of Orava in 1449. Komorovský Jost all except Orava to Matblas
Corvin, ~ause he allied hlmself witb Prince Casimir of Poland, wbo
sougbt to unseat Mathias as Regent of Hungary. Mathias could not
take the stronghold by force; Komorovský sold it to bim for 8000
ducats In 1474. Komorovský left for Poland, but bis army, "tbe Black
Regiment," joined · up wltb King Mathlas. Jobn Corvi:n, who succeeded
bis father as regent, marrled into tbe Zápoľský family. After bis
death in 1505, the castle became the property of the Zápoľský family.
In 1526, the two Kostkas, Peter and Nicholas, Czecb noblemen,
defended it in tbe name of Zápoľský so well, that Katzianer, commander of King Ferdinanďs army and the man who practlcally wlped
out Trenčín in 1528, could not capture ít. S6metime later the Kostkas
made up with Ferdinand, who recognized their possessions (Lietava
and Strečno, received from Zrupoľský for valoai>Je services rendered)
and gave Orava to the grandson of tbe Kostkas' sister, John of Dubová, in 15·34. The latter dled in 1545 without heirs and willed the
castle to Wenceslaus Sedlnlcký on the condition that the Kostkas
could have it on the payment of 9000 ducats, the sum expended in furnisblng the castle. Nicholas Kostka wanted tbe castle very mucb, but
did not bave the stipulated 9000 ducats. lt became bis, bowever,
ihdirectly some years later. Francis 'ľhurzo, adminlstrator of Nitra,
Celi in love witb Bal'bara Kostka, Nicbolas' daughter, and married ber
in 1554. Thurzo paid Sedlnický tbe requlred sum and became the next
owner of the castle. He built the lower part of the castle and the well
in tbe courtyard, furnlshed the rooms luxuriously, and planted fruit
trees in tbe vlcinlty. Hls wlfe dled about ten years Jater wltbout
bearing children, and Tburzo married Catherine Zrinský, who bore him
four sons and two daugbters. Thurzo wllled the castle to bis oldest '·s on
George when he died in 1576. Tbe Thurzo widow then married ·Emerich
l<'orgáč.
George Tburzo became palatinate. In 1611 he prnnounced judgment
against "the Bloody Countess Bathory" of Čachtrce. He died in 1616
and left the castle to bis son Henry. The Jatter dled flve years later
and the Orava stronghold passed lnto the hands of Catherine Tôkôly,
a Tburzo by birth. The seventeenth century was packéd wlth ~~ouble
for tbe occupants of tbe castle, whlch passed into the hands of klngs,
rebel.s, and brigands. Emrlch Tôkôly fortified the castle ánd Caspar
Pika was at the head of tbe garrlson stationed there. Tbe castle
was taken In 1674 by generals Špork and Heister through tbe treacbery of the Polis)?. dlvislon of tbe garrison. Pika was pinned tó a pole
and the otber defendants were sfaughtered. Tôkčily's four-year-old son
and bis tutor got a.way with their llves. The rebels under Rákoczy
won tbe castle 1back in 1703, only to lose lt to tbe EmJ?eror's anny In 1711.
The Orava Ca.stle was dam~ed by fire May 18, 1800, but was
partlally rebuilt soon after. In tbe first quarter of the twentleth century Orava came into the possession of tbe Zichy famlly, who restored
it . to lts present cÓnditlon.
If limes ever get norma! again and you wlll be allowed ·to travel
t o Slovakla., v-isit Orava Castle and vlew the beautiful, enchanted Orava
valley trom tbe castle heights.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Orava (The Orava Castle)
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 2, No. 1 (3), March 1952
pp. 23-24
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 1952
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9843ecdca4096265cc4fb2022a13eb49.pdf
42ff8cdfb2154da3f2bfedd6c328972b
PDF Text
Text
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-
�86
SLOVAKIA
ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-.
:tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The
county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad
W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia
to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the
castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed
in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad
lives on in many legends.
The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of
Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty
cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow
but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One
of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to
Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica
claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they
a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~.
People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~
served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad
was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were
as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a
blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they
might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at
least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the
daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the
lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the
keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was
able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle.
The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse
in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He
and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage.
It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the
lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her.
And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor...
tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for
seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people
of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her
and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that
�SLOVAKIA
87
a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to
talk to, the cursed girl.
She begged him to help her and liberate her from the
infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would
come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden
1keys
from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal
the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a
great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which
would be his ~eward.
'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to
the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so
ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after
him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that
you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition
sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even
more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a
single trace behind herself.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"Let me be allowed to point to the example given by
Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted
with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that
he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our
alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of
practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was
placed for the greatest success of our national revolution,
the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it
an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren,
that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly
elected as president of the State Council of our parliament
abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the
British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National
Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt,
a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47).
�
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-
�86
SLOVAKIA
ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-.
:tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The
county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad
W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia
to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the
castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed
in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad
lives on in many legends.
The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of
Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty
cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow
but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One
of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to
Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica
claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they
a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~.
People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~
served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad
was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were
as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a
blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they
might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at
least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the
daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the
lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the
keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was
able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle.
The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse
in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He
and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage.
It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the
lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her.
And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor...
tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for
seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people
of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her
and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that
�SLOVAKIA
87
a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to
talk to, the cursed girl.
She begged him to help her and liberate her from the
infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would
come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden
1keys
from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal
the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a
great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which
would be his ~eward.
'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to
the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so
ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after
him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that
you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition
sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even
more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a
single trace behind herself.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"Let me be allowed to point to the example given by
Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted
with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that
he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our
alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of
practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was
placed for the greatest success of our national revolution,
the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it
an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren,
that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly
elected as president of the State Council of our parliament
abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the
British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National
Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt,
a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47).
�
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
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
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-
86
SLOVAKIA
ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-.
:tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The
county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad
W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia
to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the
castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed
in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad
lives on in many legends.
The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of
Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty
cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow
but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One
of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to
Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica
claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they
a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~.
People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~
served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad
was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were
as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a
blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they
might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at
least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the
daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the
lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the
keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was
able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle.
The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse
in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He
and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage.
It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the
lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her.
And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor...
tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for
seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people
of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her
and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that
SLOVAKIA
87
a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to
talk to, the cursed girl.
She begged him to help her and liberate her from the
infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would
come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden
1keys
from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal
the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a
great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which
would be his ~eward.
'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to
the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so
ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after
him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that
you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition
sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even
more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a
single trace behind herself.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"Let me be allowed to point to the example given by
Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted
with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that
he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our
alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of
practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was
placed for the greatest success of our national revolution,
the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it
an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren,
that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly
elected as president of the State Council of our parliament
abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the
British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National
Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt,
a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47).
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
Castles of Slovakia: Starohrad (The Old Castle) of Liptov
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956
pp. 85-87
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1956
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/7a3033fbc750bf84e96852cef9a672bb.pdf
f62ed6b74ec119818831168f1938ea87
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
STREONO
One orf the fourteen fortresses in ruins along the river
Vah is the castle Sltrecno, lbuiit, they say, by the fea-rless
Matthew C8ik, "the Lord orf the Vah and the Tatras."
Mainy were the occupants of this stronghold, the glory orf
a past era, nestled on the summit of Mt. Bieda. We read
that St·r ecno was the home orf Francis Veseliny in the
17th century. The wife of Veseliny, Sophia Bosniak, died
in the stronghold .A!pril 28, 1644, Mld her body, interned
in the Lamretanian side-cllapel of the Teplicka ohuroh,
has remained practicailly whole for over 300 years.
Sophia married the haJndsome Veseliny in her best
years; they were ve-ry h-ruppy at Streono. They were haippy,
thaJt is untH Veseliny was cailed aiway by duty. When he
returned Veseliny was ra very changed man. He practicaJUy
ignored Sophia who had n.m out to welcome him home.
He spent daiys ,a t a time in his room or on the hunt and
ate his meals alone. Sophia became very sad indeed; she
was alone and in tears. Then the news came to her . that
Vese1iny was prepa,ring to leave the castle the Tuesday
before IDaster. The night before the said Tuesday, Solphia
receiived a letter from her slister, W1hiClh explained why
her husband acted so strangely. The news broke her heart,
when she learned that Veseliny had fallen in love with another rund wanted to lea,ve her.
Near the narrow pa,th which led to Stroono was a
higih boulder, inside of which was an altiar of the Blessed
Virgin Maxy. Sophia hastened there with a heavy heart
and spent the whole night in prayer. The following morning, Veseliny noticed her as he was ready to leave the
castle. Sophie was all spent from tears. Veseliiny was moved exceedingly. Sophia's prayers were heard. Her husband
leaped from his horse, embraced his wife, a,nd begged her
forg~veness. That was easy enough to do for the fuithful,
haippy witfe. That Tuesday beoome a special day for Sophia.
�SLOVAKIA
39
Every year on ,t he Tuesday before Easter she would go
baxefoot to the caive of the Blessed Mother. She visited
the church in Tepli'c:ka every day and during advent made
the visit ib,amoot. Sophia was noted for her kindness,
the ipoor were her wards and she founded a hospitall.
Mter Sophia died at Strecno, April 28, 1644, the
chrupel of the Blessed Mother was oipened to the pulblic,
as the saintly Sophia had wished before her death. Her
body w8JS not preserved artificially or scientifioaUy, yet
it has not fallen into decay. The story goes on to say
that when Thokoly invaded the vicinity in 1678, he plundered and burned Stroono ;and had the casket conta!ining
the body of Sophia taken from the chapel and opened, intending to rab it of jewelry and valuaibles. Wihen he found
but 01J1e finger bearing a ring, Thokoly flew into a rage,
cut the ring finger off, and threw the 1body of Sophia into
lime. But her body remained practically the same as it
was. Sophia's body was removed to the Teplmka church
in 1'698, when Leopold I. ordered Strecno destro3/ed. In
1729 the ·casket was placed in the Lau:retanian Ohapel. Albove
the casket i s a portrait of Sophia. The Slovaks of the vicinity
say that the casket contains the body of a saint. The people
of 2iHna even today honor Sophia as the mother- of widows
rund onphruns.
1
•
•
•
"In the most important decisions, such for
instance as concerned the foreign policy of the state, the government
never consulted the parliament. In the summer of 1947, when the
government was confronted with a Soviet demand not to participate in the Paris conference on the Marshall Plan, it did not even
consult the parliamentary committee of foreign affairs, and the
chairman of the committee. lvo Duchacek, a former Socialist newsWHO SAID IT? -
paperman, refused my demand for an immediate convocation of the
committee. Although the great majority of citizens, including even
most of the supporters of the Socialist parties, were in favor of participation and although the minis ters were warned to this effect by
several deputies, the government unanimously decided not to participate. This was extraordinary in view of the fact that there were
only nine Communist members in the government of twenty-aix minis-
ters, the seventeen non-Communists clearly having a preponderant
majority. Through this decision, the last opportunity to have new
elections was probably lost." (Bohdan Chudoba, former member
of the Czech Parliament, in THOUGHT, Fordham University Quarterly, Vol 25. No 96, 1950) .
�
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
STREONO
One orf the fourteen fortresses in ruins along the river
Vah is the castle Sltrecno, lbuiit, they say, by the fea-rless
Matthew C8ik, "the Lord orf the Vah and the Tatras."
Mainy were the occupants of this stronghold, the glory orf
a past era, nestled on the summit of Mt. Bieda. We read
that St·r ecno was the home orf Francis Veseliny in the
17th century. The wife of Veseliny, Sophia Bosniak, died
in the stronghold .A!pril 28, 1644, Mld her body, interned
in the Lamretanian side-cllapel of the Teplicka ohuroh,
has remained practicailly whole for over 300 years.
Sophia married the haJndsome Veseliny in her best
years; they were ve-ry h-ruppy at Streono. They were haippy,
thaJt is untH Veseliny was cailed aiway by duty. When he
returned Veseliny was ra very changed man. He practicaJUy
ignored Sophia who had n.m out to welcome him home.
He spent daiys ,a t a time in his room or on the hunt and
ate his meals alone. Sophia became very sad indeed; she
was alone and in tears. Then the news came to her . that
Vese1iny was prepa,ring to leave the castle the Tuesday
before IDaster. The night before the said Tuesday, Solphia
receiived a letter from her slister, W1hiClh explained why
her husband acted so strangely. The news broke her heart,
when she learned that Veseliny had fallen in love with another rund wanted to lea,ve her.
Near the narrow pa,th which led to Stroono was a
higih boulder, inside of which was an altiar of the Blessed
Virgin Maxy. Sophia hastened there with a heavy heart
and spent the whole night in prayer. The following morning, Veseliny noticed her as he was ready to leave the
castle. Sophie was all spent from tears. Veseliiny was moved exceedingly. Sophia's prayers were heard. Her husband
leaped from his horse, embraced his wife, a,nd begged her
forg~veness. That was easy enough to do for the fuithful,
haippy witfe. That Tuesday beoome a special day for Sophia.
�SLOVAKIA
39
Every year on ,t he Tuesday before Easter she would go
baxefoot to the caive of the Blessed Mother. She visited
the church in Tepli'c:ka every day and during advent made
the visit ib,amoot. Sophia was noted for her kindness,
the ipoor were her wards and she founded a hospitall.
Mter Sophia died at Strecno, April 28, 1644, the
chrupel of the Blessed Mother was oipened to the pulblic,
as the saintly Sophia had wished before her death. Her
body w8JS not preserved artificially or scientifioaUy, yet
it has not fallen into decay. The story goes on to say
that when Thokoly invaded the vicinity in 1678, he plundered and burned Stroono ;and had the casket conta!ining
the body of Sophia taken from the chapel and opened, intending to rab it of jewelry and valuaibles. Wihen he found
but 01J1e finger bearing a ring, Thokoly flew into a rage,
cut the ring finger off, and threw the 1body of Sophia into
lime. But her body remained practically the same as it
was. Sophia's body was removed to the Teplmka church
in 1'698, when Leopold I. ordered Strecno destro3/ed. In
1729 the ·casket was placed in the Lau:retanian Ohapel. Albove
the casket i s a portrait of Sophia. The Slovaks of the vicinity
say that the casket contains the body of a saint. The people
of 2iHna even today honor Sophia as the mother- of widows
rund onphruns.
1
•
•
•
"In the most important decisions, such for
instance as concerned the foreign policy of the state, the government
never consulted the parliament. In the summer of 1947, when the
government was confronted with a Soviet demand not to participate in the Paris conference on the Marshall Plan, it did not even
consult the parliamentary committee of foreign affairs, and the
chairman of the committee. lvo Duchacek, a former Socialist newsWHO SAID IT? -
paperman, refused my demand for an immediate convocation of the
committee. Although the great majority of citizens, including even
most of the supporters of the Socialist parties, were in favor of participation and although the minis ters were warned to this effect by
several deputies, the government unanimously decided not to participate. This was extraordinary in view of the fact that there were
only nine Communist members in the government of twenty-aix minis-
ters, the seventeen non-Communists clearly having a preponderant
majority. Through this decision, the last opportunity to have new
elections was probably lost." (Bohdan Chudoba, former member
of the Czech Parliament, in THOUGHT, Fordham University Quarterly, Vol 25. No 96, 1950) .
�
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
SLOVAKIA
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA
STREONO
One orf the fourteen fortresses in ruins along the river
Vah is the castle Sltrecno, lbuiit, they say, by the fea-rless
Matthew C8ik, "the Lord orf the Vah and the Tatras."
Mainy were the occupants of this stronghold, the glory orf
a past era, nestled on the summit of Mt. Bieda. We read
that St·r ecno was the home orf Francis Veseliny in the
17th century. The wife of Veseliny, Sophia Bosniak, died
in the stronghold .A!pril 28, 1644, Mld her body, interned
in the Lamretanian side-cllapel of the Teplicka ohuroh,
has remained practicailly whole for over 300 years.
Sophia married the haJndsome Veseliny in her best
years; they were ve-ry h-ruppy at Streono. They were haippy,
thaJt is untH Veseliny was cailed aiway by duty. When he
returned Veseliny was ra very changed man. He practicaJUy
ignored Sophia who had n.m out to welcome him home.
He spent daiys ,a t a time in his room or on the hunt and
ate his meals alone. Sophia became very sad indeed; she
was alone and in tears. Then the news came to her . that
Vese1iny was prepa,ring to leave the castle the Tuesday
before IDaster. The night before the said Tuesday, Solphia
receiived a letter from her slister, W1hiClh explained why
her husband acted so strangely. The news broke her heart,
when she learned that Veseliny had fallen in love with another rund wanted to lea,ve her.
Near the narrow pa,th which led to Stroono was a
higih boulder, inside of which was an altiar of the Blessed
Virgin Maxy. Sophia hastened there with a heavy heart
and spent the whole night in prayer. The following morning, Veseliny noticed her as he was ready to leave the
castle. Sophie was all spent from tears. Veseliiny was moved exceedingly. Sophia's prayers were heard. Her husband
leaped from his horse, embraced his wife, a,nd begged her
forg~veness. That was easy enough to do for the fuithful,
haippy witfe. That Tuesday beoome a special day for Sophia.
SLOVAKIA
39
Every year on ,t he Tuesday before Easter she would go
baxefoot to the caive of the Blessed Mother. She visited
the church in Tepli'c:ka every day and during advent made
the visit ib,amoot. Sophia was noted for her kindness,
the ipoor were her wards and she founded a hospitall.
Mter Sophia died at Strecno, April 28, 1644, the
chrupel of the Blessed Mother was oipened to the pulblic,
as the saintly Sophia had wished before her death. Her
body w8JS not preserved artificially or scientifioaUy, yet
it has not fallen into decay. The story goes on to say
that when Thokoly invaded the vicinity in 1678, he plundered and burned Stroono ;and had the casket conta!ining
the body of Sophia taken from the chapel and opened, intending to rab it of jewelry and valuaibles. Wihen he found
but 01J1e finger bearing a ring, Thokoly flew into a rage,
cut the ring finger off, and threw the 1body of Sophia into
lime. But her body remained practically the same as it
was. Sophia's body was removed to the Teplmka church
in 1'698, when Leopold I. ordered Strecno destro3/ed. In
1729 the ·casket was placed in the Lau:retanian Ohapel. Albove
the casket i s a portrait of Sophia. The Slovaks of the vicinity
say that the casket contains the body of a saint. The people
of 2iHna even today honor Sophia as the mother- of widows
rund onphruns.
1
•
•
•
"In the most important decisions, such for
instance as concerned the foreign policy of the state, the government
never consulted the parliament. In the summer of 1947, when the
government was confronted with a Soviet demand not to participate in the Paris conference on the Marshall Plan, it did not even
consult the parliamentary committee of foreign affairs, and the
chairman of the committee. lvo Duchacek, a former Socialist newsWHO SAID IT? -
paperman, refused my demand for an immediate convocation of the
committee. Although the great majority of citizens, including even
most of the supporters of the Socialist parties, were in favor of participation and although the minis ters were warned to this effect by
several deputies, the government unanimously decided not to participate. This was extraordinary in view of the fact that there were
only nine Communist members in the government of twenty-aix minis-
ters, the seventeen non-Communists clearly having a preponderant
majority. Through this decision, the last opportunity to have new
elections was probably lost." (Bohdan Chudoba, former member
of the Czech Parliament, in THOUGHT, Fordham University Quarterly, Vol 25. No 96, 1950) .
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Strečno
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 1 (6), April 1953
pp. 38-39
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
April 1953
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9d0ab676ff2e6ce5e3da3c983e1f8c77.pdf
75e57d5c95416413d1a65f9325148d2f
PDF Text
Text
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
�64
SLOVAKIA
it only nine years, when he was thrown out of it in 1450
by Peter Komorovsky, one of John Jiskra's commanders.
King Mathias donated the castle to· the Pan:krac clan of
Llptovsky Svaty M~kulas; but Komo,11ovsky would not gi,ve
11; up . .Pankrac attaciked Liptovsky Hradok but could not
ta,ke it. King Mathias intervened, stormed the castle with
his army in 1'474 and forced Komorov,s ky to surrender it.
In 1485 the castle passed into the hands of the ·z apol'sky
clan who held it until 1'527, when it was seized by the imperial army under the command orf G€nera:l Katzianer.
The historic castle was then held :b y various magnates
until 1600, when Nicholas Sandorfi b,ecame the owner. He
it was who made additions to, the Liptovsky Hra,dok, lby
building a one-story renaissance structure around three
sides of the original structure. This part of the castle is
completely preserved and today is the home of the district court. In 1623, 'Stephen Ost:rosich bought the castle:
he lost it to the army of George Rakoczy in 1644. When
Rakoczy concluded 1peace with Ferdinand II[, Liptovsky
Hradok passed into the hands of Nicholas Ostrosich, who
held it to his death in 1660. The Ostrosich family held it
another ten years, G€neral Spork of the imperial army seizing it in 1670. Thereafter, the residents of Liiptovsky
Hradok changed often; rebellions. plagued the country;
when Francis Rakoczy II rebelled, the castle was practically ruined. !Prince Lichtenstein owned the castle from
1709 to 1731, when it_ was !bought from him by the state .
.Since the time it has been under state management and
now is controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture.
Because of its location, Liptovsky Hradok is called a
paradise. Its scenic 'beauty attracts many visitors; it is a
verita)ble vacationla.nd. Thousands of visitors come to Liptovisky Hradok to make excursions into the High 'Datras,
the plateaus of Liptov, the Demauc;v Caverns, the Va-•
zec Cave, and the Lower Tatras .
•
•
•
'DRE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in
every plliblic libra:ry, in every college ·a nd university, in the
home of every American oif Slovak descent. Get your copy
NOW. Paper bound copy-· $2.00; in cloth $3.00.
�
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
�64
SLOVAKIA
it only nine years, when he was thrown out of it in 1450
by Peter Komorovsky, one of John Jiskra's commanders.
King Mathias donated the castle to· the Pan:krac clan of
Llptovsky Svaty M~kulas; but Komo,11ovsky would not gi,ve
11; up . .Pankrac attaciked Liptovsky Hradok but could not
ta,ke it. King Mathias intervened, stormed the castle with
his army in 1'474 and forced Komorov,s ky to surrender it.
In 1485 the castle passed into the hands of the ·z apol'sky
clan who held it until 1'527, when it was seized by the imperial army under the command orf G€nera:l Katzianer.
The historic castle was then held :b y various magnates
until 1600, when Nicholas Sandorfi b,ecame the owner. He
it was who made additions to, the Liptovsky Hra,dok, lby
building a one-story renaissance structure around three
sides of the original structure. This part of the castle is
completely preserved and today is the home of the district court. In 1623, 'Stephen Ost:rosich bought the castle:
he lost it to the army of George Rakoczy in 1644. When
Rakoczy concluded 1peace with Ferdinand II[, Liptovsky
Hradok passed into the hands of Nicholas Ostrosich, who
held it to his death in 1660. The Ostrosich family held it
another ten years, G€neral Spork of the imperial army seizing it in 1670. Thereafter, the residents of Liiptovsky
Hradok changed often; rebellions. plagued the country;
when Francis Rakoczy II rebelled, the castle was practically ruined. !Prince Lichtenstein owned the castle from
1709 to 1731, when it_ was !bought from him by the state .
.Since the time it has been under state management and
now is controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture.
Because of its location, Liptovsky Hradok is called a
paradise. Its scenic 'beauty attracts many visitors; it is a
verita)ble vacationla.nd. Thousands of visitors come to Liptovisky Hradok to make excursions into the High 'Datras,
the plateaus of Liptov, the Demauc;v Caverns, the Va-•
zec Cave, and the Lower Tatras .
•
•
•
'DRE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in
every plliblic libra:ry, in every college ·a nd university, in the
home of every American oif Slovak descent. Get your copy
NOW. Paper bound copy-· $2.00; in cloth $3.00.
�
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
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
64
SLOVAKIA
it only nine years, when he was thrown out of it in 1450
by Peter Komorovsky, one of John Jiskra's commanders.
King Mathias donated the castle to· the Pan:krac clan of
Llptovsky Svaty M~kulas; but Komo,11ovsky would not gi,ve
11; up . .Pankrac attaciked Liptovsky Hradok but could not
ta,ke it. King Mathias intervened, stormed the castle with
his army in 1'474 and forced Komorov,s ky to surrender it.
In 1485 the castle passed into the hands of the ·z apol'sky
clan who held it until 1'527, when it was seized by the imperial army under the command orf G€nera:l Katzianer.
The historic castle was then held :b y various magnates
until 1600, when Nicholas Sandorfi b,ecame the owner. He
it was who made additions to, the Liptovsky Hra,dok, lby
building a one-story renaissance structure around three
sides of the original structure. This part of the castle is
completely preserved and today is the home of the district court. In 1623, 'Stephen Ost:rosich bought the castle:
he lost it to the army of George Rakoczy in 1644. When
Rakoczy concluded 1peace with Ferdinand II[, Liptovsky
Hradok passed into the hands of Nicholas Ostrosich, who
held it to his death in 1660. The Ostrosich family held it
another ten years, G€neral Spork of the imperial army seizing it in 1670. Thereafter, the residents of Liiptovsky
Hradok changed often; rebellions. plagued the country;
when Francis Rakoczy II rebelled, the castle was practically ruined. !Prince Lichtenstein owned the castle from
1709 to 1731, when it_ was !bought from him by the state .
.Since the time it has been under state management and
now is controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture.
Because of its location, Liptovsky Hradok is called a
paradise. Its scenic 'beauty attracts many visitors; it is a
verita)ble vacationla.nd. Thousands of visitors come to Liptovisky Hradok to make excursions into the High 'Datras,
the plateaus of Liptov, the Demauc;v Caverns, the Va-•
zec Cave, and the Lower Tatras .
•
•
•
'DRE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in
every plliblic libra:ry, in every college ·a nd university, in the
home of every American oif Slovak descent. Get your copy
NOW. Paper bound copy-· $2.00; in cloth $3.00.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: The New Castle of Liptov
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 5, No. 4 (17), December 1955
pp. 63-64
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1955
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/62624c5173e8d5a68159941447324162.pdf
8303d0bf4edfec408f97127c03b0584b
PDF Text
Text
92
SLOVAKIA
the Communists in February 1948. He went into exile in 1949, but
returned voluntanily to Czecho-Slova:kia in December 1953. He was
employed secretly by Radio Free Europe.
Since leaving Czecho-,Slova,kia, Dr. Ripka has advocated a poHcy of "co-existence" in the following terms:
"Today more than ever I persist in bel ieving that a free and
independent Cz·ecihoslov,a kia cannot exist except in a balanced Europe in
which the Western Powers and Russia are trying to live on good
terms. Even the events of February 1948 h ave not been able to shake
this conviction, which remain s the keystone of my whole co nception of for eign policy." (Czechoslovakia Enslaved, 1~50, p, 74)
This is the record of an exile politician living in the
United States and paid a salary from funds corntriihwted to
fight Communism. It is for the reader to drnw hi:s own conclusions om the, /basis of this record. - (Overseas Research,
Inc., Special Bulletin, Nov. 28, 1954, Washington, D. C.)
•
• •
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA:
'JIHE OLD CASTLE ( Stary Hrad)
The ruins of th£s ,o ld castle still .stand on a ,p recipitous
rock aJbave the river Vah. The structure, named the Old
Castle of Trencin (!Stary Hrad) 'belongs to the c1ass of
fortresses which were lb:uilt ,prabaJbly during the time af tihe
Great Mornvian EmpiTe. Tr,a,veli!ng against the current of
the Vah, Stary Hlrad cam. be seen on the left side. We are
told that it was once called Nez;budsky Oastle, which attests to -i ts antiquity. 01dest arvailaJble documents refer to
it as the Old Castle ("Castmm Stargra,d"); they teU us
that it was -gi,v en to Bohumir Seibaslarvorvilc aJbout 1250 for
bravery displayed in -the battle against the Tatars neaT
S·rujaiva. Stary Hrad is more ancient than Streicno. The
structure itself suggests that it was !built ,3J'bout the same
time as the Devin and Trencin castles,, i.e., during the
Roman era.
Bohumir ,w as lord of the castle until 1'266 ; Count Peter
of Hont from 1 267 to the end of the thirteenth century,
when the Balasa family gained ownership. Then iMatthew
Calk, "Lord of the Vah and the Tatras," -besieged and sei'Zed
it, hut did not keep it for long, because we learn that a
certain Thomas Carpi exchanged it in 1'323 for his property
1
�SLOVAKIA
93
in :Darmoty. Donte, administrator (2upan) of Zvolen County became owner of it earl;y in the 15th century for a short
time, when King Lottci.s donated it to Sandzi'Voj, a Polish
nobleman, because he had he1ped his daughter Hedwig gain
the Polish throne. Sandlzirvod, . however, remained in SlovaJkia only a short time. !Stary Hrad iwas donated to
Queen ElitzaJbeth, wifo oif King Allbrecht (1439). 'Iwo year.s
later the PoTIJgrac clan of Svaty Mikulas occ,upied Stary
Hrad and Strecno; the family was loyal to Jiskra of
Brandys.
The Pongrac clan terrorized the entire Vah Valley.
John Hlunady of TransyJvarnia allied himself with Po.ngrac
to fiight the iking, who had procliaimed him a rebel. Pongrac was c3JPtured in Budin and condemned to jail for life;
his companions iwerre hanged lby order of King Vlooisla;v.
After Hun,ady made up with the iking, he entreated him to
free ,Pcmgrac so that he might lead the fight against the
Turks who were 'Plundering the Balkans. The expedition
against the Tur.ks was disastrous for the Christians, but
Pongrac escaped to· return home safely.
A short time. later, with the help of Komororvsky, administrator of Liptorv County, Pongrac regained. Stary
Hrad and Stre1Cno, and then seized Branc. Pongrac and
his men made se,vera.J predatory ex'Peditions into Poland
and caused ~ing Cazimir to complain to the HungaTian
Estates, demanding that they do something aJbout the
rdl:Jber knight. The ,Diet in .Segedin decided to punish
Pongrac, and Ulrich Cilslky was delegated to undertake
the tasik (1449). But, it seems, Cils.'ky did not measure up
to it, because the sorties into Poland continued and he himself was murdered in Belgrade, in. 1456.
According to the record, Pongrac was proibaJbly needed
by the king, who was willing not only to forget his transgressions, but even made him the Zupan of Liptorv County.
When Ladisilav Hurnady ,w as beheaded in 1'456, Pongrac
joined Uip with rhis uncle Siladi and King Mathias recogruzed: him a1S1 lord orf Stary Hrad, 1Stre:eno and Brame. After
Pongrfoc, the ,oiwners of Stary Hrad changed. frequently. We
find the Zapolskys, Takolys and Rakoczis among them. In
time it lost its strategic significance, was aJbandoned and
�94
SLOVAKIA
foll into ruin. Since the road leading through the valley is
on the other side of the V ah, 1Stary Hrad i,s seldom visited.
What is left of it hangs like an eagle's nest albove the aibyss,
crumlbling aiway stone lb.y stone and falling into the foam.y
waters of the V ah.
The ;neighlboring rock Which towers aJbove the ruins of
St,a ry Hrad is called Margaret. Legend tells us how it acquired its name. The Slo'VaJks of IStrecno say that a come-ly widow of S ~ o had a very bea.utifol step-daughter
named Margaret. They got alon,g ve;ry nicely until love intervened. I:t so happened that a handsome young man, employed on the estate of the wido.w, became the obd·e ct of
her affections. But the yollll1g handsome one prefer.red to
cast his eyes upon the !beautiful Margaret and scorn her
step-mother. [Hurt and angered, the widow decided to do
away with Margaret.
One day the ,w idow sent her daughter on an errand
to relatives in. Vru1lky and ordered her to return the same
evening. Retwrning home, Margaret tripped gayly along
the 'beaiten. path near the Vah, singill'g her favorite SlovaJk
melodies. As she cliirn)bed the rooky slope, Margaret paused
several times to .r est. When she reached the summit of the
rook, a po.mt where the path comes dangerously close to
the edge of. the c1i!ff, Maragret paused again a.n.d gazed in
wonderment on the bea.JUtiful !Valley 1beloiW. IBeifore the pooc
girl couid realize what had happened, she was hurtling
through space into the chu.rni.Il!g waters of the Vah below.
The 1Vengelful, murderous widorw, questioned by the handsome one aJbout /Margaret, replied evasilvely a.n.d roused his
suspicions. When the 1battered, cold, still body of Margaret
was found se1Veral days later, caught ibetween the rocks,
her lOIVer cried hysterically for diaJy s and finally lOSJt control of hi-s mind.
But Ma:rgaret's mocderous stepmother did not gain
her end. The handsome yoll'Ilg man, who had become Margaret's lover, never reooivered his mind. iHla!vinig learned
the a,wful truth, he roamed aimlessly on the rook, from
which hist loved one was hurtled to her death, until he
also perished. &om that day to this the rock is called
Margaret.
�
92
SLOVAKIA
the Communists in February 1948. He went into exile in 1949, but
returned voluntanily to Czecho-Slova:kia in December 1953. He was
employed secretly by Radio Free Europe.
Since leaving Czecho-,Slova,kia, Dr. Ripka has advocated a poHcy of "co-existence" in the following terms:
"Today more than ever I persist in bel ieving that a free and
independent Cz·ecihoslov,a kia cannot exist except in a balanced Europe in
which the Western Powers and Russia are trying to live on good
terms. Even the events of February 1948 h ave not been able to shake
this conviction, which remain s the keystone of my whole co nception of for eign policy." (Czechoslovakia Enslaved, 1~50, p, 74)
This is the record of an exile politician living in the
United States and paid a salary from funds corntriihwted to
fight Communism. It is for the reader to drnw hi:s own conclusions om the, /basis of this record. - (Overseas Research,
Inc., Special Bulletin, Nov. 28, 1954, Washington, D. C.)
•
• •
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA:
'JIHE OLD CASTLE ( Stary Hrad)
The ruins of th£s ,o ld castle still .stand on a ,p recipitous
rock aJbave the river Vah. The structure, named the Old
Castle of Trencin (!Stary Hrad) 'belongs to the c1ass of
fortresses which were lb:uilt ,prabaJbly during the time af tihe
Great Mornvian EmpiTe. Tr,a,veli!ng against the current of
the Vah, Stary Hlrad cam. be seen on the left side. We are
told that it was once called Nez;budsky Oastle, which attests to -i ts antiquity. 01dest arvailaJble documents refer to
it as the Old Castle ("Castmm Stargra,d"); they teU us
that it was -gi,v en to Bohumir Seibaslarvorvilc aJbout 1250 for
bravery displayed in -the battle against the Tatars neaT
S·rujaiva. Stary Hrad is more ancient than Streicno. The
structure itself suggests that it was !built ,3J'bout the same
time as the Devin and Trencin castles,, i.e., during the
Roman era.
Bohumir ,w as lord of the castle until 1'266 ; Count Peter
of Hont from 1 267 to the end of the thirteenth century,
when the Balasa family gained ownership. Then iMatthew
Calk, "Lord of the Vah and the Tatras," -besieged and sei'Zed
it, hut did not keep it for long, because we learn that a
certain Thomas Carpi exchanged it in 1'323 for his property
1
�SLOVAKIA
93
in :Darmoty. Donte, administrator (2upan) of Zvolen County became owner of it earl;y in the 15th century for a short
time, when King Lottci.s donated it to Sandzi'Voj, a Polish
nobleman, because he had he1ped his daughter Hedwig gain
the Polish throne. Sandlzirvod, . however, remained in SlovaJkia only a short time. !Stary Hrad iwas donated to
Queen ElitzaJbeth, wifo oif King Allbrecht (1439). 'Iwo year.s
later the PoTIJgrac clan of Svaty Mikulas occ,upied Stary
Hrad and Strecno; the family was loyal to Jiskra of
Brandys.
The Pongrac clan terrorized the entire Vah Valley.
John Hlunady of TransyJvarnia allied himself with Po.ngrac
to fiight the iking, who had procliaimed him a rebel. Pongrac was c3JPtured in Budin and condemned to jail for life;
his companions iwerre hanged lby order of King Vlooisla;v.
After Hun,ady made up with the iking, he entreated him to
free ,Pcmgrac so that he might lead the fight against the
Turks who were 'Plundering the Balkans. The expedition
against the Tur.ks was disastrous for the Christians, but
Pongrac escaped to· return home safely.
A short time. later, with the help of Komororvsky, administrator of Liptorv County, Pongrac regained. Stary
Hrad and Stre1Cno, and then seized Branc. Pongrac and
his men made se,vera.J predatory ex'Peditions into Poland
and caused ~ing Cazimir to complain to the HungaTian
Estates, demanding that they do something aJbout the
rdl:Jber knight. The ,Diet in .Segedin decided to punish
Pongrac, and Ulrich Cilslky was delegated to undertake
the tasik (1449). But, it seems, Cils.'ky did not measure up
to it, because the sorties into Poland continued and he himself was murdered in Belgrade, in. 1456.
According to the record, Pongrac was proibaJbly needed
by the king, who was willing not only to forget his transgressions, but even made him the Zupan of Liptorv County.
When Ladisilav Hurnady ,w as beheaded in 1'456, Pongrac
joined Uip with rhis uncle Siladi and King Mathias recogruzed: him a1S1 lord orf Stary Hrad, 1Stre:eno and Brame. After
Pongrfoc, the ,oiwners of Stary Hrad changed. frequently. We
find the Zapolskys, Takolys and Rakoczis among them. In
time it lost its strategic significance, was aJbandoned and
�94
SLOVAKIA
foll into ruin. Since the road leading through the valley is
on the other side of the V ah, 1Stary Hrad i,s seldom visited.
What is left of it hangs like an eagle's nest albove the aibyss,
crumlbling aiway stone lb.y stone and falling into the foam.y
waters of the V ah.
The ;neighlboring rock Which towers aJbove the ruins of
St,a ry Hrad is called Margaret. Legend tells us how it acquired its name. The Slo'VaJks of IStrecno say that a come-ly widow of S ~ o had a very bea.utifol step-daughter
named Margaret. They got alon,g ve;ry nicely until love intervened. I:t so happened that a handsome young man, employed on the estate of the wido.w, became the obd·e ct of
her affections. But the yollll1g handsome one prefer.red to
cast his eyes upon the !beautiful Margaret and scorn her
step-mother. [Hurt and angered, the widow decided to do
away with Margaret.
One day the ,w idow sent her daughter on an errand
to relatives in. Vru1lky and ordered her to return the same
evening. Retwrning home, Margaret tripped gayly along
the 'beaiten. path near the Vah, singill'g her favorite SlovaJk
melodies. As she cliirn)bed the rooky slope, Margaret paused
several times to .r est. When she reached the summit of the
rook, a po.mt where the path comes dangerously close to
the edge of. the c1i!ff, Maragret paused again a.n.d gazed in
wonderment on the bea.JUtiful !Valley 1beloiW. IBeifore the pooc
girl couid realize what had happened, she was hurtling
through space into the chu.rni.Il!g waters of the Vah below.
The 1Vengelful, murderous widorw, questioned by the handsome one aJbout /Margaret, replied evasilvely a.n.d roused his
suspicions. When the 1battered, cold, still body of Margaret
was found se1Veral days later, caught ibetween the rocks,
her lOIVer cried hysterically for diaJy s and finally lOSJt control of hi-s mind.
But Ma:rgaret's mocderous stepmother did not gain
her end. The handsome yoll'Ilg man, who had become Margaret's lover, never reooivered his mind. iHla!vinig learned
the a,wful truth, he roamed aimlessly on the rook, from
which hist loved one was hurtled to her death, until he
also perished. &om that day to this the rock is called
Margaret.
�
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
92
SLOVAKIA
the Communists in February 1948. He went into exile in 1949, but
returned voluntanily to Czecho-Slova:kia in December 1953. He was
employed secretly by Radio Free Europe.
Since leaving Czecho-,Slova,kia, Dr. Ripka has advocated a poHcy of "co-existence" in the following terms:
"Today more than ever I persist in bel ieving that a free and
independent Cz·ecihoslov,a kia cannot exist except in a balanced Europe in
which the Western Powers and Russia are trying to live on good
terms. Even the events of February 1948 h ave not been able to shake
this conviction, which remain s the keystone of my whole co nception of for eign policy." (Czechoslovakia Enslaved, 1~50, p, 74)
This is the record of an exile politician living in the
United States and paid a salary from funds corntriihwted to
fight Communism. It is for the reader to drnw hi:s own conclusions om the, /basis of this record. - (Overseas Research,
Inc., Special Bulletin, Nov. 28, 1954, Washington, D. C.)
•
• •
CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA:
'JIHE OLD CASTLE ( Stary Hrad)
The ruins of th£s ,o ld castle still .stand on a ,p recipitous
rock aJbave the river Vah. The structure, named the Old
Castle of Trencin (!Stary Hrad) 'belongs to the c1ass of
fortresses which were lb:uilt ,prabaJbly during the time af tihe
Great Mornvian EmpiTe. Tr,a,veli!ng against the current of
the Vah, Stary Hlrad cam. be seen on the left side. We are
told that it was once called Nez;budsky Oastle, which attests to -i ts antiquity. 01dest arvailaJble documents refer to
it as the Old Castle ("Castmm Stargra,d"); they teU us
that it was -gi,v en to Bohumir Seibaslarvorvilc aJbout 1250 for
bravery displayed in -the battle against the Tatars neaT
S·rujaiva. Stary Hrad is more ancient than Streicno. The
structure itself suggests that it was !built ,3J'bout the same
time as the Devin and Trencin castles,, i.e., during the
Roman era.
Bohumir ,w as lord of the castle until 1'266 ; Count Peter
of Hont from 1 267 to the end of the thirteenth century,
when the Balasa family gained ownership. Then iMatthew
Calk, "Lord of the Vah and the Tatras," -besieged and sei'Zed
it, hut did not keep it for long, because we learn that a
certain Thomas Carpi exchanged it in 1'323 for his property
1
SLOVAKIA
93
in :Darmoty. Donte, administrator (2upan) of Zvolen County became owner of it earl;y in the 15th century for a short
time, when King Lottci.s donated it to Sandzi'Voj, a Polish
nobleman, because he had he1ped his daughter Hedwig gain
the Polish throne. Sandlzirvod, . however, remained in SlovaJkia only a short time. !Stary Hrad iwas donated to
Queen ElitzaJbeth, wifo oif King Allbrecht (1439). 'Iwo year.s
later the PoTIJgrac clan of Svaty Mikulas occ,upied Stary
Hrad and Strecno; the family was loyal to Jiskra of
Brandys.
The Pongrac clan terrorized the entire Vah Valley.
John Hlunady of TransyJvarnia allied himself with Po.ngrac
to fiight the iking, who had procliaimed him a rebel. Pongrac was c3JPtured in Budin and condemned to jail for life;
his companions iwerre hanged lby order of King Vlooisla;v.
After Hun,ady made up with the iking, he entreated him to
free ,Pcmgrac so that he might lead the fight against the
Turks who were 'Plundering the Balkans. The expedition
against the Tur.ks was disastrous for the Christians, but
Pongrac escaped to· return home safely.
A short time. later, with the help of Komororvsky, administrator of Liptorv County, Pongrac regained. Stary
Hrad and Stre1Cno, and then seized Branc. Pongrac and
his men made se,vera.J predatory ex'Peditions into Poland
and caused ~ing Cazimir to complain to the HungaTian
Estates, demanding that they do something aJbout the
rdl:Jber knight. The ,Diet in .Segedin decided to punish
Pongrac, and Ulrich Cilslky was delegated to undertake
the tasik (1449). But, it seems, Cils.'ky did not measure up
to it, because the sorties into Poland continued and he himself was murdered in Belgrade, in. 1456.
According to the record, Pongrac was proibaJbly needed
by the king, who was willing not only to forget his transgressions, but even made him the Zupan of Liptorv County.
When Ladisilav Hurnady ,w as beheaded in 1'456, Pongrac
joined Uip with rhis uncle Siladi and King Mathias recogruzed: him a1S1 lord orf Stary Hrad, 1Stre:eno and Brame. After
Pongrfoc, the ,oiwners of Stary Hrad changed. frequently. We
find the Zapolskys, Takolys and Rakoczis among them. In
time it lost its strategic significance, was aJbandoned and
94
SLOVAKIA
foll into ruin. Since the road leading through the valley is
on the other side of the V ah, 1Stary Hrad i,s seldom visited.
What is left of it hangs like an eagle's nest albove the aibyss,
crumlbling aiway stone lb.y stone and falling into the foam.y
waters of the V ah.
The ;neighlboring rock Which towers aJbove the ruins of
St,a ry Hrad is called Margaret. Legend tells us how it acquired its name. The Slo'VaJks of IStrecno say that a come-ly widow of S ~ o had a very bea.utifol step-daughter
named Margaret. They got alon,g ve;ry nicely until love intervened. I:t so happened that a handsome young man, employed on the estate of the wido.w, became the obd·e ct of
her affections. But the yollll1g handsome one prefer.red to
cast his eyes upon the !beautiful Margaret and scorn her
step-mother. [Hurt and angered, the widow decided to do
away with Margaret.
One day the ,w idow sent her daughter on an errand
to relatives in. Vru1lky and ordered her to return the same
evening. Retwrning home, Margaret tripped gayly along
the 'beaiten. path near the Vah, singill'g her favorite SlovaJk
melodies. As she cliirn)bed the rooky slope, Margaret paused
several times to .r est. When she reached the summit of the
rook, a po.mt where the path comes dangerously close to
the edge of. the c1i!ff, Maragret paused again a.n.d gazed in
wonderment on the bea.JUtiful !Valley 1beloiW. IBeifore the pooc
girl couid realize what had happened, she was hurtling
through space into the chu.rni.Il!g waters of the Vah below.
The 1Vengelful, murderous widorw, questioned by the handsome one aJbout /Margaret, replied evasilvely a.n.d roused his
suspicions. When the 1battered, cold, still body of Margaret
was found se1Veral days later, caught ibetween the rocks,
her lOIVer cried hysterically for diaJy s and finally lOSJt control of hi-s mind.
But Ma:rgaret's mocderous stepmother did not gain
her end. The handsome yoll'Ilg man, who had become Margaret's lover, never reooivered his mind. iHla!vinig learned
the a,wful truth, he roamed aimlessly on the rook, from
which hist loved one was hurtled to her death, until he
also perished. &om that day to this the rock is called
Margaret.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: The Old Castle (Starý Hrad)
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 4, No. 3-4 (12-13),
pp. 92-94
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
Sept.-Dec. 1954
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/a19b874d39bd901d74ba5515132f17d0.pdf
ae1523694f48a1f23883043c2922ad02
PDF Text
Text
18
Castles of Slovakia
SLOVAKIA
TRENčlN
Above the city of Trenčin (Trencheen), Slovakla, same 1230 feet
above sea level, are sproocl the plcturesques ruins of a fonner mighty
strong,hold. Its or.igln ls ancient; they say that the uppermost part was
built durlng the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (a,bout 176 A.D.l
by a Roman legionnaire called Terence, hence the name Terencium Trenčín. Terence, it is recorded, was sent into the terl1itory to subjugate the Quadi and Markom.ani. The latter were conquered at the base
of the stony mount on whlch the Tulns can be seen today. An inscriptlon on the rock "Victoriae Auguatorum•.•" bears mute testimony to
the fact. Many years later Trenčín was taken by various groups, the
Huns, the Gepidl, the Avars, and the Magyars. Bretislav, a Czech
Prince, raided Trenčín in 1607 and led away many prlsoners and
cattle into Bohemia. In 1100 the town was devastated by another
Czech Prince, Svätopluk.
In the minds of ,the ,Slovak people, however, the most illustrious
owner of the castle and ruler of Trenčin was Matthew Čá.k (Tchak)
- "Lord of the Váh and t he Tatras." A~ter the death of the last
Arpad ruler, Andrew NI, In 1301, Čá.k beca.me the adversary of
Charle-s Robert and ,an ally of the Czech King, Wencesl<aus III; the
latter died in 1306. For a Ume Charles Robent was pOiWerless to deal
with Matthew Čá.k who ruled lndependenbly over Slovakia. Čá.k
had 'h is own .army aud coined his own money. In 1312 he was beaten
at Rozhanovce near Koške, but Cha.rles Robert could not take the
castle where Ma.tthew Čá.k had retreated.
A pea.ce pact between the Poles, Czechs and Austrlans · was
signed a.t the stronghold August 24, 1335, in the presence of the
Bohemian King, John of Luxemberg, and his son Charles. It was in the
Trenčin Castle that Charles, brother of Zigmund, became engaged to
Marie, the daughter of Louis the Great and heir to Au.stria. In 1396
Zlgmund gave the castle to General Ctibor, owner of the nelgh·b orlng castle of Bečkov. When John Ctibor dled In 1424, ~gmund gave
the Trenčín Castle to hls second wife, Barbara Celska.
'rule Hus,site chlef, John Jiskra of Br.andys took the castle in
1440, expanded and garrlsoned lt. In 1458 Jlskra surrendered Tren·
čin, as well as all the other Slovak fortresse:i in his possesslon, to
King Mat!Mas. The latter ma.rried Catherine, the daughter of the
Czech George Podebrady, a.t the Castle May 25, 1461. In 1475 Mathias
donated the cast1e to Stephen Zá.polský, whose da.ughter became
the wlfe of King Zigmund of Pola.nd. Under Zá.polský the castle
was furnished with costly furniture and some of t,he flnest works of
art. Zá.polskťs· son John was chosen King of Hungary In 1526. His
adversary Ferdinand of the Habsburg line besleged the pla.ce, and
General Katza.nler a.ctua.lly took it over 1n 1528 and destroyed lt by
fJre. The' ca.stle eventua:lly was rebu!Jt, but it n&Ver became as resplendent as it was during Zá.polský's Ume.
There is a legend connected with the well on the castle grounds
- "the lovera' well.'' Aooord1ng to the legend, Stephen Zá.polský,
returning from his wa.rs agalnst the Turk$, brought a bea.utiful slave,
Faitima, for his wdfe Hed~vlg. After a Ume a. Turklsh pedd1er galned
�SLOVAKIA
19
entrance to the castle; lt wa.s Omar, the beloved of Fatima. Omar
begged Zápolský to free Fatima. Tlring or Omar's pleas, Zápolský
remarked: .. You cannot draw wat&r from thls stone, nor can you
draiw a tear from my eye." Omar took Zápolský at bis word and,
wlth a few of hls followers, began to dig for water in the stone.
After three years of palnful effort, Omar was rewarded; he struck
water. Zápolský was moved exceedlng1y by the deed and granted
Omar's request.
Alex Thurzo J·ecelved the Trenčin stronghold from Ferdinand;
bis coat of arms marked wlth the year ló40 can be seen today on
a w:!ndow of the lnner cais4le. Imrich Forgáč, who marrled the "Black
Prlncess," Prince Wenceslaus' widow, inherlted the castJe in 1588.
But already In 1600 we flnd the castle the property or tlhe llleehazye. The Turks tried to galn possesslon of the castle in 1663,
but failed. Rakoczy II was also unsuccessful dn hl.s abtempt in 1703.
I n 1742 Queen Marie Therese had the fortress re-p alred and the tow&r
rebullt. The la.tter etand.s 105 feet hlgh and af·fords a.n exqulslte view
of the vicinlty.
There Ie a legend that t he orlginal tower was bullt by Louls I.
When the Rakoczy rebellJons were quelled, a plague broke out ln
Trenčln. People sought refuge In churches, but prayers did not seem
to help. People dled In thelr homes and no one burled them. It
seemed that death ruled over Trenčln. Then somethlng mlraculous
took place. The guard on the castle tower sa,w a very br1ght llgM
over the to-wer and then St. Francls Xavler stepped out of a cloud
and blessed the people of Trenčin. Tihe guard sounded the alarm,
and the whole garrlson went out to welcome the Salnt. The commander
of the gar.ríso.n ma.de the sign oť the cross wlth hls sword and promlsed that the date of the Sa1nťs appearance would ever be a holy
day In Trenčin. The plague passed and Trenčln wae saved. The people
of Trenčin stm observe the memory of that day.
But let me flnish bhe story of the Trenčin Ca.stle. A comma.nd
ltad been gtlven that a garrlson occupy the castle at all tlmes. Klngs
and queens pas,sed on, but the order was not revoked untll someone
thought of 1t in 1782, when the garrlson wa.s called away at la.st, after
occupylng the oastle for 112 years. Fire destroyed al! bulldlngs In 1790.
•
•
•
RED GEOGRAPHY: The news servlce of the Centra! Slovak Ca-
thollc Bureau in Rome recently publlshed a story about a certain
school inspector of the T rnava distrlct In Slovak!a who gave dlrectlvee
to teachers on how to teach. Among other thlngs he sald that lf
nuns were able to lnterest chlldren In a non-ex!etent being, God,"
then the teachers certalnly should be able to interest chlldren In
Stalln who actually exlsts. "The Marx-Lenin doctrlnes of our Stalln,"
he contlnued, "must be applled In all classes. For exatnple, in gcography you teach the chlldren about the East and the West. Now,
you could say: The sun rlses in the East; there 1s our great Stalln,
the sun or the natlons whlch enllghtens all natlons wlth hls knOI\Vledge. The sun sets In the West; there you f!nd decayed capltallsm,
the treacherous bourgeolele and murderous lmper!allsm." - But moot
of the Slovak teachers and puplls prefer the advlce of Horace Greeley:
Go West. young man!
�
18
Castles of Slovakia
SLOVAKIA
TRENčlN
Above the city of Trenčin (Trencheen), Slovakla, same 1230 feet
above sea level, are sproocl the plcturesques ruins of a fonner mighty
strong,hold. Its or.igln ls ancient; they say that the uppermost part was
built durlng the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (a,bout 176 A.D.l
by a Roman legionnaire called Terence, hence the name Terencium Trenčín. Terence, it is recorded, was sent into the terl1itory to subjugate the Quadi and Markom.ani. The latter were conquered at the base
of the stony mount on whlch the Tulns can be seen today. An inscriptlon on the rock "Victoriae Auguatorum•.•" bears mute testimony to
the fact. Many years later Trenčín was taken by various groups, the
Huns, the Gepidl, the Avars, and the Magyars. Bretislav, a Czech
Prince, raided Trenčín in 1607 and led away many prlsoners and
cattle into Bohemia. In 1100 the town was devastated by another
Czech Prince, Svätopluk.
In the minds of ,the ,Slovak people, however, the most illustrious
owner of the castle and ruler of Trenčin was Matthew Čá.k (Tchak)
- "Lord of the Váh and t he Tatras." A~ter the death of the last
Arpad ruler, Andrew NI, In 1301, Čá.k beca.me the adversary of
Charle-s Robert and ,an ally of the Czech King, Wencesl<aus III; the
latter died in 1306. For a Ume Charles Robent was pOiWerless to deal
with Matthew Čá.k who ruled lndependenbly over Slovakia. Čá.k
had 'h is own .army aud coined his own money. In 1312 he was beaten
at Rozhanovce near Koške, but Cha.rles Robert could not take the
castle where Ma.tthew Čá.k had retreated.
A pea.ce pact between the Poles, Czechs and Austrlans · was
signed a.t the stronghold August 24, 1335, in the presence of the
Bohemian King, John of Luxemberg, and his son Charles. It was in the
Trenčin Castle that Charles, brother of Zigmund, became engaged to
Marie, the daughter of Louis the Great and heir to Au.stria. In 1396
Zlgmund gave the castle to General Ctibor, owner of the nelgh·b orlng castle of Bečkov. When John Ctibor dled In 1424, ~gmund gave
the Trenčín Castle to hls second wife, Barbara Celska.
'rule Hus,site chlef, John Jiskra of Br.andys took the castle in
1440, expanded and garrlsoned lt. In 1458 Jlskra surrendered Tren·
čin, as well as all the other Slovak fortresse:i in his possesslon, to
King Mat!Mas. The latter ma.rried Catherine, the daughter of the
Czech George Podebrady, a.t the Castle May 25, 1461. In 1475 Mathias
donated the cast1e to Stephen Zá.polský, whose da.ughter became
the wlfe of King Zigmund of Pola.nd. Under Zá.polský the castle
was furnished with costly furniture and some of t,he flnest works of
art. Zá.polskťs· son John was chosen King of Hungary In 1526. His
adversary Ferdinand of the Habsburg line besleged the pla.ce, and
General Katza.nler a.ctua.lly took it over 1n 1528 and destroyed lt by
fJre. The' ca.stle eventua:lly was rebu!Jt, but it n&Ver became as resplendent as it was during Zá.polský's Ume.
There is a legend connected with the well on the castle grounds
- "the lovera' well.'' Aooord1ng to the legend, Stephen Zá.polský,
returning from his wa.rs agalnst the Turk$, brought a bea.utiful slave,
Faitima, for his wdfe Hed~vlg. After a Ume a. Turklsh pedd1er galned
�SLOVAKIA
19
entrance to the castle; lt wa.s Omar, the beloved of Fatima. Omar
begged Zápolský to free Fatima. Tlring or Omar's pleas, Zápolský
remarked: .. You cannot draw wat&r from thls stone, nor can you
draiw a tear from my eye." Omar took Zápolský at bis word and,
wlth a few of hls followers, began to dig for water in the stone.
After three years of palnful effort, Omar was rewarded; he struck
water. Zápolský was moved exceedlng1y by the deed and granted
Omar's request.
Alex Thurzo J·ecelved the Trenčin stronghold from Ferdinand;
bis coat of arms marked wlth the year ló40 can be seen today on
a w:!ndow of the lnner cais4le. Imrich Forgáč, who marrled the "Black
Prlncess," Prince Wenceslaus' widow, inherlted the castJe in 1588.
But already In 1600 we flnd the castle the property or tlhe llleehazye. The Turks tried to galn possesslon of the castle in 1663,
but failed. Rakoczy II was also unsuccessful dn hl.s abtempt in 1703.
I n 1742 Queen Marie Therese had the fortress re-p alred and the tow&r
rebullt. The la.tter etand.s 105 feet hlgh and af·fords a.n exqulslte view
of the vicinlty.
There Ie a legend that t he orlginal tower was bullt by Louls I.
When the Rakoczy rebellJons were quelled, a plague broke out ln
Trenčln. People sought refuge In churches, but prayers did not seem
to help. People dled In thelr homes and no one burled them. It
seemed that death ruled over Trenčln. Then somethlng mlraculous
took place. The guard on the castle tower sa,w a very br1ght llgM
over the to-wer and then St. Francls Xavler stepped out of a cloud
and blessed the people of Trenčin. Tihe guard sounded the alarm,
and the whole garrlson went out to welcome the Salnt. The commander
of the gar.ríso.n ma.de the sign oť the cross wlth hls sword and promlsed that the date of the Sa1nťs appearance would ever be a holy
day In Trenčin. The plague passed and Trenčln wae saved. The people
of Trenčin stm observe the memory of that day.
But let me flnish bhe story of the Trenčin Ca.stle. A comma.nd
ltad been gtlven that a garrlson occupy the castle at all tlmes. Klngs
and queens pas,sed on, but the order was not revoked untll someone
thought of 1t in 1782, when the garrlson wa.s called away at la.st, after
occupylng the oastle for 112 years. Fire destroyed al! bulldlngs In 1790.
•
•
•
RED GEOGRAPHY: The news servlce of the Centra! Slovak Ca-
thollc Bureau in Rome recently publlshed a story about a certain
school inspector of the T rnava distrlct In Slovak!a who gave dlrectlvee
to teachers on how to teach. Among other thlngs he sald that lf
nuns were able to lnterest chlldren In a non-ex!etent being, God,"
then the teachers certalnly should be able to interest chlldren In
Stalln who actually exlsts. "The Marx-Lenin doctrlnes of our Stalln,"
he contlnued, "must be applled In all classes. For exatnple, in gcography you teach the chlldren about the East and the West. Now,
you could say: The sun rlses in the East; there 1s our great Stalln,
the sun or the natlons whlch enllghtens all natlons wlth hls knOI\Vledge. The sun sets In the West; there you f!nd decayed capltallsm,
the treacherous bourgeolele and murderous lmper!allsm." - But moot
of the Slovak teachers and puplls prefer the advlce of Horace Greeley:
Go West. young man!
�
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
18
Castles of Slovakia
SLOVAKIA
TRENčlN
Above the city of Trenčin (Trencheen), Slovakla, same 1230 feet
above sea level, are sproocl the plcturesques ruins of a fonner mighty
strong,hold. Its or.igln ls ancient; they say that the uppermost part was
built durlng the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (a,bout 176 A.D.l
by a Roman legionnaire called Terence, hence the name Terencium Trenčín. Terence, it is recorded, was sent into the terl1itory to subjugate the Quadi and Markom.ani. The latter were conquered at the base
of the stony mount on whlch the Tulns can be seen today. An inscriptlon on the rock "Victoriae Auguatorum•.•" bears mute testimony to
the fact. Many years later Trenčín was taken by various groups, the
Huns, the Gepidl, the Avars, and the Magyars. Bretislav, a Czech
Prince, raided Trenčín in 1607 and led away many prlsoners and
cattle into Bohemia. In 1100 the town was devastated by another
Czech Prince, Svätopluk.
In the minds of ,the ,Slovak people, however, the most illustrious
owner of the castle and ruler of Trenčin was Matthew Čá.k (Tchak)
- "Lord of the Váh and t he Tatras." A~ter the death of the last
Arpad ruler, Andrew NI, In 1301, Čá.k beca.me the adversary of
Charle-s Robert and ,an ally of the Czech King, Wencesl<aus III; the
latter died in 1306. For a Ume Charles Robent was pOiWerless to deal
with Matthew Čá.k who ruled lndependenbly over Slovakia. Čá.k
had 'h is own .army aud coined his own money. In 1312 he was beaten
at Rozhanovce near Koške, but Cha.rles Robert could not take the
castle where Ma.tthew Čá.k had retreated.
A pea.ce pact between the Poles, Czechs and Austrlans · was
signed a.t the stronghold August 24, 1335, in the presence of the
Bohemian King, John of Luxemberg, and his son Charles. It was in the
Trenčin Castle that Charles, brother of Zigmund, became engaged to
Marie, the daughter of Louis the Great and heir to Au.stria. In 1396
Zlgmund gave the castle to General Ctibor, owner of the nelgh·b orlng castle of Bečkov. When John Ctibor dled In 1424, ~gmund gave
the Trenčín Castle to hls second wife, Barbara Celska.
'rule Hus,site chlef, John Jiskra of Br.andys took the castle in
1440, expanded and garrlsoned lt. In 1458 Jlskra surrendered Tren·
čin, as well as all the other Slovak fortresse:i in his possesslon, to
King Mat!Mas. The latter ma.rried Catherine, the daughter of the
Czech George Podebrady, a.t the Castle May 25, 1461. In 1475 Mathias
donated the cast1e to Stephen Zá.polský, whose da.ughter became
the wlfe of King Zigmund of Pola.nd. Under Zá.polský the castle
was furnished with costly furniture and some of t,he flnest works of
art. Zá.polskťs· son John was chosen King of Hungary In 1526. His
adversary Ferdinand of the Habsburg line besleged the pla.ce, and
General Katza.nler a.ctua.lly took it over 1n 1528 and destroyed lt by
fJre. The' ca.stle eventua:lly was rebu!Jt, but it n&Ver became as resplendent as it was during Zá.polský's Ume.
There is a legend connected with the well on the castle grounds
- "the lovera' well.'' Aooord1ng to the legend, Stephen Zá.polský,
returning from his wa.rs agalnst the Turk$, brought a bea.utiful slave,
Faitima, for his wdfe Hed~vlg. After a Ume a. Turklsh pedd1er galned
SLOVAKIA
19
entrance to the castle; lt wa.s Omar, the beloved of Fatima. Omar
begged Zápolský to free Fatima. Tlring or Omar's pleas, Zápolský
remarked: .. You cannot draw wat&r from thls stone, nor can you
draiw a tear from my eye." Omar took Zápolský at bis word and,
wlth a few of hls followers, began to dig for water in the stone.
After three years of palnful effort, Omar was rewarded; he struck
water. Zápolský was moved exceedlng1y by the deed and granted
Omar's request.
Alex Thurzo J·ecelved the Trenčin stronghold from Ferdinand;
bis coat of arms marked wlth the year ló40 can be seen today on
a w:!ndow of the lnner cais4le. Imrich Forgáč, who marrled the "Black
Prlncess," Prince Wenceslaus' widow, inherlted the castJe in 1588.
But already In 1600 we flnd the castle the property or tlhe llleehazye. The Turks tried to galn possesslon of the castle in 1663,
but failed. Rakoczy II was also unsuccessful dn hl.s abtempt in 1703.
I n 1742 Queen Marie Therese had the fortress re-p alred and the tow&r
rebullt. The la.tter etand.s 105 feet hlgh and af·fords a.n exqulslte view
of the vicinlty.
There Ie a legend that t he orlginal tower was bullt by Louls I.
When the Rakoczy rebellJons were quelled, a plague broke out ln
Trenčln. People sought refuge In churches, but prayers did not seem
to help. People dled In thelr homes and no one burled them. It
seemed that death ruled over Trenčln. Then somethlng mlraculous
took place. The guard on the castle tower sa,w a very br1ght llgM
over the to-wer and then St. Francls Xavler stepped out of a cloud
and blessed the people of Trenčin. Tihe guard sounded the alarm,
and the whole garrlson went out to welcome the Salnt. The commander
of the gar.ríso.n ma.de the sign oť the cross wlth hls sword and promlsed that the date of the Sa1nťs appearance would ever be a holy
day In Trenčin. The plague passed and Trenčln wae saved. The people
of Trenčin stm observe the memory of that day.
But let me flnish bhe story of the Trenčin Ca.stle. A comma.nd
ltad been gtlven that a garrlson occupy the castle at all tlmes. Klngs
and queens pas,sed on, but the order was not revoked untll someone
thought of 1t in 1782, when the garrlson wa.s called away at la.st, after
occupylng the oastle for 112 years. Fire destroyed al! bulldlngs In 1790.
•
•
•
RED GEOGRAPHY: The news servlce of the Centra! Slovak Ca-
thollc Bureau in Rome recently publlshed a story about a certain
school inspector of the T rnava distrlct In Slovak!a who gave dlrectlvee
to teachers on how to teach. Among other thlngs he sald that lf
nuns were able to lnterest chlldren In a non-ex!etent being, God,"
then the teachers certalnly should be able to interest chlldren In
Stalln who actually exlsts. "The Marx-Lenin doctrlnes of our Stalln,"
he contlnued, "must be applled In all classes. For exatnple, in gcography you teach the chlldren about the East and the West. Now,
you could say: The sun rlses in the East; there 1s our great Stalln,
the sun or the natlons whlch enllghtens all natlons wlth hls knOI\Vledge. The sun sets In the West; there you f!nd decayed capltallsm,
the treacherous bourgeolele and murderous lmper!allsm." - But moot
of the Slovak teachers and puplls prefer the advlce of Horace Greeley:
Go West. young man!
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Castles of Slovakia: Trenčín
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 2, No. 3 (5), December 1952
pp. 18-19
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1952
castles
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1d5cb84a7f17e3373754833b4495dba0.pdf
2ba3da7f17378068460166b0be921a69
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
93
CENSORSHIP POLICIES IN CZECHO-SLOVAKIA
1918-1938
WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON SLOVAKIA
Eugene Urban
ABSTRACT
By means of clever propaganda, the Czecho-Slovak Republic became known as an exemplary democratic State
and the ethnic groups living within her boundaries were enjoying a personal, cultural, political and economic freedom.
But the reality was exactly the opposite. The CzechoSlovak Republic was nothing but a big concentration camp
for four million Slovaks, three and half million Germans,
seven hundred thousand Ukrainians, six hundred thousand
Magyars, one hundred fifty thousand Poles, etc., the Czechs
enjoying the privileged position of guards.
The real objective of the Czecho-Slovak Republic was
to deprive the different ethnic groups of their national
identity and, at their expense, to enlarge herself to the point
of becoming a power among the others of Europe.
The Slovaks, a very nationally selfconscious group, differing from the Czechs in language, traditions, culture, customs, and character, were guaranteed 1918 that the new Republic would be a confederation of two States: the Slovak and
the Czech. But the Czechs failed to keep their promises and
pacts and instead they treated Slovakia as a colony.
One of the weapons used to suppress the desire of the
Slovaks to be again a free and independent nation was the
censorship of the press, the most effective medium of communication. The aim was to blot out all remembrance of
Slovqk historical traditions, and to suppress the individuality
and evidence of an oid cultural nation in the very heart.
of Europe - a nation which has made its contributions to
the building up of Western Christian culture and civilization.
And, although the Czecho-Slovak Constitution had guaranteed freedom of the press, several laws were later enacted
to make censorship legal. But the Slovaks defended them-
�94
SLOVAKIA
selves as well as they could in Parliament and with "underground" means of communication.
Czecho-Slovak Laws Concerning Freedom of Press, Speech,
and Association. Theory and Practice
The freedoms of press and association in the CzechoSlovak Republic were guaranteed in paragraph 113, (1) of
the Constitution accepted by the Revolutionary National
Assembly on the 29th of February, 1920:
Freedom of the press as well as the right to assemble peaceably
and without arms and to form associations is guaranteed. It is therefore in principle inadmissible to place the press under preliminary
censorship.I
Paragraph 117 guaranteed the freedom of expression
of opinion:
Every person may within the limits of the law express his or h er
opinion by word, in writing, in print, by picture, etc. The same applies
to legal persons within the limits of their competence. No one shall
suffer in the ,sphere of his work or emloyment for excercising this
right.2
According to these articles of the C o n s t i t u t i o n,
Czecho-Slovakia had no press law of its own. The press was
supposed to be free of Government interference and to
serve the genuine interests of the various ethnical groups
living in Czecho-Slovakia. It was supposed, also, that they
would be free to assemble in political, cultural, religious,
economical, etc. organizations and to secure through them
their rights.
Except for the Czechs, all other ethnical groups were
integrated in Czecho-Slovakia without being given opportunity to express their will freely.
With regard to the Slovaks, the Constitution was in
direct contradiction to the spirit and letter of the Cleveland and Pjttsburgh Pacts signed by the Slovaks and Czechs
in Cleveland, Ohio, October 5, 1915 and in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 30, 1918. 3 This latter was signed moreover
by President Tomas G. Masaryk. According to these two
pacts, Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be a federation of
both the Slovak and the Czech States. 4
But these pacts were not included in the Constitution.
�SLOVAKIA
!)5
The representatives for Slovakia who voted in Parliament for
the acceptance of this anti-Slovak Constitution were not elected by the people, but appointed by the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Prague from a minority group advocating
integration with the Czech nation.
The Constitution was in flagrant contradiction to the
spirit and the principles on which Czecho-Slovakia had been
created. In the first years of her existence, the discontent
of the Slovaks and of the other minorities with Czech imperialism and centralism early started to manifest itself, and
this particularly in the periodical press and at the meetings of
the political parties. The Czechs did not delay in their retaliation. They replaced the guarantees of paragraph 113 of
the Constitution with a series of laws by which the freedom
of the press was practically nullified. Not having a press law
of their own, the Czech majority in the Prague Parliament
made use of the old Austrian press law No. 119/ 1873 (May
23) and No. 142/ 1868 (October 15) of the Austrian Code,
and the Hungarian law No. XIV /1914 to suppress freedom
of the press. These were the oppressive laws of the old
Au.stro-Hungarian regime against which both Slovaks and
Czechs fought in the Parliaments of Vienna and Budapest.
It has been said repeatedly that Czecho-Slovakia was created
to liberate the Czechs and Slovaks from the Austro-Hungarian yoke. It is an ironic fact that Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk,
the first President of Czecho-Slovakia, who as deputy for
Bohemia, had condemned these laws in the Parliament of
Vienna, now signed and approved them as the laws of the
land, as law No 50/1923 (March 19), paragraph 34.5
The co-founder of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and her
second President, Dr. Eduard Benes, who was also theoretically a defender of the freedom of the press, also signed
law No. 50/1923.
The same law No. 50/ 1923 provided for the defense
of the Republic, and paragraph 34 stipulated the conditions under which the publication of periodicals might
be prohibited.
Law No. 3006 was drawn up on April 14, 1920; it was later
supplemented by law No. 125/ 1933 (July 10)7, according to
which the State's Security Bureau, without a judicial order
could demand the c o n f i s c a t i o n and opening of letters
�96
SLOVAKIA
and other items transported by mail. It could prohibit
public meetings and it could impose special conditions
upon the activities of associations or prohibit them. Paragraph 10 was concerned with the press. The State's
Security Bureau could limit or impose special conditions for
the publication and distribution of periodicals, or prohibit
their publication. It could order the editor of a periodical to
present, two hours before its publication, copies for preventive censorship. The same Bureau could put under surveillance or prohibit the activities of printing shops, of distributing companies, and of press agencies. It could also prohibit possession of printing presses and other means of reproducing writings and illustrations by private persons.
Law No. 50/1923, for the defense of the Republic, was
enacted in a period when Czecho-Slovakia was fully recognized and her existence insured by International Peace
Treaties. This law was not addressed against her enemies
from abroad, but to deal with the growing dissatisfaction
from inside. Especially in Slovakia the discontent was alarming. The fact that the Czechs violated the Pacts of Cleveland
and Pittsburgh were the most powerful reasons for this
discontent.
Law 50/1923 was enacted in order to give the Czechs
a weapon to terrorize the dissatisfied Slovaks and the other
minorities. It fixed the penalty for military treason, for violation of State secrets, for offence to the President of the
Republic, for any challenge to commit penal acts or not to
fulfill legal obligations, for approving the crime, for associating against the State, for the spread of false reports, etc. All
the paragraphs of this law were appliable also to the periodical press.
Directly concerned with the periodical press was paragraph 34 of this law. It gave the Government's ooreaus
power to prohibit the publication of periodicals. The period of suspension of publication was established as one
month for periodicals published at least five times a week,
two months for those published at least three times a week,
and six months for those purlished less than this.
But this law seemed not to be strict enough for the
Czech Government. Ten years larer, law No. 50/1923 was
completed and changed by the law No. 124/ 1933 (July 10).8
This new law extended the list of "crimes and offences"
�SLOVAKIA
97
for which the publication of a periodical could be suspended and gave the Government the right to enlarge the validity
of paragraph 34 by a simple government decree. The suspension period of periodicals was enlarged from one to
three months and from two to six months.
Not even that was enough for the Government of CzechoSlovakia. The Governmental Decree No. 150/1933 (July
18),9 published ten days later, again increased the number
of paragraphs which could be violated by the press and
added to the number of crimes and offences also the infringements of these laws.
One year later a new law No. 140/ 1934 was drawn up.
(July 10), 10 which changed and completed the law No 50/
1923, the law No. 124/ 1933 and the Government Decree
No. 150/ 1933. The number of possible penal acts was increased again. The Government was empowered to prolong
the validity of these laws for another two years. The distribution of transgressing periodicals could be prohibited in all
stores which sold the products of the State's monopoly (tobacco, stamps, salt, etc.) or in the buildings and stations of
the State owned railways (there were only State owned railways in Czecho-Slovakia). These periodicals could be also
deprived of the right to use special tariffs and of the right
of transportation by mail or by railroads. The same law
compelled all periodicals to publish free, without change
or comment, on their first or second page, by usual types
of letters, and in the largest edition, official declarations
of the President, the Vice-President, the Prime-Minister,
members of the Government, etc., appealing to this law.
A new Government Decree No. 163/ 1934 (July 16) 11
further extended the number of "crimes, offences and infringements" for which the publication of a periodical could
be suspended.
Two other government decrees, No. 157 / 1935 (July
13) 12 and No. 165/ 1937 (July 24) 13 , prolonged the validity
of the paragraph 34 of the law No. 50/ 1923 and the subsequent laws until the 13th July 1939.
Another law, No. 126/ 1933 (July 10) 14 was concerood
with the distribution (col portage) of periodicals. The distribution of periodicals which directly or indirectly subvert
or put blame on the independence, Constitutional unity, the
�98
SLOVAKIA
integrity and the democratic and republican form of the
State or the democratic order in the Czecho-Slovak Republiccould be prohibited. This right could also be taken away
from those periodicals which "menace the public peace and
order, especially by publishing false news and news which
distort the truth". The distribution in Czecho-Slovakia of
periodicals published abroad could be also prohibited. It
was prohibited to distribute periodicals in the schools and
in the military quarters. The Regional Office was entitled
to prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in Czecho-Slovakia, while the Ministry of Interior in cooperation
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in foreign countries.
Paragraph II of this law required publication of any
correction asked by a person who felt that the content of
some article published by the periodical was offensive to
him or that information given was untrue.
And finally the law No. 130/ 1936 (May 13)15 was enacted, which completed the previous National Defense laws for
the defense of the Republic. This law established capital punishment for many crimes against law No. 50/ 1923. It also
prohibited the publication of news regarding military treason
if not approved previously by the Ministry of National .
Defense.
All these laws and Government Decrees were climaxed
by • National Defense Law No. 131/ 1936 (May 13)16 for the
defense of the State. This law gave the Government absolute
power in a national emergency to suspend all laws, all
rights and liberties. It gave the Government the right to
censor the press, films, telegrams, telephone conversations,
letters, packages sent by mail, phonographs records, etc. It
established preventive censorship and gave the State's Security Bureau the power to prohibit the publication and distribution of periodicals. The importation of periodicals from abro.ad ·could be also prohibited. The law provided for the
establishment of a commission which would direct and carry
out the censorship policy.
The Government was given in fact dictatorial powers:
and this law was generally considered as the last nail in
the coffin of democracy in Czecho-Slovakia.
�SLOVAKIA
99
Objectives and Methods of Czechoslovak
Censorship Policies
From the analysis of censored material it is possible to
learn much about the objectives pursued by the Czech Government in the case of Slovakia.
Previous mention has been made of the profound antagonism developed between the Slovaks and Czechs as a result
of the Czech violation of the Cleveland and Pittsburgh pacts.
The Czech wanted to denationalize the Slovaks by forcing
them to accept the false claim that Slovaks are Czechs and
that the Slovak language is a Czech dialect. To obtain this
aim, the Czechs made use of various means. They created a
wave of terrorism, using the armed forces, police, gendarmery and the C z e ch national organizations, especially
"Sokol" known for both its atheism and chauvinism. They
also sent hundreds of thousands of Czech teachers and Czech
Government officials into Slovakia, thereby forcing the Slovaks, who were denied jobs in their own country, to emigrate
because of hunger and unemployment.
They further contributed to the economic impaverishrnent of Slovakia by dismantling its heavy industry and transporting the productive machinery to Bohemia. In this way
production was stopped and the enterprises were forced to
dose. Many factory buildings were purposely demolished
.and many mines flooded.17 The steel, chemica:l, glass and
leather industries suffered most cruelly. When the workers,
deprived of their jobs demonstrated to prevent the dismantling of the factories and machinery, the Czech soldiers and
the gendarmery killed many of them. 18 In the period from
1918 to 1932, 261 enterprises were closed down in Slovakia.
From 1933 to 1937 another 425 enterprises were dismantled,
bringing the total number to 686. 19
Meanwhile, new industries were founded in Bohemia
which logically belonged in Slovakia, since Slovakia provided the raw materials used in them.20
The transportation tariffs in Slovakia were about 40 percent higher than in Bohemia and Moravia. Consequently the
Slovak coal was more expensive than coal imported from
Bohemia. 21
Further discrimination was manifest in the field of housing construction. 22
�100
SLOVAKIA
From 1921 to 1923 Slovakia received only 6 per cent
of the State's subsidies for the unemployed, although the
unemployment in Slovakia was higher than in Bohemia. 23
From the sum assigned by the Government for the construction and maintenance of schools of higher education and
Universities, Slovakia received 10 per cent, while the educational institutions in Slovakia were to be built up almost
entirely. 24 The result: Slovakia had only one incomplete University and no Polytechnical Institute, while the Czechs had
several, and the German minority had two Universities and
two Polytechnical Institutes. Further, the Slovak University
was practically a Czech University, because the professors
named by the Government were all Czechs.
Salaries for the Slovaks were about 20 per cent lower
than for the Czechs. While Slovakia abounded in natural
resources, especially for the production of energy, the petroleum lamp was the usual source of light. The combined
savings of five Slovak citizens were equal to the savings of
a single Czech.
Czech capital absorbed whatever Slovak industry still
remained after its dismantling. Slovak banks were engulfed
by Czech banks, and foreign capital was allowed to supplant
the remaining Slovak capital. 25
When agrarian reform was inaugurated in Slovakia, only
21 per cent of the land was sold to Slovak peasants, while
the rest was distributed free to the Czechs. 26 The discrimination against Slovak peasants in transportation tariffs
and taxes resulted in frequent strikes. Instead of offering
to improve their desperate condition, the Government gave
the order to fire at the strikers.27 Their hopeless situation
led them to emigrate in large numbers to the U.S.A., Canada,
Argentina, France, Germany and Belgiurn. 28
Slovakia was treated like a colony by the Czechs. They
regarded Slovakia only as an object of exploitation, a reservoir of cheap labor and a market for the products of Czech
industries. The Czech Government aimed to keep Slovakia
as an underdeveloped agricultural country. 29 Practically all
the administrative positions in Slovakia were filled by Czechs,
whose salaries also were double those of the Slovaks. 30
In Slovakia political oppression worked hand in hand
with economic injustice.
Aware of Czech chauvinism, the Slovaks began early
�SLOVAKIA
\'yd»od1 denne ~rem pondelk.a
Zdkladafel' a YO!ICA ; Andrei ffllnka
101
Br611slava,. slreda 6. m11e. t9H
1Grecki povsfalci chysfaju illok na Affleny
Rozvral na Balk6ne, alebo vffllZSlvo greckel vl6dy - Bulbarsko
vyslela voJsko na grkke brank:e
·• •11>1 ••• ~-••U ,.....,n,&aJ-.. ,.,,..,., ..
~i,---iol,f
. .•• ~ ~ - : . • ~ ,•
:'"
.:.:.•\.:=:
tf~i~~l~~t;~~~
~fiff;[f~!~1f[~tt¥.Jlf§ l{if;}~t~¥.K~~
The whitewashed newspapers had to be presented in a new form: A
corrected issue was printed after the confiscation
to organize politically. The great Slovak patriot Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka founded the Catholic and nationalist Slovak People's
Party. Its program aimed at autonomy for Slovakia in accordance with the decrees of the Pittsburgh Pact (1918). The
Protestant leader, poet, and writer, Rev. Martin Razus, restored the Slovak National Party. In order to hinder Slovak
political association, the Czechs established branches of
their own parties in Slovakia. By means of political intrigue
and corruption they attained a measure of success, but the
majority of Slovaks resolutely opposed them. Because of
�102
SLOVAKIA
the forced intergration of Slovakia with Bohemia, and the
denial of Slovakia's right to self-determination, the fiftyfive Slovak deputies were invariably outvoted by the Czech
majority in the Prague Parliament.
The Czechs employed terrorist tactics also against Slovak political parties, imposing on them a relentless censorship of the press and disruption of their public meetings.
By such means they strove to impede direct communication
between the Slovak people and their political leaders.
The press was a high-powered tool in the hands of the
Slovak political parties. It introduced new ideas, it taught the
people to recognize and support their own national interest,
it pointed out the injustices committed against the Slovak
nation by the Government and it suggested ways to remedy
the situation. Public meetings served the same purpose, demonstrating by enthusiastic attendance the growing strength
of the Slovak nation.
Consequently, public meetings were dissolved by government agents whenever the speaker criticized the government, and troops and police were ordered to charge against
the protesting Slovaks. Many Slovaks were killed and wounded by Czech bullets.
The censor deleted from the press every criticism of
Government officials and legislative bodies, in order to cover
their misdeeds and keep the people uninformed. The second
purpose was to hinder opposition parties from communicating with their readers and voters.
In the hope of keeping such ideas in the background and
forcing on the Slovaks the false notion of a "Czechoslovak
nation and people", the Czech censor confiscated articles
dealing with Slovakia's national identity and its right to
self determination.
The Czech determination to eradicate religion from Slovak public life must remain under cover, hence the censor
suppressed all articles and reports of the desecration of
churches by the Czechs and the removal of crosses from
schools.
In the eyes of the Czechs it was a most serious crime
for the Slovak press to publicize the struggle of the Slovak
people for autonomy, for the right to govern themselves, to
run their own schools; in short, to enjoy all the rights of
nationhood belonging to them as a nation. The Czechs seem
�SLOVAKIA
103
to have naively thought that without the press to remind
them of their rights the Slovaks would drop the issue.
The Slovaks were not allowed to read reports on CzechoSlovakia in press. The Czech Government feared that this
would more profoundly motiviate their political aspirations.
Practically all the statements and resolutions of the
Slovak political parties were censored in order to stifle
opposition and prevent the natural political development of
the Slovak nation.
Reports of the activity of Slovak organizations in the
United States of America were yet another object of the
censor's displeasure, because these organizations were strongly in favor of autonomy for Slovakia.
The two presidents of Czecho-Slovakia, Masaryk and
Bene~, were unassailable in the press. The slightest criticism,
whether by Czechs or by Slovaks, was taboo and automatically censored out. A legend was built up around these two
men, making them untouchable as if they were the apex of
perfection. To perpetuate it no criticism of their many human
foibles and moral lapses was tolerated.
The real objective of Czech cenzorship was to suppress
the facts of Slovak history with their underlying appeal to
self-respect and to strike out these glorious moments of the
past which could fortify the Slovak political and national
fight for the realization of their ideal of freedom and independence.
Censorship was thorough. It made impossible any attempt by the Slovaks and other minority groups to charge
the Czech government with undemocratic practices. Meanwhile the Czechs were using it to create a "great Czech
nation" at the expense of the other ethnic groups living in
Czecho-Slovakia and disregarding their right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness. Their ultimate goal was to
achieve a dominant position among the small States in Central Europe.
In a word, Czech censorship was a tool of Czech imperialism and its faithful servant. It was the ruthless Czech
antidote to the self-determination and national development
of the Slovak nation and the other minorities in the CzechoSlovak Republic. As such, Czech censorship was diametrically opposed to the principles of democracy, freedom, and
human progress.
�104
SLOVAKIA
"Authority is conservative ... freedom is progressive .. .
conflict between the two is inevitable", says Lucy Maynard
Salmon, 31 in reference to freedom of the press.
Since Czech censorship was directed against human
progress, freedom, and democracy, the means it employed
could only have been wicked. It stopped at nothing to attain
its objectives. Nothing was immoral if it served the Czech
goal of domination.
Czech post office and railway employees often seized
entire editions of the opposition's periodicals and destroyed
them. Soldiers were often ordered to raid newspaper and
party offices to confiscate mailing lists and manuscripts.
This happened in Trnava, Leopoldov, Bratislava, and elsewhere. Sometimes the soldiers reduced the place to shambles. Consequently, readers in the capital city itself were
often deprived of their papers. Karol Sidor reported in the
March 22, 1919 issue of the Slovak:
" Orders have been given (,b y Czech officials) to destroy the
SLOVAK. Revorts have been pouring in from all parts of Slovakia
that the SLOVAK, ofl!!c!al PU!bl!cation of the Slovak 'People's Party,
has been seized by scoundrels and its sale and dlstriburtion prohibited."32
Kon~tantin Culen wrote:
"In the early yea,rs the SLOVAK was subjected to as many as
three censorsihips: political, military, and economic. Some issues
of the newspaper ,bore the inscription, "Thrice censored and corrected
edition". Even these multi-censored copies were sometimes thrown
out of trains en route by Czech mailmen. Slovak employees who
dared to subscribe to the Sl.lOVAK endangered their livelihood. And
when even this did not dauRt them, they were personally terrorized by the police and government of!lclals .33
Oftentimes newspapers were deprived of the right of
distribution (colportage). Post offices were instructed to
refuse money orders sent to the opposition newspapers.
Persons who subscribed to these newspapers were harassed
and many were dismissed from government jobs. 34
Court action was taken against editors of newspapers
which printed articles unwelcome to the censor. The editors
111.sually assumed responsibility for unsigned articles; hence,
many of them were in and out of jail.
In a censored article entitled "We protest" Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka wrote these bitter words:
�SLOVAKIA
105
"We a re involved in doz ens, even hundreds of cour-t ca-ses. Hereafter I will assume full responsibility for every news article, whether
written by the editor or by Paul or Saul. J will appear before the
judge, I will answer the charges. And when I have been deprived
of freedom, when the iron door of my prison has dosed behind me,
when I am locked up and begin to burn like an expiatory candle on
the a ltar of the fa,therl and, then I will charge you, friends, deputies.
and leaders of the P eople's Party: •F ollow me! Let each of you
shoulder r esoonsibility for one, two, ten articles, an d all of us will
become involved with the courts. But no. I am wrong. Let us not get
so involved. Not of our own volition will we become entangled with
the courts. We will yield only to brutal compulsion. You Czechs will
have to drag us into the courts.
And when my right hand has become still and my mortal remains
have decomposed, I tell you that a great line will form behind me,
eager as I for the glory that is sure to follow.
7ou cannot silence us. You can only massacre us. But one tiling
I ask: Do not go on deceiving the world that you are our brothers
tsons of the same nation). Never will we consent to be Czechos lovaks ... Slova kia is ours an d we will defend our country against
you as we defended it against the Magyars. The more you incriminate
ns, the more you imprison us, the more forcef ully will we fight
against you."
As the representative and chairman of the People's
Party, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka spoke out boldly on this subject
in Parliament. In June 1922, in the debate arising from his
interpellation No. 3584 on the raid of the offices of the
Slovak and Eudove noviny, he described the attack as initiated and engineered by government agents. Not only did
the assailants wreck office equipment and furniture and
destroy books, but they were aided in their orgy of destruction by the police, who should have been maintaining order.
The chief of police of Bratislava, Dr. Slavicek, a Czech,
declared that he had been unable to check the raid because
the majority of his men were hostile to the Slovak People's
Party. Andrej Hlinka rightly demanded to know when the
Slovaks might expect to have the protection of law and
order. 35
Karol Sidor described the demolition and plundering of
the offices of the Slovak as follows:
On :!\fay 25, 1922 a huge rally was orga nized in Bratislava -to protest.
Several Slovak legiona ries and Slovak university students were
present. At one 'POint a Czech speaker railed against the SLOVAK.
dem <tndlnr; that it be placed under the strictest censorship. An aroused
Slovak legionary shouted: "Your aim is to cripple the Catholic press;
you would do better to suppress your own anti-Catholic and antiSlovak press." The legionary paid for these words with a cruel beating ...
A Slovak university student r eceived th e same treatment, bis
�106
SLOVAKIA
clothes torn and covered with blood, after he had called out to an
abusive Czech speaker, "Please, talk to us in Slovak!" ...
·The speeches continued until 12: 30 p.m. At 1: 00 p.m. the first
group of demonstrators appeared in front of the editorial offices or
the SLOV.AK . . . Some 1,500 Czech legionaries escorted the demonstrators. Awaiting them was a group of 150-200 men and women who
had assembled from the villages to defend SLOVAK property. A
fight ensued, but the Czech legionaries with the aid of some 10(}
policemen, invaded the editorial offices and broke tables and chairs,
flung books, bound journals, manuscripts etc. out the windows.
(Czech) legionaries piled •the items into ca,r s and drove away.
Other (Czech) legionaries r aided the ,SLOV.AK's administrative
offices and worked havoc there also. They carried off valuaibles, including shares and mailing lists. The yard outside ,w as littered with
papers.
These raids were permitted, even abetted by the police, who together with the legionaries received praise and commendation in the
Czech press for their acts of des,truction.36
During the night of March 31, 1920, a certain Czech
army major Ludevit Palounek by name, placed a bomb in the
Lev printery in Ruzomberok in the hope of destroying the
voice of the People's Party and its organ of free discussion. 37
Even the mails were misused: derisive pamphlets were
inserted in the bundles of the Slovak, 38 as they were being
shipped to their destination.
With the growing tension in the relations between the·
Slovaks and Czechs, the censorship became more and more
despotic. After 1932, there were almost daily confiscations
of the Slovak press.
The censor received his instructions from the Ministry
of the Interior. If the censor found in the piece examined
something he considered inadmissible, he deleted it; the·
Attorney General then ordered the police to confiscate the
publication. The police seized the entire edition and burned
it. The publishing house or the editors could make an appeal
in court, or a board of representatives in Parliament could
protest to the Minister of the Interior, or of Justice, or both.
If the censorship was found unfair, the editors or publishers
could demand reimbursement for damages. But in most
cases they lost the appeal.
After confiscation, a newspaper, book, or journal was
printed in a new edition with the censored areas left blank.
It bore the inscription "Following confiscation, a new and
corrected edition" in the upper left corner of the front page
of the periodical, or on the cover of the book.
�SLOVAKIA
107
After Slovakia achieved independence on March 14,
1939, government officials found in the archives of the
Attorney General confidential orders issued by the Czech
Government with instructions to the censor as to how many
times a week certain newspapers were to be confiscated.
After a stated number of confiscations, the periodical could
be suspended for three or six months, and after repeated
confiscations, it could be suspended indefinitely at the discretion of the censor. This was a most powerful weapon in
the hands of the Government, and it was effectively used
during the visit of President Edward Benes in Slovakia in
1933. Under the pretex of repeated confiscations, the newspapers Slovak, Slovenska pravda, Narodne noviny and the
political review Nastup were suspended, so as to prevent
any criticism of Benes's speeches in the press. It was on
this visit that he angered the Slovaks by declaring that they
must become Czechs.
The actions of the censor were despotic because he knew
that the Government would not fail to support him. The
Slovak and Slovenska pravda were confiscated almost every
day. The humoristic weeklies Osa and Kocur were also confiscated, along with the cultural monthlies Pero , Slovenske
pohl'ady and Elan. Almanacs, books, poetry collections, and
placards were not exempt. Sometimes periodicals were confiscated because of articles reprinted from other non-censored newspapers. For example a periodical was confiscated
because it contained a poem originally published in the
Slovak-American almanac Jednota. An editorial containing
quotations from a book by President Thomas G. Masaryk
was also confiscated. An article by the great Slovak writer,
Svatozar Hurban Vajansky, published in Hungary at the
~md of the 19th century, was censored when reprinted in
Slovak after World War I. Newspapers were confiscated for
using the hyphen in the name of the Republic "CzechoSlovakia" although early peace treaties carry the name in
this form. 39
On several specific occasions the Czechs declared that
it would be dangerous for the future of the Republic if freedom of speech and press were permitted in Slovakia.40
With confiscation being an almost daily occurence,
periodicals suffered very heavy losses. It is pertinent to
point out that while the Czech party press subsisted on
�SLOVAKIA
108
government funds, the Slovak press depended entirely upon
the voluntary support of party members, together with subscription fees. The Slovak people understood perfectly the
great importance of the press and supported it generously.
Only in this way was the Slovak opposition press able to
survive such continuous economic strangulation by the Czech
Government.
Characteristic of the situation are words like the following: " . .. we must perforce decline to publish original articles on topics banned by the government and must limit ourselves to those which have already passed the censor." 41
This is not all. When Slovak representatives protested
in Parliament against the policies of the Government and
its agencies, their speeches in Parliament were censored
and denied publication in the parliamentary record Tisky
Poslaneck e Snemovny Nar odniho Shromazdeni
Ceskoslovensk e. The bimonthly Nastup wrote:
Republiky
" Instead of aick now ledging the human righ t to fr eedom of di scussion, th e Czechs pr oh ibited a utonomist meetings a nd r estricted
their publications. Now they have resorted to oth er meas ures.
"Th e P r esi de nt of th e Senate su ppressed a portion of Dr . Joseph
Buday's speech i n ·P a rlia men t. The Presidents of both C hambers of
Parl iamen t confiscated a major portion of the statement pr esented
by th e representatives of the Slovak People's Party.
"An exten ded (95 pages) and repo r tedly objective in ter pellation
of th e r epresentatives of the Slovak People's Par ty was als o censored by the Presidents of Par liament and denied publicati on.
" T his action was t a ken at a time w h en press censorshi p was so
stringent that no politician or political party could f r eely and publicly express a dissenting opinion as far as the Government was concerned.
"Ju Slovakia the natio na li st press is pres ently s ubjected to continuous sharp criticism a nd s uppression .. . In view of this we mus t
behold with a s tonishment the a d ditional measures taken in Parlia m ent
·to silence the autonomists who are already so effectively silenced by
press cens orship . Meanwhile •Slova k centr alists (i.e., Czech p a r tisans )
without hindrance flood Slovakia wit h their uncensored public_ations ."42
The newspaper Nar odne Noviny reported in its November 27, 1936 issue:
Statistics show that the number of confiscated publications in Czecho-Slovakia for the given years was as follows~
1929
1930
1934
Newspapers and periodicals ______ 3,370
Books ___ ______________ __________ 918
2,533
2,138
846
Confiscations
718
�109
SLOVAKIA
Foreign books and periodicals _____ 255
Total ______ ________ 4,543
183
3,434
329
3,313
Of these confiscations, 60 to 70% involved Slovak books
and periodicals.
Censorship of Books
Writing under the pseudonym Andrej Zarnov, a student
at the University of Bratislava, named Frantisek Subik, made
his literary debut in 1925 with the publication of a book of
poems which already then showed the promise that was to
make him a leading Slovak poet. The title of the book was
Straz pri Morave (Sentry at the Morava River) . Finding it
too nationalistic, the censor ordered the entire edition confiscated and had it burned at police headquarters.
The representatives of the Slovak People's Party challenged this action in the Parliament. They asked the Minister
of the Interior and the Minister of Justice:
1) Whether they were aware of the confiscation of
these poems;
2) Whether they approved;
3) Whether both Ministers were disposed to secure
the validity of the Constitution which guarantees freedom
of the press;
4) Whether they were disposed to take appropriate
disciplinary action against the censor in Bratislava;
5) Whether they were ready to guarantee freedom of
the press in Slovakia equal to that in Bohemia.
Needless to say, the Czech majority refused to discuss
this urgent interpellation in Parliament. 43
On the occasion of Msgr. Andrej Hlinka's seventieth
birthday, Karol Sidor, representative in Parliament and editor
of the Slovak, published his biography, covering the years
1864-1926.
A great admirer and loyal follower of Hlinka, Sidor
presented his hero as the key figure in the Slovak political
and national struggle for freedom and independence.
This 554-page biography suffered 31 deletions totaling
some 295 lines, equal to seven pages of the book. It was
issued with the customary caption on the cover: "Po konfiskacii nove opravene vydanie" (After confiscation a new and
�110
SLOVAKIA
corrected edition) and with blankspaces to show where the
censor had disapproved.
The following lines were deleted on pages 368-369,
from Sidor's description of the Czech attack on the meeting
of the Slovak People's Party in Zilina, August 17, 1919:
With draiwn bayonets, soldiers charged upon the people In the
square and scenes of horror ensued. Andrej Hlinka saw hi,s people
struck with rifl e 1butts and carried a,way as prisoners to the barracks.
Women from Kysuce exposed thei,r breasts to the bayonets and
shouted: "Strike here, you curs, and touch not Hlinka ! "
On October 10, 1920 Czech military units once more dispersed a meeting of the Slovak People's Party in Namestovo
and fired into the crowd, killing two Slovak peasants and
seriously wounding ten. On page 442 the description of this
savage act was deleted:
Bedfich Danek, a Czech lieutenant, scornfully asked a young
man weeping over the body of his slain father: "Why do you weep?
It ,w as Hlinka who killed him!" Namestovo came to ,be regarded a-s
a second Cernova.
The Czech press and the Government Press Agency CTK
wished to place the blame for this bloodshed on Hlinka. They
charged Hlinka with inciting the Slovaks against the Czechs.
Hlinka answered in the October 16, 1920 issue of the Slovak.
This portion of the article was deleted from the biography:
Yes, I did incite the people. I incited them and will continue
to Incite •them . My very presence incites them. So much so that it
stirs your murky conscience, stained with a ·b rother's blood. I have
incited and will continue to incite them to oppose t:he •b ase t,raud
you perpetrated against •the !Slovak n ation. W,e •w ill rise up to oppose
every injustice.
Why should we not be aroused against you, who seized me a year
ago in the dead of night and held me captive for six months at Mirov,
iBrodek, Podolie, to afford you an opportunity to demoralize and dis•
rupt .Slovakia? Should I have danced to your music when you placed
bombs in our "Lev" printery, •which had •been established with owhard•earned savin~s? I would be a cowardly traitor If I did not raise
my voice, if J did not search for a remedy and seek help.
We have incited and lest we be despised by Slovakia, we will
not stop inciting our people until w,e win autonomy from you.
On page 490 the censor deleted a reference to discrimination against the Slovaks in assigning government jobs:
The •Slovaks were unable to procure even the cheapest loaf or
government bread in Slovakia; (referring to jobs) their applications
were answered with a curt: "Impossible to grant", while t he Czech
people, often without qualification, were given the best paid jobs in
Slovakia.
�SLOVAKIA
111
That is how the newspapers SLOVAK, NARODNIE NOVINY, and the
magazine, NASTUP, looked after censorship
A quotation on p. 506 from an "Appeal of the Representatives of the Slovak People's Party to the Minister of the
Interior" in Prague, September 4, 1923, was confiscated:
The authorities spread terror every-where. Civil servants planned the
disruption of meetings by force and public safety agencies did nothing
to -defend the victims; on the contrary, they cooperated with the
agressors. Holle, Nove Zamky, and ,t he riot at Brezova make it clear
as day that groups of assailants were organized to incHe rioting and
to damage private property.
Very heavily censored was the chapter in which Sidor
described Hlinka's arrest at midnight. The occasion was his
return from the Peace Conference in Paris, where he had
delivered to the delegates a Memorandum in which he demanded in the name of the Slovak nation that the Slovaks
be given national and civic freedom and their autonomy
guaranteed. Hlinka's words to one of his chaplains were
censored on page 385.
"Proclaim abroad to the wide world the kind of freedom we
enjoy in Slovakia. They have come to carry me off like a criminal
In the middle of the night when everybody is asleep ...
The press reported that I trembled. On the contrary, I felt like
a lion. I cared not whether they killed me or jailed me. My blood
�112
SLOVAKIA
boiled. Indescribable feelings struggled within me. I could not tell
which was stronger: my love for my oppress-ed nation or my contempt of the intruders ... "
Following Hlinka's deportation, an account of the rebellions of the students and citizens of his parish town, Ruzomberok, was variously deleted as on pages 387, 392 and 393.
The description of the terrorism of the Czech soldiers
and employees in Slovakia was censored on page 444:
November 6, 1920 he (Rev. Frantisek Klein) reported in the
SLOVAK that he was traveling by train •with soldiers who insulted
him because he was reading the .SIJOV AK. One of ,them asked in
Czech: "Why doesn't someone kill tH!inka ?"
On pages 458-459 the account of the murderous attack
on Hlinka's life in Krupina, June 12, 1921, by a Czech, and
the insult to which he was subjected in Sahy two days later
by Czech railroadmen was expunged:
The following day, June 13, Hlinka set out with companions to
Sahy to report the Krupina incident to the "Zupan", [)r. Victor
Ravasz. As he was passing through the square a railroadman, named
S<tu~hlik and the school inspector, Bartolom/lj Krpelec, both Czechs,
confronted him with curses, calling him "bandit" and "agitator".
Later at the "zupan's" office, Stuchlik, with 60 co-workers, delivered the following ultimatum: The "zupan" must expel Andrej
iHlinka at once from ,the 1Hont "zupa" or suffer the consequences.
The railroadmen (all Czechs) also declared that they would not
permit Hlinka's train to leave the Sahy station.
·T he "zupan", after appealing to the Ministry in BraJtislava for
instructions, assured Blinka that the culprits in both Krupina and
Sahy •w ould ,be penalized as an example to others.
In the a,fternoon IHlinka ,boarded •the train at Sahy. The station
wa,s filled with people, waiting to see the outcome of the contest.
The rallroadmen held to their purpose. After a long while the zupan
arrive6l at ,t he station. The railroadmen demanded that -he order
Hlinka out of the train. Lenghty nego tiations followed. Meanwhile
Hlinka waited patiently within ...
Finally the "zupan" announced that the ,train was about to depart. At that moment a line of railroadmen formed below the windO'W
of Hlinka's compartment. They gave vent to their haitred -b y spitting
at Hlinka, cursing and maligning ·h im until the train moved out oE
sight.
Another incident which occurred in the railroad station
Trencianske Teplice, July 5, 1921, was deleted from page
459:
A Czech in the station, recogmzmg Hlinka, called out, "Hang
Hlinka ! " Andrej IHlinka stepped forward and asked him to identify
himself. The Czech continued to shout, but did not give his name ...
And a few lines further on the same page:
�SLOVAKIA
113
Another •Czech took up the cry, shouting, "Hang Hllnka". The
p eople attacked h im, although ,Hlinka- made an effort to calm them.
Mea nwhil e the train arrived and he boarded it ,w ith his secretary
Ramaj . :Bishop Kmeeko a nd tMsgr. Tiso remained in the station, bu t
they were unable to quiet the p eople. Several Czechs were severely
beaten .
Other subjects censored in Sidor's book were: criticism
·o f President Masaryk's anti-Catholic attitude (page 286) ;
daims of job discrimination that while hundreds of thousands
of Czechs were given the best paid jobs in Slovakia, often
without qualification, more than 300,000 Slovaks were forced
to emigrate because of the discrimination against them (pages 345 and 490). Also censored were references to organized Czech terror against the Slovaks, to agression against
Hlinka and his followers, to denial of government protection in the exercise of freedom of speech and association,
and any account of the formation of defense groups of the
Slovak People's Party for the protection of its meetings
.against Czech terrorists. Among the deletions were several
lines about the general anti-Catholic attitude of the Czech
people (page 471).
Another censored book was Vo vazeni, written by a
young editor of the Slovak, Alexander Mach. 46 The author
had been jailed on a charge of conspiracy with Professor Dr.
Vojtech Tuka against the integrity of Czecho-Slovakia. After
serving part of the sentence, he was exonerated from complicity in the "plot" and released. A year later he published his
book about his term in prison. In a manifestly unjust trial
Dr. Vojtech Tuka was sentenced to 15 years and liberated
after 10 years, when Slovakia won her autonomy on October
·6, 1938.
From Mach's book the censor confiscated some 520 lines, totaling 13 pages, or 7 per cent of the 198 pages of the
book. Unfortunately, I do not know of any uncensored copy
of the book and can therefore quote nothing from it.
To illustrate the mental climate in which the author
wrote his book, I will cite some lines of his epilogue "Po
roku" (After one year):
I was in prisoa on charges which cannot at present be freely and
sincerely dis cussed. In preparing this accoun t I was hemmed in by
restrairut lest I again find myself rb ehind prison bars . I was obliged
to limit my remarks lest the censor fo11bid their publication. Difficulties in the selection of material abounded. It was not easy for
me to decide what to eliminate, what to omit ... Thus as I prepared
�114
SLOVAKIA
my narrative rhe penal code was before me. Yet I have remained
completely frank; I did not change what I had •w ritten as a prisoner.
I preferred only .to eliminate the sensitive issues ...
Another example of the censorship of books is furnished by the interpellation presented in the Prague Parliament
by the representative Msgr. Dr. Jozef Tiso, concerning the
confiscation of the Kalendar Hlinkovej Slovenskej Eudovej
Strany na rok 1934 (Almanac of the Hlinka's Slovak People's
Party for the year 1934).
Two articles which appeared over the name of Msgr.
Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Party, were confiscated. In
these articles Hlinka warned the Czechs to stop persecuting
the Slovaks for claiming autonomy. Even Czech authors,
whom Hlinka quoted to illustrate his articles, were censored.
The title of the first article was "Za ~t'astne Slovensko" (For
a prosperous Slovakia). In the second article "Uprimne slovo o Nitre" (A frank comment on Nitra) Hlinka analyzed the
spontaneous explosion of Slovak discontent at the festivities
commemorating the 1,l00th anniversary of the first Christian church on Slovak territory, created in Nitra by Prince
Pribina in about 831 A. D. It was, Hlinka declared, a display
of resistance to the Prague Government, intent on exploiting these eminently Slovak festivities for their own purposes. Andrej Hlinka, who had been refused the right to speak
on the program, was carried up to the stage and backed by
his 200,000 followers, he read a statement in which he
solemnly affirmed Slovakia's adherence to its eleven hundred
years-old Christian traditions and proclaimed Slovakia's right
to territorial sovereignity.
This demonstration of outraged Slovak national pride
was observed by foreign diplomats and news reporters, who
were thus witnesses of the true will of the Slovak nation to
be free and the chauvinistic aim of the Czechs as expressed
in the Ottuv Obchodni Slovnik (Otta's Commercial Dictionary, 1921) volume 2, page 1217: "Slovakia shall be a colony
to us. It is an error to suppose that a colony cannot have
common frontiers with the mother country. An example of
this is Russia and Siberia."
Several lines from a poem by Ignac Grebac Orlov were·
also censored. Partially censored was the article entitled "Narodna jednota" (National unity), by Dr. Jozef Tiso on the·
necessity of national unity for the Slovaks. .
�SLOVAKIA
115
From the article "K sedemdesiatke Andreja Hlinku"
(On the 70th anniversary of Andrej Hlinka) by Karol Sidor
this paragraph was deleted:
What occured in 11919, ,w hen 'Hlinka and other Slovak leaders
were jailed, the ISiLOVAK suspended, and terrorism unleashed everywhere, was now repeated on a larger scale.
In .September 193131 the 1SIJOVAK was suspended -f or 3 months ...
lik,ewise the .S'.liOVAiK TYZDENNIK (1Slovak Weekly) and the T!AT·•RA:N,SKY SLOVAK (Tatra Slovak). We were left without a voice ...
We were not permitted to w,rite, the people had nothing to read. And
the prisons were daily being filled with objectors. Hundreds of Slovaks were suJbjected ,to investigations about their participation In the
Nitra festivities ...
Dr. Karol Mederly's article "Obec a politika" (Community and politics) was also confiscated, for its insistence on
the right of the Slovaks to vote according to their conscience.
Pictures of Hlinka carried on the shoulders of University students to the Nitra stage, the procession of 200,000
Slovaks in Nitra, and even articles of comic and satiric content were censored.
The interpellation contains a complete rescript of the
articles confiscated in the almanac. 47
In conclusion the writer would like to mention here
that printed works of other minorities and political parties
were also confiscated by the censor.
CENSORSHIP OF PERIODICALS
The periodicals in Slovakia have a long tradition. The
oldest periodical published on Slovak territory was Schemnitzer N ewszeitung edited in Banska Stiavnica in German,
in 1540-1541. Latin periodicals also had their day.
The first periodical in the Slovak language was Presspurske noviny (Bratislava News - Pressburg is German for
:Bratislava,), published from 1783 to 17 87.
Following World War I, newspapers, reviews, and magazines promised to become more plentiful. This was especially welcome to Slovakia, where publications in the Slovak
language had been prohibited by Hungarian oppressors. Under
the Czecho-Slovak republic the Slovaks were prepared to
-enjoy the democratic freedom promised by the Pittsburgh
.P act and especially freedom of the press, speech, and association. Alas, they soon came to realize that the promises,
�116
SLOVAKIA
as far as Slovakia was concerned, were empty words and
nothing more.
In Czecho-Slovakia, the newspapers were usually owned
and operated by political parties. There were very few socalled "independent newspapers". Yet even though labeled
"independent", some of these were nevertheless the tool of
a financial group, a political party or a governmental coalition.
The newspapers in Slovakia were of two kinds: government and so-called opposition.
Under opposition came the publication of the Slovak
People's Party, the Slovak National Party and the Communist
Party. The Hungarian and German minorities had a similar
classification of newspapers.
All these newspapers were characterized by their adherence to an ideology and the effort to propagate it. They
were interested in social and political problems, and they
never evaded any controversial issue. Their influence on the
formation of public opinion was considerable.
The rapid political evolution and maturation of the Slovak nation was due chiefly to the efforts of the political
press of the Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National
Party. The obstacles with the Czech administration plac~d
in their path by means of censorship, economic and political
pressure, by corruption and terrorism, by political trials and
murder in its effort to suppress the Slovak drive for in-dependence, only helped to accelerate and strenghten this
process. In their 20 years of forced cohabitation with the·
Czechs, the Slovaks achieved a rapid political evolution,
thanks to their press and they were thus prepared in the international crisis of 1938-1939 to proceed prudently toward
the realization of their national aspirations.
The press of the opposition encountered paralyzing difficulties in Czecho-Slovakia. In a debate before Parliament
Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Slovak People's Party
declared that under Hungary and Austria, unjustly as they
had been treated, the Slovaks and the Czechs had enjoyed
greater freedom of the press than in the new "brotherly"
State. of Czecho-Slovakia. 48
A resolution issued by the 14th Convention of the Social
Democratic Party in 1922 protested against the practice of
confiscation of the press. 49
�SLOVAKIA
117
Jozef Vr ab e c, representative of the Slovak People's
Party, protested against the confiscation of the March 13,
1921 issue of Slovensky krest'ansky socialista, for its article
"Za more, za ocean" (Beyond the Sea, beyond the Ocean). 50
In this article the Czech Government was held responsible
for the emigration of thousands of Slovaks through its policy of job discrimination and its dismantling of Slovak industries.
Slovenske Eudove Noviny was confiscated because it
criticized the discriminatory policy against Slovak construction workers by a Czech construction enterprise, which led
to a bloody fight between the Slovak jobless workers and
the imported Czech workers. The police arrested the Slovaks. 51
In a parliamentary debate on Novembre 24, 1920, representative A. Bobok complained about the "terrible restriction of the press and opinion" in Czecho-Slovakia and
claimed the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. 52
In a debate in the House of Representatives, June 21,
1922 Msgr. Andrej Hlinka declared:
Each issue of the SLOVAK ts censored . . . ,I will show you a
startling example of freedom of the press. Here it is. (He shows censored issues of the ,S1L OVAK, rwith their blank columns). Everything
is censored from t he first word to the last.
That is suppo,sed to be freedom of the -press, freedom to express
an opinion . ..
iSee, here is the S1LOVEN,S,KA. JEIDNOTA ... here, SIJOVENSKA.
POLITl!KA. Here you see the freedom of the press for which I spent
4 years in jail.
Here is 1SlJOViIDNSKA. PRAVDA. Notice what has been deleted.
(He reads): "What Czech statistics s-h ow about •S lovak schools."
And mention of "Teaching the Slovak language" was eradicated.
Such freedom of the press do we enjoy in Slovakia! This has been
going on now since Mairch 25 - we are systematically criticized and
censored. And they tell the world we have freedom of the -press in
this Republic!
In Interpellation No. XXI/4226, April 26, 1923, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek interpellated the Minister
of Justice on the confiscation of the Slovak, April 25, 1923,
because it reprinted the article "Zapredana Orava a Spi§"
(Orava and Spis Betrayed) from the newspaper Denny hlas
(Daily voice) published in Cleveland, Ohio, April 3, 1923. In
this article the Czech diplomat Dr. Karel Pergler, who had
also signed the Pittsburgh Pact (1918), accused the CzechoSlovak Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Edvard Bene~ of
�118
SLOVAKIA
having sold to the Poles the Slovak territories of Orava and
Spg for the coal districts of Karvina in Silesia, inhabited
by Poles. 54
The Slovak, December 11, 1923, was censored for declaring inaccurate and false the statement of President Dr. T.
G. Masaryk that the Slovaks and the Czechs were one and
the same nation and that Slovak is a dialect of the Czech
language.
Representative Rev. Pavol Machacek wrote as follows
in the article "Kati sa raduju" (The executioners rejoice) in
the August 10, 1922 issue of Slovenske l'udove noviny:
Heavy -f ines were imposed on the peasants. Financial burdens
forced artisans to close their shops . . . !Government officia1's confiscated articles reprinted from Czech newspapers ... They issued the
directive to destroy us at any cost.
And they succeeded. ·Since the first or Januwry our daily S'LOVAK has been confiscated 45 times and the SLOVENiSIKE Im.DOVE
NOWNY almost as many. Every confiscation meant a loss of 3,5004,000 crowns in damages. In thi-s brief period we were in arrears
1'70,000 crowns. The financial burden became .so greait that the S,J,;{}VAK was forced to cease publication.
In an interpellation to the Minister of Interior, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek declared:
The coalition government is not content to pass a cruel law,
which empowers the Attorney General to confiscate newspapers
before distribution. It did not hesitate to permit the violation of the
secrecy of registered mail in 'Slovakia without a court order. The
Plenipotentiary ordered the confiscation or an Open Letter addre!ised to the !President of the Republic, sent •b y :registered mail from
Americans of .Slovak extraction. ,I ndeed, the Minister, •D r. Kallay, has
empowered not only the post offices, but also the gendarmery and
the police to confiscate letters without notifying the addressee.55
The Slovak in its August 19, 1933 issue complained that
it had been confiscated six times in the previous week. The
only reason it was not seven times is that the paper is issued
only six times a week.
The same paper in its August 26, 1933 issue notes:
Yesterday's SLOVAK carried news of the confiscation of the
TATRA!NSKY SLIOV.AK. But the 1SLIOVAK, SDOVAK TYZDENNIK,
SLOVENS<KA BRAVDA, and the fortnightly tSLOVAK NA STRAZI of
Zilina suffered a similar fate. In the later paper, seven columns were
en<tirely deleted, so that it was issued •with two or its four pages
blank.
In the article56 "Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom" (A misunderstanding between
�SLOVAKIA
119
the autonomist press and the censor of Bratislava), the author
-ks- (who is probably Karol Sidor, editor-in-chief of the
Slovak) wrote that in the previous week an issue of the Slovak had been confiscated because it reprinted in the Slovak
language an article about Slovakia written by a Frenchman,
Ebray, and published in the Pester Lloyd, a newspaper permitted in Czecho-Slovakia and available in the coffeehouses
of Bratislava to anybody who could read German.
In a parliamentary debate on the proposal of a new
press law, June 9, 1933, Representative Jozef Sivak declared:
I would venture to assert ,t hat the development and evolution of
d emocracy is best achieved by a ,f ree press ... ,I t is true that article
113 of our Constitution guarantees freedom of the press ... but it is
nothing ,but a pa per guairantee, as are all th e guarantees in this
Republic.
You know that by the Pit tsburgh !Pact the Slovaks were guarantP.ed
autonomy, but again this is only a paper guarantee . . . The feverish
zeal of the censor knows no limits. The Attorney General confiscates
everything. It is not possible in this day and age to w.rite the truth
about Czech discriminrution of the !Slovak laborer, to say anything
about the rights of •Slovak peasants, !Slovak workers, ,S lovak artisans
and shop-keepers. No one is, allowed to criticize the ,government or
individual officers. ·All is censored... even the statements of the
Board of Representatives of the Slovak \People's iParty ...
The following appeared in the article "Neustale habanie Slovaka" (The constant harassment of the Slovak) in its
August 22, 1933 issue:
Readers of the SLOVAK received the !Sunday edition with dismay.
The front page, with six deletions, showed how heavily the hand of
the censor had struck.
On no account are we p ermitted to criticize ithe government. An
article in which Msgr. Andrej Hlinka ,s et forth the significance of
the Nitra centennary celebration on August 13, 1933 and praised the
Slovaks tfor itheir participation in it, was censored. Confiscated also
was an article by 1S enator Andrej Janecek, in which he assumed
responsibility for (his part in) the Nltra episode.
A report on the investigation of several partici pants in the Nltra
festivities was confiscaited, although the government had encouraged
attendance.
Other confiscations were: Part of the report on the fiasco perpetrated by government parties in Nitra who, although a minority in
the district, had convened to protest · the €Vents of August 13, 1933 ; ·
Slav repor ts on •t he Nitra centenary; ·Reflections on the Pittsburgh
Pact.
It is not unusual for us to b e subjected to confiscations - evea
dally. But what the censor did with our !Sunday edition outrageously surpass·e s anything ever attempted before.
Our party will adopt -s uitable measures to defend our consti-
�120
SLOVAKIA
t uti onal r igh t to free dom of th e press, denied us by th e " lords" i n
the governm ent. W e will e m ploy a ll possible means to r each on r
read er s.
On its anniversary the Slovak was confiscated for the
editorial "Patnast' rokov Slovaka" (Fifteen years of the Slovak), which conveyed the impressions of its readers on the
reappearance of the Slovak after three months' suspension by
the Attorney General. The same issue was confiscated for
its information about the activities of Americans of Slovak
descent in the United States, a reprint from Osadne hlasy
(Parish News ), a Slovak weekly in Chicago, Illinois, and one
part of an article by a Czech signatary of the Pittsburgh
Pact. 57
Interpellation No. 1193/ IX, November 10, 1937, proffered by representatives Karol Sidor and Dr. Martin Sokol
was motiviated by the confiscation of two articles in Slov enska pravda and Slovak, November 10 and 11, 1937. The title
of the two articles was "Zakony demonstracii". They included a report on the spirited demonstrations of the studets of Bratislava University, demanding the slovakization
of the University, of government bureaus, and of the army
and police in Slovakia, under the slogan "Slovakia for the
Slovaks". It carried an account of the brutal intervention of
Czech police, who severely beat the students with sabres and
clubs. An illustration showing a hand brandishing a club
(used by the police ) was also confiscated. The headline "Demand plebiscite for Slovak autonomy!" was deleted from
the February 10, 1938 issue of the Slovak, but the same line
was left by the censor in the text of the article. Such inconsistencies in the practice of censorship were frequent.
For this reason the Czech journalist Dr. Benes (not the
President Dr. Benes) could declare in the organ of the Union
of Czecho-Slovakia Journalists:
The pr ess is practically ou tlawed in Czechoslovakia . .. a nd fr ee•
dom of the press •has become degenerated by confisca tions .58
Such a statement, naturally, could not have been published in Slovakia.
In an evening discussion at the Czechoslovak National
Council, the Czech editor Jan· Hrabanek declared that the
articles of the Constitution concerning freedom of the press
were not respected, that a permit for printing newspapers
�SLOVAKIA
121
was required, that the publication of periodicals was too
often suspended and the right of distribution forfeited on
the basis of a mere suspicion, without any conviction of a
penal act. 59
After 1932, when young Slovak members of government
parties were more attuned to the ideas and attitudes of the
majority of the Slovak nation, the governmental press in the
Slovak language also began to appear with blank pages.
In the May 5, 1939 issue (page 90) of Zem (Soil) a political magazine of young Agrarians, the editor wrote an article
entitled "Komu osozi cenzura?" (Who Benefits from censorship?) Among other things he said:
Newspapers with blank pages ... that is a product of the censor.
The author sees thi.s miscarrriage of his intellectual effort and loses
heart. Readers are cheated by receiving blank newspapers . . . Jn
recent times the censor is busier than ever before. Formerly only
newspapers which habHually pabl!shed a rticles sharply criticizing
the government were censored. These were chiefly the papers of the
opposition. •B ut that is a. thing of the past. Nowadays even the newsp a pers of government pal'ties are censored and they appear now with
the familiar blank spaces.
What was most offensive to the Slovaks was the confiscation of the literary magazine Slovenske Pohl'ady, No.
l0A, 1932, published with the date of October 28, the "Day
of Freedom", the official national festivity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. Slovenske Pohl'ady, founded in 1846, had
never been confiscated before. It had always stood as a
symbol of the independent cultural life of the Slovaks and
was dear to the heart of every Slovak. Why was this revered
non-political periodical censored? Its editor Dr. Stefan Krcmery, submitted to criticism the Czechs in Slovakia, because
they did not read or buy Slovak books and despised Slovak
literature. In the other censored article he reviewed very
favorably a new volume of poems Hlas krvi (The Voice of
blood), published by Andrej Zarnov, author of the confiscated volume of poems Straz pri Morave, mentioned on page 53.
The cultural magazines Pero (Pen), Pramen (Source),
Elan (Impetus) and DAV (The Masses) and the humoristic
periodical Osa (Wasp) and Kocur (Cat) were also confiscated several times.
�122
SLOVAKIA
CENSORSHIP OF THE PRESS OF OTHER NATIONALITIES
LIVING IN CZECHO-SLOV AKIA
The Slovak press was not alone in the battle for freedom of the press. Other ethnical groups living in CzechoSlovakia were also hindered in the free expression of ideas.
It is true that the Czech Government was much more lenient
toward the Germans and Magyars, who were favorably situated and could appeal to the German Reich and Hungary for
moral and financial support.
But the case of the Ukrainians living in the territory of
"Subcarpathian Russia" was similar to that of the Slovaks.
By the Peace Treaties of Saint Germain-en-Laye, France, on
October 10, 1919, this territory which had belonged to Hungary before World War I was incorporated in Czecho-Slovakia
as an autonomous entity. Its position in the Czecho-Slovak
Republic was to be that of a federated state. But, as in the
Slovak case, the Czechs failed to honor their obligations and
the Ruthenians were treated as another Czech colony. Its
political and economic exploitation was in open contradiction
to the terms of the St. Germain-en-Laye treaties. The po:..
sition of the Subcarpathian Ruthenians was as hopeless as
that of the Slovaks. But this poor and exploited nation was
also aware of its national origin and of the Czech aims of
domination. Its representatives in the Prague Parliament and
its periodicals followed generally the same line as that of
the Slovaks. They demanded their rights, guaranteed by the
peace treaties, especially the right of national self-determination.
·
The Czech methods of domination in Subcarpathian
Russia were similar to those employed in Slovakia: military
and political terrorism, economic exploitation and impoverishment, political corruption and censorship, combined
with the curtailing of freedom of speech and association.
In Parliament the Ruthenians reacted in the same way
as the Slovaks.
The January. 31, 1926 issue of the newspaper Karpatska
pravda (Carpathian truth), published in Uzgorod, was censor·ed in its editorial "Continuous Oppression" for this statement:
The cup is full to overflowing. ·T he poor people of Subcarpathian
Ruthenia, ruthl essly oppressed ·by the Czech bourgeoisie, suffers cold,
�SLOVAKIA
123
unemploy men t, hu nger, pove r ty a nd e ndles·s mis,ery. Eig-h teen years we
h ave lived in "fr ater nal" union with Czecho,S lovak ia, but nothing
h as ·been do ne to improve social cond Hions .. .so
On April 8, 1937 Representative Dr. S. A. Fencik interpellated the Minister of the Interior on the confiscation of
issue No. 216 of Na§ put (Our way ), published in Uzgorod.
The periodical was confiscated on the pretex that the censored article might disturb the public peace. It was entitled
"Voice of a Slovak" and included a quotation from the daily
Slovak, March 19, 1937, stating that the establishment by
Prague of a "Gubernatorial Council" for Subcarpathian Russia is but a surrogate for the autonomy guaranteed by the
Constitution. The article was not confiscated in the Slovak,
but the Na§ put was confiscated for informing its readers
.a bout the Slovak' s views.
The No. 212 issue of Na§ put, 1937 was confiscated on
the same pretex, i. e. that it might disturb the public peace.
The article "Autonomy" was confiscated for the lines:
" ... this a utonomy is guaranteed only on paper . To this day it
h as not been r ealized. In eighteen yea.rs no effort has been made to
b egi n to put it into effect."61
The press of the Czech opposition also shared the fate of
that of the other nationalities. Only a very insignificant percentage of Czechs however, voted for their opposition parties.
The others were generally satisfied with their privileged
position and had no desire to change it.
On September 16, 1930 the representatives of the Czech
National Democracy, Dr. Karel Pergler and Ji.ti Sti'ibrny
interpellated the Minister of Justice on the confisc ation of the
periodical Franta, vol. III. No. 21 , March 6, 1930:
Despite the guarantees of freedom or speech and press contained
i n the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak •Republic, o ur legislative
bodies have not checked or even improved the preventive censorship inconsistent with democracy, especially in peacetime. Under a
r egi me li k e ours one wou ld not expect a censor.s hip and confiscation
policy which ·r enders impossible a decent and desirable criticism of
ideas and political principles h el d by government functionaries. But
the exact opposite is the ca,se. In this Repu1blic it is not permitted
to discuss people in the government and their views on any topic.
As a proo1' of my assertion, I have here several periodicals that suf·fered con fiscation. The classic example of the confiscation policy
adopted by the government in contradiction to the most basic concepts
of freedom of the press and discussion, was the confiscation of the
March 6, 19·30 issue of F'RQ)l''DA. The article "Two Concepts" by F.
Schwartz was the offender ...
�124
SLOVAKIA
This article contained criticism of Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk, President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Another article "Co je vice nez 7. marec" (What is more significant
than March 7) written by Josef Vodracka and published in
the same issue, was also confiscated, because of its criticism
of Masaryk's philosophy of Czech statehood. (March 7 was
Masaryk's birthday and a national holiday.) In the article
"Napoleonsky rys" (Napoleonic feature), published in the
same issue, a description of Masaryk's charact€r was also
censored. Another article "Muz Bible" (Biblical man) by
Kamil Masin was censored for its designation of Masaryk
as a "messianist" (man of Providence). In the same issue
also F. Petrik's article "Rozsevac a znec" (Sower and harvester) on the ideological inconsequence of Masaryk's philosophy and F. Schwarz's article "Souhlasime s Masarykem"
(We agree with Masaryk) along with several other articles
were censored.
The interpellation continued:
The press wa·s at one time the principal means of maintaining
freedom and national consciousness. In the Czecho,Slovak Republic,
the press has become the .frightening destroyer of every freedom
because an honest and independent press has been annihilated. It
serves now as ~ blindfold for the people ...62
This example shows that censorship in Czecho-Slovakia
was like an octopus which extended its arms into all areas
of public life and impeded the march of democracy and the
natural evolution of the various ethnical groups.
SLOVAK DEFENSE AGAINST THE EFFECTS
OF CENSORSHIP
A direct result of the systematic violation of freedom of the press by governmental censorship was that Slovak political parties were denied normal communication with
their members. At the disposal of the Government were the
police, the army, the gendarmry and about 300,000 privileged Czech functionaries in Slovakia, whose task it was to
hinder the activity of Slovak political forces, working and
fighting for the freedom and independence of Slovakia.
The people of Slovakia, deprived of the most effective
means of communication, the press, which was constantly,
almost daily, confiscated, the radio was State-owned and
controlled, and never at the disposal of opposition parties,
�SLOVAKIA
125
were more and more interested in knowing, what new injustice was committed against the Slovak nation.
Several methods of rendering the censorship less effective were developed by the political parties. These political parties, who owned many of the newspapers, constantly
challenged the respective Ministers in Parliament by interpellations. Their interpellations were always published, together with the censored articles, in the Tisky Poslanecke
Snemovny N<irodniho Shromazdeni Repub liky Ceskoslovenske (a publication comparable to the U.S. Congressional
Record) and this procedure gave them immunity and the
right to be reprinted in the newspapers. But it was not unusual for the censor to confiscate even these immunized
articles and interpellations.
The interpellation had to be signed by at least twenty
representatives. Small parties, which lacked this number,
obtained the necessary signatures from the representatives
of other opposition parties. The interpellations were addressed to the Minister of the Interior, or the Minister of Justice.
The reply of the Government to the interpellation,
which also requested that the matter be discussed, was usually negative.If a written answer was requested, the Minister
almost invariably approved the procedure of the censor.
Here is an example:
Reply of the Government to the interpellation of representative
Andrej Hlinka and associates concerning .the confiscation of the dally
SLOVAK, No. 105, May 9, 1934 (No. 2712/VII). - The confiscation
of the portions adduced In the lnterpellatlon . . . executed by the
office -of the Attorney General in Bratislava, •w as exa mined by the
regional court In Bratislava and approved In full. The complaint challenging this decision was rejected by the 1Prlme Minister: J. Malypetr.63
If nothing was found wrong in the censored article, the
reply to the interpellation was:
.. . I find that some portions adduced in interpellation No. 3610/·
XIV were confiscated without a legal r eason. I informed the office
of the Attorney General in Nitra that thes e articles ... are nothini;:
more than poli,tical r eflections and attacks and their suppression
cannot be justified by law. I hope that similar cases will not be
repeated .. ,64
But the censorship policy was not modified by a few
decisions in favor of the opposition's press.
Another procedure used by the opposition press to
�126
SLOVAKIA
counteract the effects of censorship was to send the first
printed copy to the censor's office and simultaneously to
deliver several hundred copies to the public vendors. The
Bratislava readers were usually waiting and so at least some
of them were able to obtain uncensored copies, which passed clandestinely from hand to hand. The procedure was the
same for the towns and villages near the capital city of Bratislava. Workers, employees, railroadmen and occasional
travelers, women from the villages selling vegetables in the
market, all cooperated in smuggling the uncensored copies
of newspapers out of Bratislava. Most helpful in this distribution of uncensored copies were the Slovak railroadmen.
Each town in which the train stopped, had its copy of the
uncensored newspaper. This was done with the utmost caution, since those involved could have been charged with a
criminal act against the security of the State at the risk of
imprisonment or loss of job.
After the censor completed his job, the Attorney-General ordered the police to confiscate the newspaper. The
policemen seized the unsold uncensored copies from the
news-stands. In coffeehouses they seized uncensored copies
from the hands of readers, who had not reali21ed in good
time the presence of the officers and failed to hide their
copies.
Articles from confiscated political, social and cultural
periodicals, were typed and distributed among interested
people, chiefly university students and graduates, who formed little clubs to discuss them.
The same was done with confiscated books or volumes
of poetry. The writer recalls how, after the publication of
Sidor's and Mach's books, mentioned previously, he was
given one typewritten copy of the censored parts of the
books, and was required to type at least fiV'e new copies
and distribute them among five other persons. Such distribution was possible only among persons who were trustworthy and of the same political convictions. The result was
that almost everybody in Slovakia could have his own copy
of the censored parts of the books. The secretariats of the
political parties cooperated with students, workers and peasants in this underground press and the solidarity of the
nation as a whole was wonderful. It is true that many people
were caught and penalized, but that was the risk.
�SLOVAKIA
127
Students in foreign countries supplied information about
the views of the foreign press on the Slovak problem and
themselves published the Slovak viewpoint in foreign newspapers. They smuggled into the country articles about Slovakia from the foreign press. The customs examination of
Slovak students traveling abroad or returning from foreign
countries was viery thorough.
The clandestine importing of news reports from abroad
was even more dangerous than the distribution of censored
articles in Slovakia. If caught in possession of any news item
unfavorable to Czecho-Slovakia, a person could be prosecuted for "association with the enemies of the State", for espionage, or for plotting against the State.
Information brought from abroad was discussed only
in small confidential groups of students and intellectuals,
and secret reports were given to certain leaders of political
parties. The Czechs were not generally able to identify the
persons responsible for this smuggling of information. But
they never forgot. During his studies in Zagreb (Croatia)
in 1937 or 1938, one of my friends wrote several articles
about the oppression of the Slovaks in Czecho-Slovakia. For
these and other articles written for the Croatian press ten
years later in 1947 he was sentenced by a Czech Communist
"people's court" to eight years in prison.
CONCLUSION
Freedom of the press consist~ in the free gathering of
information, in free communication, in the free publication
of information, in the free printing and distribution of published information and in the free subscription and free
reading of published information.
In Czecho-Slovakia these freedoms were very limited
and in Slovakia they were practically non-existent.
If one succeeded in gathering information, it became
impossible to communicate it if the Czechs felt that it criticized or threatened their hegemony.
To publish such information signified sure intervention
of the censor and meant the consequent confiscation of the
entire edition of the book or periodical, in which it was
published.
To diffuse information confiscated by the censor was
�128
SLOVAKIA
considered by the Czechs as an act against the security of
the State.
The freedom to subscribe to and to read published information was also very limited. Anyone found to be in possession
of censored information was ,exposed to the danger of being
arrested and penalized.
From pertinent material available to the writer and
from his own experiences in Czecho-Slovakia in the years
1918-1938, he has reached the conclusion that despite the
constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press, censorship in its most drastic form was widely employed against
the opposition and the minorities in direct contradiction to
the Constitution and the so-called "democratic" system
which it guaranteed.
Public opinion in Slovakia could not manifest itself
freely in the press and information was diffused chiefly
through the channels generally resorted to by underground
organizations.
The people of Slovakia learned to read and interpret
the blank spaces of the censored newspapers and what they
"read" this way was much more unfavorable to the Czech
system than the impression the censored words would have
provoked.
The impossibility of frank discussion had created an
atmosphere of hatred in which the Slovaks renounced once
and for all any discussion with the Czechs. They began to
take their own course which led logically to the unanimous
declaration of the independent Slovak Republic, March 14,
1939, by the autonomous Slovak Parliament.
Censorship applied against the Slovaks proved that
freedom cannot be suppressed indefinitely, because it is a
part of the condition of our life, our development, and our
progress. In its essence our soul is free. Whoever suppresses
the freedom of others, will himself lose freedom. The Czechs
lost their freedom on the very day when the Slovaks declared
their independence. Bohemia became a Protectorate of Germany. When with the aid of the Soviet army and through
the indifference of the Western world, the Czechs enslaved
the Slovaks a second time after World War II, they lost their
freedom too, and became a satelite of Soviet Russia. In order
�SLOVAKIA
129
to keep the Slovaks in Czech slavery, they sold their own
freedom to the Muscowite tyrant, exposing to Red danger
the entire Central and Occidental Europe.
The words of the great Slovak poet Jan Kollar (17931852) are most appropriate here:
Whoever respects the freedom of others
Is himself worthy of freedom.
Whoever enslaves with handcuffs
Is himself a slave ! 65
FOOTNOTES
1.
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction by Ji:ri Hoetzl and V. Joachim, American Association for
International Conciliation, Pt,blications, No. 179 (October 1922),
2.
3.
Ibid., p. 443.
Karl Falk, "Strife in Czechoslovakia: The German Minority
Question", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV, (March 15, 1938), p. 4.
The Cleveland Pact stipulated that the Slovaks and Czechs
would form II federative union of states. Slovakia was to enjoy
complete national autonomy, including its own Parliament and
government administration, its own political and financial institutions, complete freedom to develop culturally and the right
to use Slovak as its official language. The form of government
was to be democratic, operating in a union of two autonomous
states. The Pittsburgh Pact guaranteed that "Slovakia shall have
its own administration, its own tribunals and its own Parliament. Slovak shall be the official language in schools, in government offices and in public life in general."
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 23 (March
31, 1923), pp. 207-218.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizen£ statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1920) .
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 708-709.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 44 (July
p. 441.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8
15, 1933), p. 707.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Ibid. ( 1933) p. 771.
Ibid. Part 56 (July 7, 1934) pp. 513-516.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1934), p. 598.
Ibid. (1935), p. 527.
Ibid. (1937), p. 786.
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 709-714.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 35, (May
23, 19i6) pp. 477-479.
I!Jid. pp. 479-541.
Imrich Stanek, Zrada a pad. (Praha: Statnf Nakladatelstvf Politicke Literatury, 1958), p. 33.
�SLOVAKIA
130
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 41.
Ibid., p. 33.
Ibid., p. 34.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 34.
Ibid., p. 35.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
Ibid., pp. 38-39.
Ibid., p. 39.
Ibid., p. 40.
Ibid., p. 32.
Ibid., pp. 41-43.
Lucy Maynard Salmon, The newspaper and authority. (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1923), p. 3.
Karol Sidor, Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926), Bratislava: Knihtlaciaren Sv. Andrej a, 1934), p. 359.
Culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Machacek, Pavol. "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske .l!udove Novi·
ny", (August 10, 1923). pp. 1-2.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 150, (1922).
Karol Sidor, Op. cit., pp. 487-488.
Ibid., p. _426.
Ibid., p. 425.
Culen, Konstantin, "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
C. A. Macartney, Hungary and her successors, pp. 137-139.
"Azda takto", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 163.
"Nerovny boj", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 162.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 5280, (1925).
Head of a region.
Administrative region of Slovakia.
Sano Mach, Vo viheni, (Bratislava: Jednota, 1930).
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, 'l)sky, No. 2799, (1934).
Culen, Konstantin. "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Ceskoslovenska Socialne demokraticka strana. Protokol sjazdu
z 12. a 22. aprila 1922, p. 203.
Ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka·
Snemovna, Tisky, 1. volebni obdobi, 2. zasedani, No. 1882, 1921.
Op. cit., No. IV/4098, 1923.
(;ulen, Kon~tantin, "Slcboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
�SLOVAKIA
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
fi3.
64.
65.
131
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 3584, (June 21, 1922.).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. XXI/4226, (April 26, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. VI/4636, (May 27, 1924).
Slovak, July 23, 1933.
Slovak, J anuary 26, 1934.
Tisk a novinari, XII, No. 5, (1938).
Druhy kruh diskusnich vecerii Narodni Rady ceskoslovenske",
Cechoslovak a nase zahranici. Vsenarodni mesicnik. Vol. XV,
No. 4-5, (April-May, 1935), p. 100.
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 1937, VI. volebne obdobi, 5 zasedani, No.
876/ VI, April 8.
Ibid, XV/4226, (May 25, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 628/IX, (September 16, 1930).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 2951, (1934).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, I. volebni obdobi, 5. zasedani, No. 2591, (July
28, 1922), pp. 10-11.
Jan Kollar, Slavy dcera. 1824.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
<::incik, Joseph G. Anglo-Saxon and Slovak-Avar Patterns of the
Cuthbert Gospel. Series Cyrilomethodiana, v. 1. Cleveland: Slovak
Institute, 1958.
Delaney, Edward L. False freedom . Los Angeles: Sequoia University
Press, 1954.
Diplomaticus. The Czechs and their minorities. London, Thornton
Butterworth, (1938).
Durcansky, Ferdinand. Pohl'ad na slovensku politicku minitlost'. Bratislava: Ludotypia, 1943.
Hrusovsky, Frantisek. Slovenske dejiny. 6th ed. Turciansky Sv. Martin:
Matica Slovenska, 1940.
Kerr, Walter. Criticism and censorship. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1956.
Kimball, Young and Lawrence, Raymond D. Bibliography on censorship
and propaganda. University of Oregon publications, v. 1, 1928.
Journalism series, No. 1. Eugene: University Press, 1928.
Mach, Sano. Vo viizeni. Censored ed. Bratislava: Jednota, 1930.
Macartney, C. A. Hungary and her successors. The treaty of Trianon
and its consequences, 1919-1937. New York, Oxford University
Press, 1937.
McKean, Richard et al. The freedom to read. Perspective and program.
New York: R. R. Bowker, 1957.
�SLOVAKIA
132
Miskovic, Alojz and Pisut, Milan. Dejiny slovenskej literatury pre VI.
triedu slovenskych gymnazii a pre ucitel'ske akademie. Bratislava:
Statne nakladatel'stvo, 1941.
Mraz, Andrej. Die Literatur der Slovaken. Berlin: Volk und Reich
Verlag, n. d.
Salmon, Lucy Maynard. The newspaper and authority. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1923.
Seton-Watson, R. W. A history of the Czechs and Slovaks. New York:
Hutchinson and Co., 1943.
Sidor, Karol. Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Censored ed. Bratislava:
Knihtlaciareii Sv. Andreja, 1934.
-Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Uncensored ed. Bratislava: Knihtlaciarer1
Sv. Andreja, 1934.
- Slovcici v zahranicnom odboji. Bratislava: Jednota, 1928.
Slovensky Oslobodzovaci vybor. Prcivo Slovcikov na samostatnost' vo svet•
le dokumentov. Sv. 1: Biela kniha. By Ferdinand Durcansky. Buenos
Aires: Dorrego, 1954.
Stanislav, Jan. Slovanski apostoli Cyril a Metod • ich cinnost' vo Vel'ko•
moravskej risi. Bratislava: Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slovaca, 1945.
Thomas, S. Harris. Czechoslovakia in European history. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1944.
Zubek, Theodoric J., O.F.M., S.T.D. The Church of silence in Slovakia.
Published by John J. Lach, 1956.
PAMPHLETS
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur la necessite de plebiscite
en Slovaquie. Paris: 1946.
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur l'existence de la Republique Slovaque et sur la necessite de conclure le traite de paix avec
elle. Paris: 1946.
Durcansky, Ferdinand. The international asp zct of the Slovak question.
New York: Slovak Liberation Committee, 1954.
Jakobson. R. Slavic languages. New York: Columbia University Press,
1955.
Slovak Action Committee, Slovak National Council in London, Slovak
League of America and Canadian Slovak League of Canada.
Memorandum presented to the Peace Conference concerning
the rationality of existence of Czecho-Slovakia. Paris: 1946.
Th e Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact. (Chi cago) : The Slovak Catholic
Federation of America, 1934.
Stewart, John F. Slovakia, its people and right to sovereign independence and freedom. Information leaflets, No. 7. Edinburgh: Scottish
League for European Fre<>dom, n. d.
PERIODICALS AND ARTICLES
"Azda takto," Ncistup (Nove.' llber 1, 1933).
ceskoslovensko a na.se zahrar,;i:i, XV, No. 4-5 (April-May, 1935).
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction
�SLOVAKIA
133
by Jiri Hoetzl and V. Joachim. American Association for International Conciliation, Publications, No. 179) (October, 1922).
culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v cSR", Bratstvo (May 23, 1951).
Falk, Karl. "Strife in Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV
(March 15, 1938).
Hlinka, Andrej. "Protestujeme", Slovak (December 22, 1921). "Komu
osozi cenzura?", Zem, III, No. 9 (May 5, 1937).
Machacek, Pavel "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske l'udove noviny, (August
10, 1923).
"Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom", Slovak, (August 27, 1933).
"Nerovny boj", Nastup (November 1, 1933) .
"Neustale habanie Slovaka", Slovak (August 27, 1933).
" O cenzure", Slovak (May 16, 1934).
"Pracuje cenzura pre stat alebo pre politicke strany?", Slovak (September 15, 1933).
"Preco nas cenzurovali", Slovak (April 29, 1934).
"150 rocna cenzura rakuska platna este aj v republike", Slovak (June
11, 1933).
Slovak (June 11, 1933).
Slovak (September 15, 1933).
Slovak (January 26, 1934).
Slovak (June 13, 1934).
Taylor, Paul B. "Partition of Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports,
(November 15, 1938).
- "Germany's expansion in Eastern Europe", Foreign Policy Reports,
XV (May 15, 1939).
Tisk a novinai'i, XII, No. 5 (1938).
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka Snemovna.
Tisky. Years: 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924. 1925, 1926, 1929, 1930, 1934,
1935.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Years: 1920, 1922,
1923, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1~37.
THESIS
Woytko, Sister Mary Gabrielle, 0.P. Slovakia's road to statehood.
A Study of the efforts of Slovakia to secure national independence.
Thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Duquesne University
as a thesis under the title "A study of the efforts of Slovakia to
secure national independence" in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. (Published by John
Lach, 1957).
�
SLOVAKIA
93
CENSORSHIP POLICIES IN CZECHO-SLOVAKIA
1918-1938
WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON SLOVAKIA
Eugene Urban
ABSTRACT
By means of clever propaganda, the Czecho-Slovak Republic became known as an exemplary democratic State
and the ethnic groups living within her boundaries were enjoying a personal, cultural, political and economic freedom.
But the reality was exactly the opposite. The CzechoSlovak Republic was nothing but a big concentration camp
for four million Slovaks, three and half million Germans,
seven hundred thousand Ukrainians, six hundred thousand
Magyars, one hundred fifty thousand Poles, etc., the Czechs
enjoying the privileged position of guards.
The real objective of the Czecho-Slovak Republic was
to deprive the different ethnic groups of their national
identity and, at their expense, to enlarge herself to the point
of becoming a power among the others of Europe.
The Slovaks, a very nationally selfconscious group, differing from the Czechs in language, traditions, culture, customs, and character, were guaranteed 1918 that the new Republic would be a confederation of two States: the Slovak and
the Czech. But the Czechs failed to keep their promises and
pacts and instead they treated Slovakia as a colony.
One of the weapons used to suppress the desire of the
Slovaks to be again a free and independent nation was the
censorship of the press, the most effective medium of communication. The aim was to blot out all remembrance of
Slovqk historical traditions, and to suppress the individuality
and evidence of an oid cultural nation in the very heart.
of Europe - a nation which has made its contributions to
the building up of Western Christian culture and civilization.
And, although the Czecho-Slovak Constitution had guaranteed freedom of the press, several laws were later enacted
to make censorship legal. But the Slovaks defended them-
�94
SLOVAKIA
selves as well as they could in Parliament and with "underground" means of communication.
Czecho-Slovak Laws Concerning Freedom of Press, Speech,
and Association. Theory and Practice
The freedoms of press and association in the CzechoSlovak Republic were guaranteed in paragraph 113, (1) of
the Constitution accepted by the Revolutionary National
Assembly on the 29th of February, 1920:
Freedom of the press as well as the right to assemble peaceably
and without arms and to form associations is guaranteed. It is therefore in principle inadmissible to place the press under preliminary
censorship.I
Paragraph 117 guaranteed the freedom of expression
of opinion:
Every person may within the limits of the law express his or h er
opinion by word, in writing, in print, by picture, etc. The same applies
to legal persons within the limits of their competence. No one shall
suffer in the ,sphere of his work or emloyment for excercising this
right.2
According to these articles of the C o n s t i t u t i o n,
Czecho-Slovakia had no press law of its own. The press was
supposed to be free of Government interference and to
serve the genuine interests of the various ethnical groups
living in Czecho-Slovakia. It was supposed, also, that they
would be free to assemble in political, cultural, religious,
economical, etc. organizations and to secure through them
their rights.
Except for the Czechs, all other ethnical groups were
integrated in Czecho-Slovakia without being given opportunity to express their will freely.
With regard to the Slovaks, the Constitution was in
direct contradiction to the spirit and letter of the Cleveland and Pjttsburgh Pacts signed by the Slovaks and Czechs
in Cleveland, Ohio, October 5, 1915 and in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 30, 1918. 3 This latter was signed moreover
by President Tomas G. Masaryk. According to these two
pacts, Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be a federation of
both the Slovak and the Czech States. 4
But these pacts were not included in the Constitution.
�SLOVAKIA
!)5
The representatives for Slovakia who voted in Parliament for
the acceptance of this anti-Slovak Constitution were not elected by the people, but appointed by the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Prague from a minority group advocating
integration with the Czech nation.
The Constitution was in flagrant contradiction to the
spirit and the principles on which Czecho-Slovakia had been
created. In the first years of her existence, the discontent
of the Slovaks and of the other minorities with Czech imperialism and centralism early started to manifest itself, and
this particularly in the periodical press and at the meetings of
the political parties. The Czechs did not delay in their retaliation. They replaced the guarantees of paragraph 113 of
the Constitution with a series of laws by which the freedom
of the press was practically nullified. Not having a press law
of their own, the Czech majority in the Prague Parliament
made use of the old Austrian press law No. 119/ 1873 (May
23) and No. 142/ 1868 (October 15) of the Austrian Code,
and the Hungarian law No. XIV /1914 to suppress freedom
of the press. These were the oppressive laws of the old
Au.stro-Hungarian regime against which both Slovaks and
Czechs fought in the Parliaments of Vienna and Budapest.
It has been said repeatedly that Czecho-Slovakia was created
to liberate the Czechs and Slovaks from the Austro-Hungarian yoke. It is an ironic fact that Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk,
the first President of Czecho-Slovakia, who as deputy for
Bohemia, had condemned these laws in the Parliament of
Vienna, now signed and approved them as the laws of the
land, as law No 50/1923 (March 19), paragraph 34.5
The co-founder of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and her
second President, Dr. Eduard Benes, who was also theoretically a defender of the freedom of the press, also signed
law No. 50/1923.
The same law No. 50/ 1923 provided for the defense
of the Republic, and paragraph 34 stipulated the conditions under which the publication of periodicals might
be prohibited.
Law No. 3006 was drawn up on April 14, 1920; it was later
supplemented by law No. 125/ 1933 (July 10)7, according to
which the State's Security Bureau, without a judicial order
could demand the c o n f i s c a t i o n and opening of letters
�96
SLOVAKIA
and other items transported by mail. It could prohibit
public meetings and it could impose special conditions
upon the activities of associations or prohibit them. Paragraph 10 was concerned with the press. The State's
Security Bureau could limit or impose special conditions for
the publication and distribution of periodicals, or prohibit
their publication. It could order the editor of a periodical to
present, two hours before its publication, copies for preventive censorship. The same Bureau could put under surveillance or prohibit the activities of printing shops, of distributing companies, and of press agencies. It could also prohibit possession of printing presses and other means of reproducing writings and illustrations by private persons.
Law No. 50/1923, for the defense of the Republic, was
enacted in a period when Czecho-Slovakia was fully recognized and her existence insured by International Peace
Treaties. This law was not addressed against her enemies
from abroad, but to deal with the growing dissatisfaction
from inside. Especially in Slovakia the discontent was alarming. The fact that the Czechs violated the Pacts of Cleveland
and Pittsburgh were the most powerful reasons for this
discontent.
Law 50/1923 was enacted in order to give the Czechs
a weapon to terrorize the dissatisfied Slovaks and the other
minorities. It fixed the penalty for military treason, for violation of State secrets, for offence to the President of the
Republic, for any challenge to commit penal acts or not to
fulfill legal obligations, for approving the crime, for associating against the State, for the spread of false reports, etc. All
the paragraphs of this law were appliable also to the periodical press.
Directly concerned with the periodical press was paragraph 34 of this law. It gave the Government's ooreaus
power to prohibit the publication of periodicals. The period of suspension of publication was established as one
month for periodicals published at least five times a week,
two months for those published at least three times a week,
and six months for those purlished less than this.
But this law seemed not to be strict enough for the
Czech Government. Ten years larer, law No. 50/1923 was
completed and changed by the law No. 124/ 1933 (July 10).8
This new law extended the list of "crimes and offences"
�SLOVAKIA
97
for which the publication of a periodical could be suspended and gave the Government the right to enlarge the validity
of paragraph 34 by a simple government decree. The suspension period of periodicals was enlarged from one to
three months and from two to six months.
Not even that was enough for the Government of CzechoSlovakia. The Governmental Decree No. 150/1933 (July
18),9 published ten days later, again increased the number
of paragraphs which could be violated by the press and
added to the number of crimes and offences also the infringements of these laws.
One year later a new law No. 140/ 1934 was drawn up.
(July 10), 10 which changed and completed the law No 50/
1923, the law No. 124/ 1933 and the Government Decree
No. 150/ 1933. The number of possible penal acts was increased again. The Government was empowered to prolong
the validity of these laws for another two years. The distribution of transgressing periodicals could be prohibited in all
stores which sold the products of the State's monopoly (tobacco, stamps, salt, etc.) or in the buildings and stations of
the State owned railways (there were only State owned railways in Czecho-Slovakia). These periodicals could be also
deprived of the right to use special tariffs and of the right
of transportation by mail or by railroads. The same law
compelled all periodicals to publish free, without change
or comment, on their first or second page, by usual types
of letters, and in the largest edition, official declarations
of the President, the Vice-President, the Prime-Minister,
members of the Government, etc., appealing to this law.
A new Government Decree No. 163/ 1934 (July 16) 11
further extended the number of "crimes, offences and infringements" for which the publication of a periodical could
be suspended.
Two other government decrees, No. 157 / 1935 (July
13) 12 and No. 165/ 1937 (July 24) 13 , prolonged the validity
of the paragraph 34 of the law No. 50/ 1923 and the subsequent laws until the 13th July 1939.
Another law, No. 126/ 1933 (July 10) 14 was concerood
with the distribution (col portage) of periodicals. The distribution of periodicals which directly or indirectly subvert
or put blame on the independence, Constitutional unity, the
�98
SLOVAKIA
integrity and the democratic and republican form of the
State or the democratic order in the Czecho-Slovak Republiccould be prohibited. This right could also be taken away
from those periodicals which "menace the public peace and
order, especially by publishing false news and news which
distort the truth". The distribution in Czecho-Slovakia of
periodicals published abroad could be also prohibited. It
was prohibited to distribute periodicals in the schools and
in the military quarters. The Regional Office was entitled
to prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in Czecho-Slovakia, while the Ministry of Interior in cooperation
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in foreign countries.
Paragraph II of this law required publication of any
correction asked by a person who felt that the content of
some article published by the periodical was offensive to
him or that information given was untrue.
And finally the law No. 130/ 1936 (May 13)15 was enacted, which completed the previous National Defense laws for
the defense of the Republic. This law established capital punishment for many crimes against law No. 50/ 1923. It also
prohibited the publication of news regarding military treason
if not approved previously by the Ministry of National .
Defense.
All these laws and Government Decrees were climaxed
by • National Defense Law No. 131/ 1936 (May 13)16 for the
defense of the State. This law gave the Government absolute
power in a national emergency to suspend all laws, all
rights and liberties. It gave the Government the right to
censor the press, films, telegrams, telephone conversations,
letters, packages sent by mail, phonographs records, etc. It
established preventive censorship and gave the State's Security Bureau the power to prohibit the publication and distribution of periodicals. The importation of periodicals from abro.ad ·could be also prohibited. The law provided for the
establishment of a commission which would direct and carry
out the censorship policy.
The Government was given in fact dictatorial powers:
and this law was generally considered as the last nail in
the coffin of democracy in Czecho-Slovakia.
�SLOVAKIA
99
Objectives and Methods of Czechoslovak
Censorship Policies
From the analysis of censored material it is possible to
learn much about the objectives pursued by the Czech Government in the case of Slovakia.
Previous mention has been made of the profound antagonism developed between the Slovaks and Czechs as a result
of the Czech violation of the Cleveland and Pittsburgh pacts.
The Czech wanted to denationalize the Slovaks by forcing
them to accept the false claim that Slovaks are Czechs and
that the Slovak language is a Czech dialect. To obtain this
aim, the Czechs made use of various means. They created a
wave of terrorism, using the armed forces, police, gendarmery and the C z e ch national organizations, especially
"Sokol" known for both its atheism and chauvinism. They
also sent hundreds of thousands of Czech teachers and Czech
Government officials into Slovakia, thereby forcing the Slovaks, who were denied jobs in their own country, to emigrate
because of hunger and unemployment.
They further contributed to the economic impaverishrnent of Slovakia by dismantling its heavy industry and transporting the productive machinery to Bohemia. In this way
production was stopped and the enterprises were forced to
dose. Many factory buildings were purposely demolished
.and many mines flooded.17 The steel, chemica:l, glass and
leather industries suffered most cruelly. When the workers,
deprived of their jobs demonstrated to prevent the dismantling of the factories and machinery, the Czech soldiers and
the gendarmery killed many of them. 18 In the period from
1918 to 1932, 261 enterprises were closed down in Slovakia.
From 1933 to 1937 another 425 enterprises were dismantled,
bringing the total number to 686. 19
Meanwhile, new industries were founded in Bohemia
which logically belonged in Slovakia, since Slovakia provided the raw materials used in them.20
The transportation tariffs in Slovakia were about 40 percent higher than in Bohemia and Moravia. Consequently the
Slovak coal was more expensive than coal imported from
Bohemia. 21
Further discrimination was manifest in the field of housing construction. 22
�100
SLOVAKIA
From 1921 to 1923 Slovakia received only 6 per cent
of the State's subsidies for the unemployed, although the
unemployment in Slovakia was higher than in Bohemia. 23
From the sum assigned by the Government for the construction and maintenance of schools of higher education and
Universities, Slovakia received 10 per cent, while the educational institutions in Slovakia were to be built up almost
entirely. 24 The result: Slovakia had only one incomplete University and no Polytechnical Institute, while the Czechs had
several, and the German minority had two Universities and
two Polytechnical Institutes. Further, the Slovak University
was practically a Czech University, because the professors
named by the Government were all Czechs.
Salaries for the Slovaks were about 20 per cent lower
than for the Czechs. While Slovakia abounded in natural
resources, especially for the production of energy, the petroleum lamp was the usual source of light. The combined
savings of five Slovak citizens were equal to the savings of
a single Czech.
Czech capital absorbed whatever Slovak industry still
remained after its dismantling. Slovak banks were engulfed
by Czech banks, and foreign capital was allowed to supplant
the remaining Slovak capital. 25
When agrarian reform was inaugurated in Slovakia, only
21 per cent of the land was sold to Slovak peasants, while
the rest was distributed free to the Czechs. 26 The discrimination against Slovak peasants in transportation tariffs
and taxes resulted in frequent strikes. Instead of offering
to improve their desperate condition, the Government gave
the order to fire at the strikers.27 Their hopeless situation
led them to emigrate in large numbers to the U.S.A., Canada,
Argentina, France, Germany and Belgiurn. 28
Slovakia was treated like a colony by the Czechs. They
regarded Slovakia only as an object of exploitation, a reservoir of cheap labor and a market for the products of Czech
industries. The Czech Government aimed to keep Slovakia
as an underdeveloped agricultural country. 29 Practically all
the administrative positions in Slovakia were filled by Czechs,
whose salaries also were double those of the Slovaks. 30
In Slovakia political oppression worked hand in hand
with economic injustice.
Aware of Czech chauvinism, the Slovaks began early
�SLOVAKIA
\'yd»od1 denne ~rem pondelk.a
Zdkladafel' a YO!ICA ; Andrei ffllnka
101
Br611slava,. slreda 6. m11e. t9H
1Grecki povsfalci chysfaju illok na Affleny
Rozvral na Balk6ne, alebo vffllZSlvo greckel vl6dy - Bulbarsko
vyslela voJsko na grkke brank:e
·• •11>1 ••• ~-••U ,.....,n,&aJ-.. ,.,,..,., ..
~i,---iol,f
. .•• ~ ~ - : . • ~ ,•
:'"
.:.:.•\.:=:
tf~i~~l~~t;~~~
~fiff;[f~!~1f[~tt¥.Jlf§ l{if;}~t~¥.K~~
The whitewashed newspapers had to be presented in a new form: A
corrected issue was printed after the confiscation
to organize politically. The great Slovak patriot Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka founded the Catholic and nationalist Slovak People's
Party. Its program aimed at autonomy for Slovakia in accordance with the decrees of the Pittsburgh Pact (1918). The
Protestant leader, poet, and writer, Rev. Martin Razus, restored the Slovak National Party. In order to hinder Slovak
political association, the Czechs established branches of
their own parties in Slovakia. By means of political intrigue
and corruption they attained a measure of success, but the
majority of Slovaks resolutely opposed them. Because of
�102
SLOVAKIA
the forced intergration of Slovakia with Bohemia, and the
denial of Slovakia's right to self-determination, the fiftyfive Slovak deputies were invariably outvoted by the Czech
majority in the Prague Parliament.
The Czechs employed terrorist tactics also against Slovak political parties, imposing on them a relentless censorship of the press and disruption of their public meetings.
By such means they strove to impede direct communication
between the Slovak people and their political leaders.
The press was a high-powered tool in the hands of the
Slovak political parties. It introduced new ideas, it taught the
people to recognize and support their own national interest,
it pointed out the injustices committed against the Slovak
nation by the Government and it suggested ways to remedy
the situation. Public meetings served the same purpose, demonstrating by enthusiastic attendance the growing strength
of the Slovak nation.
Consequently, public meetings were dissolved by government agents whenever the speaker criticized the government, and troops and police were ordered to charge against
the protesting Slovaks. Many Slovaks were killed and wounded by Czech bullets.
The censor deleted from the press every criticism of
Government officials and legislative bodies, in order to cover
their misdeeds and keep the people uninformed. The second
purpose was to hinder opposition parties from communicating with their readers and voters.
In the hope of keeping such ideas in the background and
forcing on the Slovaks the false notion of a "Czechoslovak
nation and people", the Czech censor confiscated articles
dealing with Slovakia's national identity and its right to
self determination.
The Czech determination to eradicate religion from Slovak public life must remain under cover, hence the censor
suppressed all articles and reports of the desecration of
churches by the Czechs and the removal of crosses from
schools.
In the eyes of the Czechs it was a most serious crime
for the Slovak press to publicize the struggle of the Slovak
people for autonomy, for the right to govern themselves, to
run their own schools; in short, to enjoy all the rights of
nationhood belonging to them as a nation. The Czechs seem
�SLOVAKIA
103
to have naively thought that without the press to remind
them of their rights the Slovaks would drop the issue.
The Slovaks were not allowed to read reports on CzechoSlovakia in press. The Czech Government feared that this
would more profoundly motiviate their political aspirations.
Practically all the statements and resolutions of the
Slovak political parties were censored in order to stifle
opposition and prevent the natural political development of
the Slovak nation.
Reports of the activity of Slovak organizations in the
United States of America were yet another object of the
censor's displeasure, because these organizations were strongly in favor of autonomy for Slovakia.
The two presidents of Czecho-Slovakia, Masaryk and
Bene~, were unassailable in the press. The slightest criticism,
whether by Czechs or by Slovaks, was taboo and automatically censored out. A legend was built up around these two
men, making them untouchable as if they were the apex of
perfection. To perpetuate it no criticism of their many human
foibles and moral lapses was tolerated.
The real objective of Czech cenzorship was to suppress
the facts of Slovak history with their underlying appeal to
self-respect and to strike out these glorious moments of the
past which could fortify the Slovak political and national
fight for the realization of their ideal of freedom and independence.
Censorship was thorough. It made impossible any attempt by the Slovaks and other minority groups to charge
the Czech government with undemocratic practices. Meanwhile the Czechs were using it to create a "great Czech
nation" at the expense of the other ethnic groups living in
Czecho-Slovakia and disregarding their right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness. Their ultimate goal was to
achieve a dominant position among the small States in Central Europe.
In a word, Czech censorship was a tool of Czech imperialism and its faithful servant. It was the ruthless Czech
antidote to the self-determination and national development
of the Slovak nation and the other minorities in the CzechoSlovak Republic. As such, Czech censorship was diametrically opposed to the principles of democracy, freedom, and
human progress.
�104
SLOVAKIA
"Authority is conservative ... freedom is progressive .. .
conflict between the two is inevitable", says Lucy Maynard
Salmon, 31 in reference to freedom of the press.
Since Czech censorship was directed against human
progress, freedom, and democracy, the means it employed
could only have been wicked. It stopped at nothing to attain
its objectives. Nothing was immoral if it served the Czech
goal of domination.
Czech post office and railway employees often seized
entire editions of the opposition's periodicals and destroyed
them. Soldiers were often ordered to raid newspaper and
party offices to confiscate mailing lists and manuscripts.
This happened in Trnava, Leopoldov, Bratislava, and elsewhere. Sometimes the soldiers reduced the place to shambles. Consequently, readers in the capital city itself were
often deprived of their papers. Karol Sidor reported in the
March 22, 1919 issue of the Slovak:
" Orders have been given (,b y Czech officials) to destroy the
SLOVAK. Revorts have been pouring in from all parts of Slovakia
that the SLOVAK, ofl!!c!al PU!bl!cation of the Slovak 'People's Party,
has been seized by scoundrels and its sale and dlstriburtion prohibited."32
Kon~tantin Culen wrote:
"In the early yea,rs the SLOVAK was subjected to as many as
three censorsihips: political, military, and economic. Some issues
of the newspaper ,bore the inscription, "Thrice censored and corrected
edition". Even these multi-censored copies were sometimes thrown
out of trains en route by Czech mailmen. Slovak employees who
dared to subscribe to the Sl.lOVAK endangered their livelihood. And
when even this did not dauRt them, they were personally terrorized by the police and government of!lclals .33
Oftentimes newspapers were deprived of the right of
distribution (colportage). Post offices were instructed to
refuse money orders sent to the opposition newspapers.
Persons who subscribed to these newspapers were harassed
and many were dismissed from government jobs. 34
Court action was taken against editors of newspapers
which printed articles unwelcome to the censor. The editors
111.sually assumed responsibility for unsigned articles; hence,
many of them were in and out of jail.
In a censored article entitled "We protest" Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka wrote these bitter words:
�SLOVAKIA
105
"We a re involved in doz ens, even hundreds of cour-t ca-ses. Hereafter I will assume full responsibility for every news article, whether
written by the editor or by Paul or Saul. J will appear before the
judge, I will answer the charges. And when I have been deprived
of freedom, when the iron door of my prison has dosed behind me,
when I am locked up and begin to burn like an expiatory candle on
the a ltar of the fa,therl and, then I will charge you, friends, deputies.
and leaders of the P eople's Party: •F ollow me! Let each of you
shoulder r esoonsibility for one, two, ten articles, an d all of us will
become involved with the courts. But no. I am wrong. Let us not get
so involved. Not of our own volition will we become entangled with
the courts. We will yield only to brutal compulsion. You Czechs will
have to drag us into the courts.
And when my right hand has become still and my mortal remains
have decomposed, I tell you that a great line will form behind me,
eager as I for the glory that is sure to follow.
7ou cannot silence us. You can only massacre us. But one tiling
I ask: Do not go on deceiving the world that you are our brothers
tsons of the same nation). Never will we consent to be Czechos lovaks ... Slova kia is ours an d we will defend our country against
you as we defended it against the Magyars. The more you incriminate
ns, the more you imprison us, the more forcef ully will we fight
against you."
As the representative and chairman of the People's
Party, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka spoke out boldly on this subject
in Parliament. In June 1922, in the debate arising from his
interpellation No. 3584 on the raid of the offices of the
Slovak and Eudove noviny, he described the attack as initiated and engineered by government agents. Not only did
the assailants wreck office equipment and furniture and
destroy books, but they were aided in their orgy of destruction by the police, who should have been maintaining order.
The chief of police of Bratislava, Dr. Slavicek, a Czech,
declared that he had been unable to check the raid because
the majority of his men were hostile to the Slovak People's
Party. Andrej Hlinka rightly demanded to know when the
Slovaks might expect to have the protection of law and
order. 35
Karol Sidor described the demolition and plundering of
the offices of the Slovak as follows:
On :!\fay 25, 1922 a huge rally was orga nized in Bratislava -to protest.
Several Slovak legiona ries and Slovak university students were
present. At one 'POint a Czech speaker railed against the SLOVAK.
dem <tndlnr; that it be placed under the strictest censorship. An aroused
Slovak legionary shouted: "Your aim is to cripple the Catholic press;
you would do better to suppress your own anti-Catholic and antiSlovak press." The legionary paid for these words with a cruel beating ...
A Slovak university student r eceived th e same treatment, bis
�106
SLOVAKIA
clothes torn and covered with blood, after he had called out to an
abusive Czech speaker, "Please, talk to us in Slovak!" ...
·The speeches continued until 12: 30 p.m. At 1: 00 p.m. the first
group of demonstrators appeared in front of the editorial offices or
the SLOV.AK . . . Some 1,500 Czech legionaries escorted the demonstrators. Awaiting them was a group of 150-200 men and women who
had assembled from the villages to defend SLOVAK property. A
fight ensued, but the Czech legionaries with the aid of some 10(}
policemen, invaded the editorial offices and broke tables and chairs,
flung books, bound journals, manuscripts etc. out the windows.
(Czech) legionaries piled •the items into ca,r s and drove away.
Other (Czech) legionaries r aided the ,SLOV.AK's administrative
offices and worked havoc there also. They carried off valuaibles, including shares and mailing lists. The yard outside ,w as littered with
papers.
These raids were permitted, even abetted by the police, who together with the legionaries received praise and commendation in the
Czech press for their acts of des,truction.36
During the night of March 31, 1920, a certain Czech
army major Ludevit Palounek by name, placed a bomb in the
Lev printery in Ruzomberok in the hope of destroying the
voice of the People's Party and its organ of free discussion. 37
Even the mails were misused: derisive pamphlets were
inserted in the bundles of the Slovak, 38 as they were being
shipped to their destination.
With the growing tension in the relations between the·
Slovaks and Czechs, the censorship became more and more
despotic. After 1932, there were almost daily confiscations
of the Slovak press.
The censor received his instructions from the Ministry
of the Interior. If the censor found in the piece examined
something he considered inadmissible, he deleted it; the·
Attorney General then ordered the police to confiscate the
publication. The police seized the entire edition and burned
it. The publishing house or the editors could make an appeal
in court, or a board of representatives in Parliament could
protest to the Minister of the Interior, or of Justice, or both.
If the censorship was found unfair, the editors or publishers
could demand reimbursement for damages. But in most
cases they lost the appeal.
After confiscation, a newspaper, book, or journal was
printed in a new edition with the censored areas left blank.
It bore the inscription "Following confiscation, a new and
corrected edition" in the upper left corner of the front page
of the periodical, or on the cover of the book.
�SLOVAKIA
107
After Slovakia achieved independence on March 14,
1939, government officials found in the archives of the
Attorney General confidential orders issued by the Czech
Government with instructions to the censor as to how many
times a week certain newspapers were to be confiscated.
After a stated number of confiscations, the periodical could
be suspended for three or six months, and after repeated
confiscations, it could be suspended indefinitely at the discretion of the censor. This was a most powerful weapon in
the hands of the Government, and it was effectively used
during the visit of President Edward Benes in Slovakia in
1933. Under the pretex of repeated confiscations, the newspapers Slovak, Slovenska pravda, Narodne noviny and the
political review Nastup were suspended, so as to prevent
any criticism of Benes's speeches in the press. It was on
this visit that he angered the Slovaks by declaring that they
must become Czechs.
The actions of the censor were despotic because he knew
that the Government would not fail to support him. The
Slovak and Slovenska pravda were confiscated almost every
day. The humoristic weeklies Osa and Kocur were also confiscated, along with the cultural monthlies Pero , Slovenske
pohl'ady and Elan. Almanacs, books, poetry collections, and
placards were not exempt. Sometimes periodicals were confiscated because of articles reprinted from other non-censored newspapers. For example a periodical was confiscated
because it contained a poem originally published in the
Slovak-American almanac Jednota. An editorial containing
quotations from a book by President Thomas G. Masaryk
was also confiscated. An article by the great Slovak writer,
Svatozar Hurban Vajansky, published in Hungary at the
~md of the 19th century, was censored when reprinted in
Slovak after World War I. Newspapers were confiscated for
using the hyphen in the name of the Republic "CzechoSlovakia" although early peace treaties carry the name in
this form. 39
On several specific occasions the Czechs declared that
it would be dangerous for the future of the Republic if freedom of speech and press were permitted in Slovakia.40
With confiscation being an almost daily occurence,
periodicals suffered very heavy losses. It is pertinent to
point out that while the Czech party press subsisted on
�SLOVAKIA
108
government funds, the Slovak press depended entirely upon
the voluntary support of party members, together with subscription fees. The Slovak people understood perfectly the
great importance of the press and supported it generously.
Only in this way was the Slovak opposition press able to
survive such continuous economic strangulation by the Czech
Government.
Characteristic of the situation are words like the following: " . .. we must perforce decline to publish original articles on topics banned by the government and must limit ourselves to those which have already passed the censor." 41
This is not all. When Slovak representatives protested
in Parliament against the policies of the Government and
its agencies, their speeches in Parliament were censored
and denied publication in the parliamentary record Tisky
Poslaneck e Snemovny Nar odniho Shromazdeni
Ceskoslovensk e. The bimonthly Nastup wrote:
Republiky
" Instead of aick now ledging the human righ t to fr eedom of di scussion, th e Czechs pr oh ibited a utonomist meetings a nd r estricted
their publications. Now they have resorted to oth er meas ures.
"Th e P r esi de nt of th e Senate su ppressed a portion of Dr . Joseph
Buday's speech i n ·P a rlia men t. The Presidents of both C hambers of
Parl iamen t confiscated a major portion of the statement pr esented
by th e representatives of the Slovak People's Party.
"An exten ded (95 pages) and repo r tedly objective in ter pellation
of th e r epresentatives of the Slovak People's Par ty was als o censored by the Presidents of Par liament and denied publicati on.
" T his action was t a ken at a time w h en press censorshi p was so
stringent that no politician or political party could f r eely and publicly express a dissenting opinion as far as the Government was concerned.
"Ju Slovakia the natio na li st press is pres ently s ubjected to continuous sharp criticism a nd s uppression .. . In view of this we mus t
behold with a s tonishment the a d ditional measures taken in Parlia m ent
·to silence the autonomists who are already so effectively silenced by
press cens orship . Meanwhile •Slova k centr alists (i.e., Czech p a r tisans )
without hindrance flood Slovakia wit h their uncensored public_ations ."42
The newspaper Nar odne Noviny reported in its November 27, 1936 issue:
Statistics show that the number of confiscated publications in Czecho-Slovakia for the given years was as follows~
1929
1930
1934
Newspapers and periodicals ______ 3,370
Books ___ ______________ __________ 918
2,533
2,138
846
Confiscations
718
�109
SLOVAKIA
Foreign books and periodicals _____ 255
Total ______ ________ 4,543
183
3,434
329
3,313
Of these confiscations, 60 to 70% involved Slovak books
and periodicals.
Censorship of Books
Writing under the pseudonym Andrej Zarnov, a student
at the University of Bratislava, named Frantisek Subik, made
his literary debut in 1925 with the publication of a book of
poems which already then showed the promise that was to
make him a leading Slovak poet. The title of the book was
Straz pri Morave (Sentry at the Morava River) . Finding it
too nationalistic, the censor ordered the entire edition confiscated and had it burned at police headquarters.
The representatives of the Slovak People's Party challenged this action in the Parliament. They asked the Minister
of the Interior and the Minister of Justice:
1) Whether they were aware of the confiscation of
these poems;
2) Whether they approved;
3) Whether both Ministers were disposed to secure
the validity of the Constitution which guarantees freedom
of the press;
4) Whether they were disposed to take appropriate
disciplinary action against the censor in Bratislava;
5) Whether they were ready to guarantee freedom of
the press in Slovakia equal to that in Bohemia.
Needless to say, the Czech majority refused to discuss
this urgent interpellation in Parliament. 43
On the occasion of Msgr. Andrej Hlinka's seventieth
birthday, Karol Sidor, representative in Parliament and editor
of the Slovak, published his biography, covering the years
1864-1926.
A great admirer and loyal follower of Hlinka, Sidor
presented his hero as the key figure in the Slovak political
and national struggle for freedom and independence.
This 554-page biography suffered 31 deletions totaling
some 295 lines, equal to seven pages of the book. It was
issued with the customary caption on the cover: "Po konfiskacii nove opravene vydanie" (After confiscation a new and
�110
SLOVAKIA
corrected edition) and with blankspaces to show where the
censor had disapproved.
The following lines were deleted on pages 368-369,
from Sidor's description of the Czech attack on the meeting
of the Slovak People's Party in Zilina, August 17, 1919:
With draiwn bayonets, soldiers charged upon the people In the
square and scenes of horror ensued. Andrej Hlinka saw hi,s people
struck with rifl e 1butts and carried a,way as prisoners to the barracks.
Women from Kysuce exposed thei,r breasts to the bayonets and
shouted: "Strike here, you curs, and touch not Hlinka ! "
On October 10, 1920 Czech military units once more dispersed a meeting of the Slovak People's Party in Namestovo
and fired into the crowd, killing two Slovak peasants and
seriously wounding ten. On page 442 the description of this
savage act was deleted:
Bedfich Danek, a Czech lieutenant, scornfully asked a young
man weeping over the body of his slain father: "Why do you weep?
It ,w as Hlinka who killed him!" Namestovo came to ,be regarded a-s
a second Cernova.
The Czech press and the Government Press Agency CTK
wished to place the blame for this bloodshed on Hlinka. They
charged Hlinka with inciting the Slovaks against the Czechs.
Hlinka answered in the October 16, 1920 issue of the Slovak.
This portion of the article was deleted from the biography:
Yes, I did incite the people. I incited them and will continue
to Incite •them . My very presence incites them. So much so that it
stirs your murky conscience, stained with a ·b rother's blood. I have
incited and will continue to incite them to oppose t:he •b ase t,raud
you perpetrated against •the !Slovak n ation. W,e •w ill rise up to oppose
every injustice.
Why should we not be aroused against you, who seized me a year
ago in the dead of night and held me captive for six months at Mirov,
iBrodek, Podolie, to afford you an opportunity to demoralize and dis•
rupt .Slovakia? Should I have danced to your music when you placed
bombs in our "Lev" printery, •which had •been established with owhard•earned savin~s? I would be a cowardly traitor If I did not raise
my voice, if J did not search for a remedy and seek help.
We have incited and lest we be despised by Slovakia, we will
not stop inciting our people until w,e win autonomy from you.
On page 490 the censor deleted a reference to discrimination against the Slovaks in assigning government jobs:
The •Slovaks were unable to procure even the cheapest loaf or
government bread in Slovakia; (referring to jobs) their applications
were answered with a curt: "Impossible to grant", while t he Czech
people, often without qualification, were given the best paid jobs in
Slovakia.
�SLOVAKIA
111
That is how the newspapers SLOVAK, NARODNIE NOVINY, and the
magazine, NASTUP, looked after censorship
A quotation on p. 506 from an "Appeal of the Representatives of the Slovak People's Party to the Minister of the
Interior" in Prague, September 4, 1923, was confiscated:
The authorities spread terror every-where. Civil servants planned the
disruption of meetings by force and public safety agencies did nothing
to -defend the victims; on the contrary, they cooperated with the
agressors. Holle, Nove Zamky, and ,t he riot at Brezova make it clear
as day that groups of assailants were organized to incHe rioting and
to damage private property.
Very heavily censored was the chapter in which Sidor
described Hlinka's arrest at midnight. The occasion was his
return from the Peace Conference in Paris, where he had
delivered to the delegates a Memorandum in which he demanded in the name of the Slovak nation that the Slovaks
be given national and civic freedom and their autonomy
guaranteed. Hlinka's words to one of his chaplains were
censored on page 385.
"Proclaim abroad to the wide world the kind of freedom we
enjoy in Slovakia. They have come to carry me off like a criminal
In the middle of the night when everybody is asleep ...
The press reported that I trembled. On the contrary, I felt like
a lion. I cared not whether they killed me or jailed me. My blood
�112
SLOVAKIA
boiled. Indescribable feelings struggled within me. I could not tell
which was stronger: my love for my oppress-ed nation or my contempt of the intruders ... "
Following Hlinka's deportation, an account of the rebellions of the students and citizens of his parish town, Ruzomberok, was variously deleted as on pages 387, 392 and 393.
The description of the terrorism of the Czech soldiers
and employees in Slovakia was censored on page 444:
November 6, 1920 he (Rev. Frantisek Klein) reported in the
SLOVAK that he was traveling by train •with soldiers who insulted
him because he was reading the .SIJOV AK. One of ,them asked in
Czech: "Why doesn't someone kill tH!inka ?"
On pages 458-459 the account of the murderous attack
on Hlinka's life in Krupina, June 12, 1921, by a Czech, and
the insult to which he was subjected in Sahy two days later
by Czech railroadmen was expunged:
The following day, June 13, Hlinka set out with companions to
Sahy to report the Krupina incident to the "Zupan", [)r. Victor
Ravasz. As he was passing through the square a railroadman, named
S<tu~hlik and the school inspector, Bartolom/lj Krpelec, both Czechs,
confronted him with curses, calling him "bandit" and "agitator".
Later at the "zupan's" office, Stuchlik, with 60 co-workers, delivered the following ultimatum: The "zupan" must expel Andrej
iHlinka at once from ,the 1Hont "zupa" or suffer the consequences.
The railroadmen (all Czechs) also declared that they would not
permit Hlinka's train to leave the Sahy station.
·T he "zupan", after appealing to the Ministry in BraJtislava for
instructions, assured Blinka that the culprits in both Krupina and
Sahy •w ould ,be penalized as an example to others.
In the a,fternoon IHlinka ,boarded •the train at Sahy. The station
wa,s filled with people, waiting to see the outcome of the contest.
The rallroadmen held to their purpose. After a long while the zupan
arrive6l at ,t he station. The railroadmen demanded that -he order
Hlinka out of the train. Lenghty nego tiations followed. Meanwhile
Hlinka waited patiently within ...
Finally the "zupan" announced that the ,train was about to depart. At that moment a line of railroadmen formed below the windO'W
of Hlinka's compartment. They gave vent to their haitred -b y spitting
at Hlinka, cursing and maligning ·h im until the train moved out oE
sight.
Another incident which occurred in the railroad station
Trencianske Teplice, July 5, 1921, was deleted from page
459:
A Czech in the station, recogmzmg Hlinka, called out, "Hang
Hlinka ! " Andrej IHlinka stepped forward and asked him to identify
himself. The Czech continued to shout, but did not give his name ...
And a few lines further on the same page:
�SLOVAKIA
113
Another •Czech took up the cry, shouting, "Hang Hllnka". The
p eople attacked h im, although ,Hlinka- made an effort to calm them.
Mea nwhil e the train arrived and he boarded it ,w ith his secretary
Ramaj . :Bishop Kmeeko a nd tMsgr. Tiso remained in the station, bu t
they were unable to quiet the p eople. Several Czechs were severely
beaten .
Other subjects censored in Sidor's book were: criticism
·o f President Masaryk's anti-Catholic attitude (page 286) ;
daims of job discrimination that while hundreds of thousands
of Czechs were given the best paid jobs in Slovakia, often
without qualification, more than 300,000 Slovaks were forced
to emigrate because of the discrimination against them (pages 345 and 490). Also censored were references to organized Czech terror against the Slovaks, to agression against
Hlinka and his followers, to denial of government protection in the exercise of freedom of speech and association,
and any account of the formation of defense groups of the
Slovak People's Party for the protection of its meetings
.against Czech terrorists. Among the deletions were several
lines about the general anti-Catholic attitude of the Czech
people (page 471).
Another censored book was Vo vazeni, written by a
young editor of the Slovak, Alexander Mach. 46 The author
had been jailed on a charge of conspiracy with Professor Dr.
Vojtech Tuka against the integrity of Czecho-Slovakia. After
serving part of the sentence, he was exonerated from complicity in the "plot" and released. A year later he published his
book about his term in prison. In a manifestly unjust trial
Dr. Vojtech Tuka was sentenced to 15 years and liberated
after 10 years, when Slovakia won her autonomy on October
·6, 1938.
From Mach's book the censor confiscated some 520 lines, totaling 13 pages, or 7 per cent of the 198 pages of the
book. Unfortunately, I do not know of any uncensored copy
of the book and can therefore quote nothing from it.
To illustrate the mental climate in which the author
wrote his book, I will cite some lines of his epilogue "Po
roku" (After one year):
I was in prisoa on charges which cannot at present be freely and
sincerely dis cussed. In preparing this accoun t I was hemmed in by
restrairut lest I again find myself rb ehind prison bars . I was obliged
to limit my remarks lest the censor fo11bid their publication. Difficulties in the selection of material abounded. It was not easy for
me to decide what to eliminate, what to omit ... Thus as I prepared
�114
SLOVAKIA
my narrative rhe penal code was before me. Yet I have remained
completely frank; I did not change what I had •w ritten as a prisoner.
I preferred only .to eliminate the sensitive issues ...
Another example of the censorship of books is furnished by the interpellation presented in the Prague Parliament
by the representative Msgr. Dr. Jozef Tiso, concerning the
confiscation of the Kalendar Hlinkovej Slovenskej Eudovej
Strany na rok 1934 (Almanac of the Hlinka's Slovak People's
Party for the year 1934).
Two articles which appeared over the name of Msgr.
Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Party, were confiscated. In
these articles Hlinka warned the Czechs to stop persecuting
the Slovaks for claiming autonomy. Even Czech authors,
whom Hlinka quoted to illustrate his articles, were censored.
The title of the first article was "Za ~t'astne Slovensko" (For
a prosperous Slovakia). In the second article "Uprimne slovo o Nitre" (A frank comment on Nitra) Hlinka analyzed the
spontaneous explosion of Slovak discontent at the festivities
commemorating the 1,l00th anniversary of the first Christian church on Slovak territory, created in Nitra by Prince
Pribina in about 831 A. D. It was, Hlinka declared, a display
of resistance to the Prague Government, intent on exploiting these eminently Slovak festivities for their own purposes. Andrej Hlinka, who had been refused the right to speak
on the program, was carried up to the stage and backed by
his 200,000 followers, he read a statement in which he
solemnly affirmed Slovakia's adherence to its eleven hundred
years-old Christian traditions and proclaimed Slovakia's right
to territorial sovereignity.
This demonstration of outraged Slovak national pride
was observed by foreign diplomats and news reporters, who
were thus witnesses of the true will of the Slovak nation to
be free and the chauvinistic aim of the Czechs as expressed
in the Ottuv Obchodni Slovnik (Otta's Commercial Dictionary, 1921) volume 2, page 1217: "Slovakia shall be a colony
to us. It is an error to suppose that a colony cannot have
common frontiers with the mother country. An example of
this is Russia and Siberia."
Several lines from a poem by Ignac Grebac Orlov were·
also censored. Partially censored was the article entitled "Narodna jednota" (National unity), by Dr. Jozef Tiso on the·
necessity of national unity for the Slovaks. .
�SLOVAKIA
115
From the article "K sedemdesiatke Andreja Hlinku"
(On the 70th anniversary of Andrej Hlinka) by Karol Sidor
this paragraph was deleted:
What occured in 11919, ,w hen 'Hlinka and other Slovak leaders
were jailed, the ISiLOVAK suspended, and terrorism unleashed everywhere, was now repeated on a larger scale.
In .September 193131 the 1SIJOVAK was suspended -f or 3 months ...
lik,ewise the .S'.liOVAiK TYZDENNIK (1Slovak Weekly) and the T!AT·•RA:N,SKY SLOVAK (Tatra Slovak). We were left without a voice ...
We were not permitted to w,rite, the people had nothing to read. And
the prisons were daily being filled with objectors. Hundreds of Slovaks were suJbjected ,to investigations about their participation In the
Nitra festivities ...
Dr. Karol Mederly's article "Obec a politika" (Community and politics) was also confiscated, for its insistence on
the right of the Slovaks to vote according to their conscience.
Pictures of Hlinka carried on the shoulders of University students to the Nitra stage, the procession of 200,000
Slovaks in Nitra, and even articles of comic and satiric content were censored.
The interpellation contains a complete rescript of the
articles confiscated in the almanac. 47
In conclusion the writer would like to mention here
that printed works of other minorities and political parties
were also confiscated by the censor.
CENSORSHIP OF PERIODICALS
The periodicals in Slovakia have a long tradition. The
oldest periodical published on Slovak territory was Schemnitzer N ewszeitung edited in Banska Stiavnica in German,
in 1540-1541. Latin periodicals also had their day.
The first periodical in the Slovak language was Presspurske noviny (Bratislava News - Pressburg is German for
:Bratislava,), published from 1783 to 17 87.
Following World War I, newspapers, reviews, and magazines promised to become more plentiful. This was especially welcome to Slovakia, where publications in the Slovak
language had been prohibited by Hungarian oppressors. Under
the Czecho-Slovak republic the Slovaks were prepared to
-enjoy the democratic freedom promised by the Pittsburgh
.P act and especially freedom of the press, speech, and association. Alas, they soon came to realize that the promises,
�116
SLOVAKIA
as far as Slovakia was concerned, were empty words and
nothing more.
In Czecho-Slovakia, the newspapers were usually owned
and operated by political parties. There were very few socalled "independent newspapers". Yet even though labeled
"independent", some of these were nevertheless the tool of
a financial group, a political party or a governmental coalition.
The newspapers in Slovakia were of two kinds: government and so-called opposition.
Under opposition came the publication of the Slovak
People's Party, the Slovak National Party and the Communist
Party. The Hungarian and German minorities had a similar
classification of newspapers.
All these newspapers were characterized by their adherence to an ideology and the effort to propagate it. They
were interested in social and political problems, and they
never evaded any controversial issue. Their influence on the
formation of public opinion was considerable.
The rapid political evolution and maturation of the Slovak nation was due chiefly to the efforts of the political
press of the Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National
Party. The obstacles with the Czech administration plac~d
in their path by means of censorship, economic and political
pressure, by corruption and terrorism, by political trials and
murder in its effort to suppress the Slovak drive for in-dependence, only helped to accelerate and strenghten this
process. In their 20 years of forced cohabitation with the·
Czechs, the Slovaks achieved a rapid political evolution,
thanks to their press and they were thus prepared in the international crisis of 1938-1939 to proceed prudently toward
the realization of their national aspirations.
The press of the opposition encountered paralyzing difficulties in Czecho-Slovakia. In a debate before Parliament
Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Slovak People's Party
declared that under Hungary and Austria, unjustly as they
had been treated, the Slovaks and the Czechs had enjoyed
greater freedom of the press than in the new "brotherly"
State. of Czecho-Slovakia. 48
A resolution issued by the 14th Convention of the Social
Democratic Party in 1922 protested against the practice of
confiscation of the press. 49
�SLOVAKIA
117
Jozef Vr ab e c, representative of the Slovak People's
Party, protested against the confiscation of the March 13,
1921 issue of Slovensky krest'ansky socialista, for its article
"Za more, za ocean" (Beyond the Sea, beyond the Ocean). 50
In this article the Czech Government was held responsible
for the emigration of thousands of Slovaks through its policy of job discrimination and its dismantling of Slovak industries.
Slovenske Eudove Noviny was confiscated because it
criticized the discriminatory policy against Slovak construction workers by a Czech construction enterprise, which led
to a bloody fight between the Slovak jobless workers and
the imported Czech workers. The police arrested the Slovaks. 51
In a parliamentary debate on Novembre 24, 1920, representative A. Bobok complained about the "terrible restriction of the press and opinion" in Czecho-Slovakia and
claimed the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. 52
In a debate in the House of Representatives, June 21,
1922 Msgr. Andrej Hlinka declared:
Each issue of the SLOVAK ts censored . . . ,I will show you a
startling example of freedom of the press. Here it is. (He shows censored issues of the ,S1L OVAK, rwith their blank columns). Everything
is censored from t he first word to the last.
That is suppo,sed to be freedom of the -press, freedom to express
an opinion . ..
iSee, here is the S1LOVEN,S,KA. JEIDNOTA ... here, SIJOVENSKA.
POLITl!KA. Here you see the freedom of the press for which I spent
4 years in jail.
Here is 1SlJOViIDNSKA. PRAVDA. Notice what has been deleted.
(He reads): "What Czech statistics s-h ow about •S lovak schools."
And mention of "Teaching the Slovak language" was eradicated.
Such freedom of the press do we enjoy in Slovakia! This has been
going on now since Mairch 25 - we are systematically criticized and
censored. And they tell the world we have freedom of the -press in
this Republic!
In Interpellation No. XXI/4226, April 26, 1923, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek interpellated the Minister
of Justice on the confiscation of the Slovak, April 25, 1923,
because it reprinted the article "Zapredana Orava a Spi§"
(Orava and Spis Betrayed) from the newspaper Denny hlas
(Daily voice) published in Cleveland, Ohio, April 3, 1923. In
this article the Czech diplomat Dr. Karel Pergler, who had
also signed the Pittsburgh Pact (1918), accused the CzechoSlovak Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Edvard Bene~ of
�118
SLOVAKIA
having sold to the Poles the Slovak territories of Orava and
Spg for the coal districts of Karvina in Silesia, inhabited
by Poles. 54
The Slovak, December 11, 1923, was censored for declaring inaccurate and false the statement of President Dr. T.
G. Masaryk that the Slovaks and the Czechs were one and
the same nation and that Slovak is a dialect of the Czech
language.
Representative Rev. Pavol Machacek wrote as follows
in the article "Kati sa raduju" (The executioners rejoice) in
the August 10, 1922 issue of Slovenske l'udove noviny:
Heavy -f ines were imposed on the peasants. Financial burdens
forced artisans to close their shops . . . !Government officia1's confiscated articles reprinted from Czech newspapers ... They issued the
directive to destroy us at any cost.
And they succeeded. ·Since the first or Januwry our daily S'LOVAK has been confiscated 45 times and the SLOVENiSIKE Im.DOVE
NOWNY almost as many. Every confiscation meant a loss of 3,5004,000 crowns in damages. In thi-s brief period we were in arrears
1'70,000 crowns. The financial burden became .so greait that the S,J,;{}VAK was forced to cease publication.
In an interpellation to the Minister of Interior, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek declared:
The coalition government is not content to pass a cruel law,
which empowers the Attorney General to confiscate newspapers
before distribution. It did not hesitate to permit the violation of the
secrecy of registered mail in 'Slovakia without a court order. The
Plenipotentiary ordered the confiscation or an Open Letter addre!ised to the !President of the Republic, sent •b y :registered mail from
Americans of .Slovak extraction. ,I ndeed, the Minister, •D r. Kallay, has
empowered not only the post offices, but also the gendarmery and
the police to confiscate letters without notifying the addressee.55
The Slovak in its August 19, 1933 issue complained that
it had been confiscated six times in the previous week. The
only reason it was not seven times is that the paper is issued
only six times a week.
The same paper in its August 26, 1933 issue notes:
Yesterday's SLOVAK carried news of the confiscation of the
TATRA!NSKY SLIOV.AK. But the 1SLIOVAK, SDOVAK TYZDENNIK,
SLOVENS<KA BRAVDA, and the fortnightly tSLOVAK NA STRAZI of
Zilina suffered a similar fate. In the later paper, seven columns were
en<tirely deleted, so that it was issued •with two or its four pages
blank.
In the article56 "Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom" (A misunderstanding between
�SLOVAKIA
119
the autonomist press and the censor of Bratislava), the author
-ks- (who is probably Karol Sidor, editor-in-chief of the
Slovak) wrote that in the previous week an issue of the Slovak had been confiscated because it reprinted in the Slovak
language an article about Slovakia written by a Frenchman,
Ebray, and published in the Pester Lloyd, a newspaper permitted in Czecho-Slovakia and available in the coffeehouses
of Bratislava to anybody who could read German.
In a parliamentary debate on the proposal of a new
press law, June 9, 1933, Representative Jozef Sivak declared:
I would venture to assert ,t hat the development and evolution of
d emocracy is best achieved by a ,f ree press ... ,I t is true that article
113 of our Constitution guarantees freedom of the press ... but it is
nothing ,but a pa per guairantee, as are all th e guarantees in this
Republic.
You know that by the Pit tsburgh !Pact the Slovaks were guarantP.ed
autonomy, but again this is only a paper guarantee . . . The feverish
zeal of the censor knows no limits. The Attorney General confiscates
everything. It is not possible in this day and age to w.rite the truth
about Czech discriminrution of the !Slovak laborer, to say anything
about the rights of •Slovak peasants, !Slovak workers, ,S lovak artisans
and shop-keepers. No one is, allowed to criticize the ,government or
individual officers. ·All is censored... even the statements of the
Board of Representatives of the Slovak \People's iParty ...
The following appeared in the article "Neustale habanie Slovaka" (The constant harassment of the Slovak) in its
August 22, 1933 issue:
Readers of the SLOVAK received the !Sunday edition with dismay.
The front page, with six deletions, showed how heavily the hand of
the censor had struck.
On no account are we p ermitted to criticize ithe government. An
article in which Msgr. Andrej Hlinka ,s et forth the significance of
the Nitra centennary celebration on August 13, 1933 and praised the
Slovaks tfor itheir participation in it, was censored. Confiscated also
was an article by 1S enator Andrej Janecek, in which he assumed
responsibility for (his part in) the Nltra episode.
A report on the investigation of several partici pants in the Nltra
festivities was confiscaited, although the government had encouraged
attendance.
Other confiscations were: Part of the report on the fiasco perpetrated by government parties in Nitra who, although a minority in
the district, had convened to protest · the €Vents of August 13, 1933 ; ·
Slav repor ts on •t he Nitra centenary; ·Reflections on the Pittsburgh
Pact.
It is not unusual for us to b e subjected to confiscations - evea
dally. But what the censor did with our !Sunday edition outrageously surpass·e s anything ever attempted before.
Our party will adopt -s uitable measures to defend our consti-
�120
SLOVAKIA
t uti onal r igh t to free dom of th e press, denied us by th e " lords" i n
the governm ent. W e will e m ploy a ll possible means to r each on r
read er s.
On its anniversary the Slovak was confiscated for the
editorial "Patnast' rokov Slovaka" (Fifteen years of the Slovak), which conveyed the impressions of its readers on the
reappearance of the Slovak after three months' suspension by
the Attorney General. The same issue was confiscated for
its information about the activities of Americans of Slovak
descent in the United States, a reprint from Osadne hlasy
(Parish News ), a Slovak weekly in Chicago, Illinois, and one
part of an article by a Czech signatary of the Pittsburgh
Pact. 57
Interpellation No. 1193/ IX, November 10, 1937, proffered by representatives Karol Sidor and Dr. Martin Sokol
was motiviated by the confiscation of two articles in Slov enska pravda and Slovak, November 10 and 11, 1937. The title
of the two articles was "Zakony demonstracii". They included a report on the spirited demonstrations of the studets of Bratislava University, demanding the slovakization
of the University, of government bureaus, and of the army
and police in Slovakia, under the slogan "Slovakia for the
Slovaks". It carried an account of the brutal intervention of
Czech police, who severely beat the students with sabres and
clubs. An illustration showing a hand brandishing a club
(used by the police ) was also confiscated. The headline "Demand plebiscite for Slovak autonomy!" was deleted from
the February 10, 1938 issue of the Slovak, but the same line
was left by the censor in the text of the article. Such inconsistencies in the practice of censorship were frequent.
For this reason the Czech journalist Dr. Benes (not the
President Dr. Benes) could declare in the organ of the Union
of Czecho-Slovakia Journalists:
The pr ess is practically ou tlawed in Czechoslovakia . .. a nd fr ee•
dom of the press •has become degenerated by confisca tions .58
Such a statement, naturally, could not have been published in Slovakia.
In an evening discussion at the Czechoslovak National
Council, the Czech editor Jan· Hrabanek declared that the
articles of the Constitution concerning freedom of the press
were not respected, that a permit for printing newspapers
�SLOVAKIA
121
was required, that the publication of periodicals was too
often suspended and the right of distribution forfeited on
the basis of a mere suspicion, without any conviction of a
penal act. 59
After 1932, when young Slovak members of government
parties were more attuned to the ideas and attitudes of the
majority of the Slovak nation, the governmental press in the
Slovak language also began to appear with blank pages.
In the May 5, 1939 issue (page 90) of Zem (Soil) a political magazine of young Agrarians, the editor wrote an article
entitled "Komu osozi cenzura?" (Who Benefits from censorship?) Among other things he said:
Newspapers with blank pages ... that is a product of the censor.
The author sees thi.s miscarrriage of his intellectual effort and loses
heart. Readers are cheated by receiving blank newspapers . . . Jn
recent times the censor is busier than ever before. Formerly only
newspapers which habHually pabl!shed a rticles sharply criticizing
the government were censored. These were chiefly the papers of the
opposition. •B ut that is a. thing of the past. Nowadays even the newsp a pers of government pal'ties are censored and they appear now with
the familiar blank spaces.
What was most offensive to the Slovaks was the confiscation of the literary magazine Slovenske Pohl'ady, No.
l0A, 1932, published with the date of October 28, the "Day
of Freedom", the official national festivity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. Slovenske Pohl'ady, founded in 1846, had
never been confiscated before. It had always stood as a
symbol of the independent cultural life of the Slovaks and
was dear to the heart of every Slovak. Why was this revered
non-political periodical censored? Its editor Dr. Stefan Krcmery, submitted to criticism the Czechs in Slovakia, because
they did not read or buy Slovak books and despised Slovak
literature. In the other censored article he reviewed very
favorably a new volume of poems Hlas krvi (The Voice of
blood), published by Andrej Zarnov, author of the confiscated volume of poems Straz pri Morave, mentioned on page 53.
The cultural magazines Pero (Pen), Pramen (Source),
Elan (Impetus) and DAV (The Masses) and the humoristic
periodical Osa (Wasp) and Kocur (Cat) were also confiscated several times.
�122
SLOVAKIA
CENSORSHIP OF THE PRESS OF OTHER NATIONALITIES
LIVING IN CZECHO-SLOV AKIA
The Slovak press was not alone in the battle for freedom of the press. Other ethnical groups living in CzechoSlovakia were also hindered in the free expression of ideas.
It is true that the Czech Government was much more lenient
toward the Germans and Magyars, who were favorably situated and could appeal to the German Reich and Hungary for
moral and financial support.
But the case of the Ukrainians living in the territory of
"Subcarpathian Russia" was similar to that of the Slovaks.
By the Peace Treaties of Saint Germain-en-Laye, France, on
October 10, 1919, this territory which had belonged to Hungary before World War I was incorporated in Czecho-Slovakia
as an autonomous entity. Its position in the Czecho-Slovak
Republic was to be that of a federated state. But, as in the
Slovak case, the Czechs failed to honor their obligations and
the Ruthenians were treated as another Czech colony. Its
political and economic exploitation was in open contradiction
to the terms of the St. Germain-en-Laye treaties. The po:..
sition of the Subcarpathian Ruthenians was as hopeless as
that of the Slovaks. But this poor and exploited nation was
also aware of its national origin and of the Czech aims of
domination. Its representatives in the Prague Parliament and
its periodicals followed generally the same line as that of
the Slovaks. They demanded their rights, guaranteed by the
peace treaties, especially the right of national self-determination.
·
The Czech methods of domination in Subcarpathian
Russia were similar to those employed in Slovakia: military
and political terrorism, economic exploitation and impoverishment, political corruption and censorship, combined
with the curtailing of freedom of speech and association.
In Parliament the Ruthenians reacted in the same way
as the Slovaks.
The January. 31, 1926 issue of the newspaper Karpatska
pravda (Carpathian truth), published in Uzgorod, was censor·ed in its editorial "Continuous Oppression" for this statement:
The cup is full to overflowing. ·T he poor people of Subcarpathian
Ruthenia, ruthl essly oppressed ·by the Czech bourgeoisie, suffers cold,
�SLOVAKIA
123
unemploy men t, hu nger, pove r ty a nd e ndles·s mis,ery. Eig-h teen years we
h ave lived in "fr ater nal" union with Czecho,S lovak ia, but nothing
h as ·been do ne to improve social cond Hions .. .so
On April 8, 1937 Representative Dr. S. A. Fencik interpellated the Minister of the Interior on the confiscation of
issue No. 216 of Na§ put (Our way ), published in Uzgorod.
The periodical was confiscated on the pretex that the censored article might disturb the public peace. It was entitled
"Voice of a Slovak" and included a quotation from the daily
Slovak, March 19, 1937, stating that the establishment by
Prague of a "Gubernatorial Council" for Subcarpathian Russia is but a surrogate for the autonomy guaranteed by the
Constitution. The article was not confiscated in the Slovak,
but the Na§ put was confiscated for informing its readers
.a bout the Slovak' s views.
The No. 212 issue of Na§ put, 1937 was confiscated on
the same pretex, i. e. that it might disturb the public peace.
The article "Autonomy" was confiscated for the lines:
" ... this a utonomy is guaranteed only on paper . To this day it
h as not been r ealized. In eighteen yea.rs no effort has been made to
b egi n to put it into effect."61
The press of the Czech opposition also shared the fate of
that of the other nationalities. Only a very insignificant percentage of Czechs however, voted for their opposition parties.
The others were generally satisfied with their privileged
position and had no desire to change it.
On September 16, 1930 the representatives of the Czech
National Democracy, Dr. Karel Pergler and Ji.ti Sti'ibrny
interpellated the Minister of Justice on the confisc ation of the
periodical Franta, vol. III. No. 21 , March 6, 1930:
Despite the guarantees of freedom or speech and press contained
i n the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak •Republic, o ur legislative
bodies have not checked or even improved the preventive censorship inconsistent with democracy, especially in peacetime. Under a
r egi me li k e ours one wou ld not expect a censor.s hip and confiscation
policy which ·r enders impossible a decent and desirable criticism of
ideas and political principles h el d by government functionaries. But
the exact opposite is the ca,se. In this Repu1blic it is not permitted
to discuss people in the government and their views on any topic.
As a proo1' of my assertion, I have here several periodicals that suf·fered con fiscation. The classic example of the confiscation policy
adopted by the government in contradiction to the most basic concepts
of freedom of the press and discussion, was the confiscation of the
March 6, 19·30 issue of F'RQ)l''DA. The article "Two Concepts" by F.
Schwartz was the offender ...
�124
SLOVAKIA
This article contained criticism of Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk, President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Another article "Co je vice nez 7. marec" (What is more significant
than March 7) written by Josef Vodracka and published in
the same issue, was also confiscated, because of its criticism
of Masaryk's philosophy of Czech statehood. (March 7 was
Masaryk's birthday and a national holiday.) In the article
"Napoleonsky rys" (Napoleonic feature), published in the
same issue, a description of Masaryk's charact€r was also
censored. Another article "Muz Bible" (Biblical man) by
Kamil Masin was censored for its designation of Masaryk
as a "messianist" (man of Providence). In the same issue
also F. Petrik's article "Rozsevac a znec" (Sower and harvester) on the ideological inconsequence of Masaryk's philosophy and F. Schwarz's article "Souhlasime s Masarykem"
(We agree with Masaryk) along with several other articles
were censored.
The interpellation continued:
The press wa·s at one time the principal means of maintaining
freedom and national consciousness. In the Czecho,Slovak Republic,
the press has become the .frightening destroyer of every freedom
because an honest and independent press has been annihilated. It
serves now as ~ blindfold for the people ...62
This example shows that censorship in Czecho-Slovakia
was like an octopus which extended its arms into all areas
of public life and impeded the march of democracy and the
natural evolution of the various ethnical groups.
SLOVAK DEFENSE AGAINST THE EFFECTS
OF CENSORSHIP
A direct result of the systematic violation of freedom of the press by governmental censorship was that Slovak political parties were denied normal communication with
their members. At the disposal of the Government were the
police, the army, the gendarmry and about 300,000 privileged Czech functionaries in Slovakia, whose task it was to
hinder the activity of Slovak political forces, working and
fighting for the freedom and independence of Slovakia.
The people of Slovakia, deprived of the most effective
means of communication, the press, which was constantly,
almost daily, confiscated, the radio was State-owned and
controlled, and never at the disposal of opposition parties,
�SLOVAKIA
125
were more and more interested in knowing, what new injustice was committed against the Slovak nation.
Several methods of rendering the censorship less effective were developed by the political parties. These political parties, who owned many of the newspapers, constantly
challenged the respective Ministers in Parliament by interpellations. Their interpellations were always published, together with the censored articles, in the Tisky Poslanecke
Snemovny N<irodniho Shromazdeni Repub liky Ceskoslovenske (a publication comparable to the U.S. Congressional
Record) and this procedure gave them immunity and the
right to be reprinted in the newspapers. But it was not unusual for the censor to confiscate even these immunized
articles and interpellations.
The interpellation had to be signed by at least twenty
representatives. Small parties, which lacked this number,
obtained the necessary signatures from the representatives
of other opposition parties. The interpellations were addressed to the Minister of the Interior, or the Minister of Justice.
The reply of the Government to the interpellation,
which also requested that the matter be discussed, was usually negative.If a written answer was requested, the Minister
almost invariably approved the procedure of the censor.
Here is an example:
Reply of the Government to the interpellation of representative
Andrej Hlinka and associates concerning .the confiscation of the dally
SLOVAK, No. 105, May 9, 1934 (No. 2712/VII). - The confiscation
of the portions adduced In the lnterpellatlon . . . executed by the
office -of the Attorney General in Bratislava, •w as exa mined by the
regional court In Bratislava and approved In full. The complaint challenging this decision was rejected by the 1Prlme Minister: J. Malypetr.63
If nothing was found wrong in the censored article, the
reply to the interpellation was:
.. . I find that some portions adduced in interpellation No. 3610/·
XIV were confiscated without a legal r eason. I informed the office
of the Attorney General in Nitra that thes e articles ... are nothini;:
more than poli,tical r eflections and attacks and their suppression
cannot be justified by law. I hope that similar cases will not be
repeated .. ,64
But the censorship policy was not modified by a few
decisions in favor of the opposition's press.
Another procedure used by the opposition press to
�126
SLOVAKIA
counteract the effects of censorship was to send the first
printed copy to the censor's office and simultaneously to
deliver several hundred copies to the public vendors. The
Bratislava readers were usually waiting and so at least some
of them were able to obtain uncensored copies, which passed clandestinely from hand to hand. The procedure was the
same for the towns and villages near the capital city of Bratislava. Workers, employees, railroadmen and occasional
travelers, women from the villages selling vegetables in the
market, all cooperated in smuggling the uncensored copies
of newspapers out of Bratislava. Most helpful in this distribution of uncensored copies were the Slovak railroadmen.
Each town in which the train stopped, had its copy of the
uncensored newspaper. This was done with the utmost caution, since those involved could have been charged with a
criminal act against the security of the State at the risk of
imprisonment or loss of job.
After the censor completed his job, the Attorney-General ordered the police to confiscate the newspaper. The
policemen seized the unsold uncensored copies from the
news-stands. In coffeehouses they seized uncensored copies
from the hands of readers, who had not reali21ed in good
time the presence of the officers and failed to hide their
copies.
Articles from confiscated political, social and cultural
periodicals, were typed and distributed among interested
people, chiefly university students and graduates, who formed little clubs to discuss them.
The same was done with confiscated books or volumes
of poetry. The writer recalls how, after the publication of
Sidor's and Mach's books, mentioned previously, he was
given one typewritten copy of the censored parts of the
books, and was required to type at least fiV'e new copies
and distribute them among five other persons. Such distribution was possible only among persons who were trustworthy and of the same political convictions. The result was
that almost everybody in Slovakia could have his own copy
of the censored parts of the books. The secretariats of the
political parties cooperated with students, workers and peasants in this underground press and the solidarity of the
nation as a whole was wonderful. It is true that many people
were caught and penalized, but that was the risk.
�SLOVAKIA
127
Students in foreign countries supplied information about
the views of the foreign press on the Slovak problem and
themselves published the Slovak viewpoint in foreign newspapers. They smuggled into the country articles about Slovakia from the foreign press. The customs examination of
Slovak students traveling abroad or returning from foreign
countries was viery thorough.
The clandestine importing of news reports from abroad
was even more dangerous than the distribution of censored
articles in Slovakia. If caught in possession of any news item
unfavorable to Czecho-Slovakia, a person could be prosecuted for "association with the enemies of the State", for espionage, or for plotting against the State.
Information brought from abroad was discussed only
in small confidential groups of students and intellectuals,
and secret reports were given to certain leaders of political
parties. The Czechs were not generally able to identify the
persons responsible for this smuggling of information. But
they never forgot. During his studies in Zagreb (Croatia)
in 1937 or 1938, one of my friends wrote several articles
about the oppression of the Slovaks in Czecho-Slovakia. For
these and other articles written for the Croatian press ten
years later in 1947 he was sentenced by a Czech Communist
"people's court" to eight years in prison.
CONCLUSION
Freedom of the press consist~ in the free gathering of
information, in free communication, in the free publication
of information, in the free printing and distribution of published information and in the free subscription and free
reading of published information.
In Czecho-Slovakia these freedoms were very limited
and in Slovakia they were practically non-existent.
If one succeeded in gathering information, it became
impossible to communicate it if the Czechs felt that it criticized or threatened their hegemony.
To publish such information signified sure intervention
of the censor and meant the consequent confiscation of the
entire edition of the book or periodical, in which it was
published.
To diffuse information confiscated by the censor was
�128
SLOVAKIA
considered by the Czechs as an act against the security of
the State.
The freedom to subscribe to and to read published information was also very limited. Anyone found to be in possession
of censored information was ,exposed to the danger of being
arrested and penalized.
From pertinent material available to the writer and
from his own experiences in Czecho-Slovakia in the years
1918-1938, he has reached the conclusion that despite the
constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press, censorship in its most drastic form was widely employed against
the opposition and the minorities in direct contradiction to
the Constitution and the so-called "democratic" system
which it guaranteed.
Public opinion in Slovakia could not manifest itself
freely in the press and information was diffused chiefly
through the channels generally resorted to by underground
organizations.
The people of Slovakia learned to read and interpret
the blank spaces of the censored newspapers and what they
"read" this way was much more unfavorable to the Czech
system than the impression the censored words would have
provoked.
The impossibility of frank discussion had created an
atmosphere of hatred in which the Slovaks renounced once
and for all any discussion with the Czechs. They began to
take their own course which led logically to the unanimous
declaration of the independent Slovak Republic, March 14,
1939, by the autonomous Slovak Parliament.
Censorship applied against the Slovaks proved that
freedom cannot be suppressed indefinitely, because it is a
part of the condition of our life, our development, and our
progress. In its essence our soul is free. Whoever suppresses
the freedom of others, will himself lose freedom. The Czechs
lost their freedom on the very day when the Slovaks declared
their independence. Bohemia became a Protectorate of Germany. When with the aid of the Soviet army and through
the indifference of the Western world, the Czechs enslaved
the Slovaks a second time after World War II, they lost their
freedom too, and became a satelite of Soviet Russia. In order
�SLOVAKIA
129
to keep the Slovaks in Czech slavery, they sold their own
freedom to the Muscowite tyrant, exposing to Red danger
the entire Central and Occidental Europe.
The words of the great Slovak poet Jan Kollar (17931852) are most appropriate here:
Whoever respects the freedom of others
Is himself worthy of freedom.
Whoever enslaves with handcuffs
Is himself a slave ! 65
FOOTNOTES
1.
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction by Ji:ri Hoetzl and V. Joachim, American Association for
International Conciliation, Pt,blications, No. 179 (October 1922),
2.
3.
Ibid., p. 443.
Karl Falk, "Strife in Czechoslovakia: The German Minority
Question", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV, (March 15, 1938), p. 4.
The Cleveland Pact stipulated that the Slovaks and Czechs
would form II federative union of states. Slovakia was to enjoy
complete national autonomy, including its own Parliament and
government administration, its own political and financial institutions, complete freedom to develop culturally and the right
to use Slovak as its official language. The form of government
was to be democratic, operating in a union of two autonomous
states. The Pittsburgh Pact guaranteed that "Slovakia shall have
its own administration, its own tribunals and its own Parliament. Slovak shall be the official language in schools, in government offices and in public life in general."
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 23 (March
31, 1923), pp. 207-218.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizen£ statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1920) .
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 708-709.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 44 (July
p. 441.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8
15, 1933), p. 707.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Ibid. ( 1933) p. 771.
Ibid. Part 56 (July 7, 1934) pp. 513-516.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1934), p. 598.
Ibid. (1935), p. 527.
Ibid. (1937), p. 786.
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 709-714.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 35, (May
23, 19i6) pp. 477-479.
I!Jid. pp. 479-541.
Imrich Stanek, Zrada a pad. (Praha: Statnf Nakladatelstvf Politicke Literatury, 1958), p. 33.
�SLOVAKIA
130
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 41.
Ibid., p. 33.
Ibid., p. 34.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 34.
Ibid., p. 35.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
Ibid., pp. 38-39.
Ibid., p. 39.
Ibid., p. 40.
Ibid., p. 32.
Ibid., pp. 41-43.
Lucy Maynard Salmon, The newspaper and authority. (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1923), p. 3.
Karol Sidor, Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926), Bratislava: Knihtlaciaren Sv. Andrej a, 1934), p. 359.
Culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Machacek, Pavol. "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske .l!udove Novi·
ny", (August 10, 1923). pp. 1-2.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 150, (1922).
Karol Sidor, Op. cit., pp. 487-488.
Ibid., p. _426.
Ibid., p. 425.
Culen, Konstantin, "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
C. A. Macartney, Hungary and her successors, pp. 137-139.
"Azda takto", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 163.
"Nerovny boj", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 162.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 5280, (1925).
Head of a region.
Administrative region of Slovakia.
Sano Mach, Vo viheni, (Bratislava: Jednota, 1930).
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, 'l)sky, No. 2799, (1934).
Culen, Konstantin. "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Ceskoslovenska Socialne demokraticka strana. Protokol sjazdu
z 12. a 22. aprila 1922, p. 203.
Ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka·
Snemovna, Tisky, 1. volebni obdobi, 2. zasedani, No. 1882, 1921.
Op. cit., No. IV/4098, 1923.
(;ulen, Kon~tantin, "Slcboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
�SLOVAKIA
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
fi3.
64.
65.
131
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 3584, (June 21, 1922.).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. XXI/4226, (April 26, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. VI/4636, (May 27, 1924).
Slovak, July 23, 1933.
Slovak, J anuary 26, 1934.
Tisk a novinari, XII, No. 5, (1938).
Druhy kruh diskusnich vecerii Narodni Rady ceskoslovenske",
Cechoslovak a nase zahranici. Vsenarodni mesicnik. Vol. XV,
No. 4-5, (April-May, 1935), p. 100.
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 1937, VI. volebne obdobi, 5 zasedani, No.
876/ VI, April 8.
Ibid, XV/4226, (May 25, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 628/IX, (September 16, 1930).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 2951, (1934).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, I. volebni obdobi, 5. zasedani, No. 2591, (July
28, 1922), pp. 10-11.
Jan Kollar, Slavy dcera. 1824.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
<::incik, Joseph G. Anglo-Saxon and Slovak-Avar Patterns of the
Cuthbert Gospel. Series Cyrilomethodiana, v. 1. Cleveland: Slovak
Institute, 1958.
Delaney, Edward L. False freedom . Los Angeles: Sequoia University
Press, 1954.
Diplomaticus. The Czechs and their minorities. London, Thornton
Butterworth, (1938).
Durcansky, Ferdinand. Pohl'ad na slovensku politicku minitlost'. Bratislava: Ludotypia, 1943.
Hrusovsky, Frantisek. Slovenske dejiny. 6th ed. Turciansky Sv. Martin:
Matica Slovenska, 1940.
Kerr, Walter. Criticism and censorship. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1956.
Kimball, Young and Lawrence, Raymond D. Bibliography on censorship
and propaganda. University of Oregon publications, v. 1, 1928.
Journalism series, No. 1. Eugene: University Press, 1928.
Mach, Sano. Vo viizeni. Censored ed. Bratislava: Jednota, 1930.
Macartney, C. A. Hungary and her successors. The treaty of Trianon
and its consequences, 1919-1937. New York, Oxford University
Press, 1937.
McKean, Richard et al. The freedom to read. Perspective and program.
New York: R. R. Bowker, 1957.
�SLOVAKIA
132
Miskovic, Alojz and Pisut, Milan. Dejiny slovenskej literatury pre VI.
triedu slovenskych gymnazii a pre ucitel'ske akademie. Bratislava:
Statne nakladatel'stvo, 1941.
Mraz, Andrej. Die Literatur der Slovaken. Berlin: Volk und Reich
Verlag, n. d.
Salmon, Lucy Maynard. The newspaper and authority. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1923.
Seton-Watson, R. W. A history of the Czechs and Slovaks. New York:
Hutchinson and Co., 1943.
Sidor, Karol. Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Censored ed. Bratislava:
Knihtlaciareii Sv. Andreja, 1934.
-Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Uncensored ed. Bratislava: Knihtlaciarer1
Sv. Andreja, 1934.
- Slovcici v zahranicnom odboji. Bratislava: Jednota, 1928.
Slovensky Oslobodzovaci vybor. Prcivo Slovcikov na samostatnost' vo svet•
le dokumentov. Sv. 1: Biela kniha. By Ferdinand Durcansky. Buenos
Aires: Dorrego, 1954.
Stanislav, Jan. Slovanski apostoli Cyril a Metod • ich cinnost' vo Vel'ko•
moravskej risi. Bratislava: Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slovaca, 1945.
Thomas, S. Harris. Czechoslovakia in European history. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1944.
Zubek, Theodoric J., O.F.M., S.T.D. The Church of silence in Slovakia.
Published by John J. Lach, 1956.
PAMPHLETS
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur la necessite de plebiscite
en Slovaquie. Paris: 1946.
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur l'existence de la Republique Slovaque et sur la necessite de conclure le traite de paix avec
elle. Paris: 1946.
Durcansky, Ferdinand. The international asp zct of the Slovak question.
New York: Slovak Liberation Committee, 1954.
Jakobson. R. Slavic languages. New York: Columbia University Press,
1955.
Slovak Action Committee, Slovak National Council in London, Slovak
League of America and Canadian Slovak League of Canada.
Memorandum presented to the Peace Conference concerning
the rationality of existence of Czecho-Slovakia. Paris: 1946.
Th e Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact. (Chi cago) : The Slovak Catholic
Federation of America, 1934.
Stewart, John F. Slovakia, its people and right to sovereign independence and freedom. Information leaflets, No. 7. Edinburgh: Scottish
League for European Fre<>dom, n. d.
PERIODICALS AND ARTICLES
"Azda takto," Ncistup (Nove.' llber 1, 1933).
ceskoslovensko a na.se zahrar,;i:i, XV, No. 4-5 (April-May, 1935).
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction
�SLOVAKIA
133
by Jiri Hoetzl and V. Joachim. American Association for International Conciliation, Publications, No. 179) (October, 1922).
culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v cSR", Bratstvo (May 23, 1951).
Falk, Karl. "Strife in Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV
(March 15, 1938).
Hlinka, Andrej. "Protestujeme", Slovak (December 22, 1921). "Komu
osozi cenzura?", Zem, III, No. 9 (May 5, 1937).
Machacek, Pavel "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske l'udove noviny, (August
10, 1923).
"Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom", Slovak, (August 27, 1933).
"Nerovny boj", Nastup (November 1, 1933) .
"Neustale habanie Slovaka", Slovak (August 27, 1933).
" O cenzure", Slovak (May 16, 1934).
"Pracuje cenzura pre stat alebo pre politicke strany?", Slovak (September 15, 1933).
"Preco nas cenzurovali", Slovak (April 29, 1934).
"150 rocna cenzura rakuska platna este aj v republike", Slovak (June
11, 1933).
Slovak (June 11, 1933).
Slovak (September 15, 1933).
Slovak (January 26, 1934).
Slovak (June 13, 1934).
Taylor, Paul B. "Partition of Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports,
(November 15, 1938).
- "Germany's expansion in Eastern Europe", Foreign Policy Reports,
XV (May 15, 1939).
Tisk a novinai'i, XII, No. 5 (1938).
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka Snemovna.
Tisky. Years: 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924. 1925, 1926, 1929, 1930, 1934,
1935.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Years: 1920, 1922,
1923, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1~37.
THESIS
Woytko, Sister Mary Gabrielle, 0.P. Slovakia's road to statehood.
A Study of the efforts of Slovakia to secure national independence.
Thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Duquesne University
as a thesis under the title "A study of the efforts of Slovakia to
secure national independence" in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. (Published by John
Lach, 1957).
�
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
93
CENSORSHIP POLICIES IN CZECHO-SLOVAKIA
1918-1938
WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON SLOVAKIA
Eugene Urban
ABSTRACT
By means of clever propaganda, the Czecho-Slovak Republic became known as an exemplary democratic State
and the ethnic groups living within her boundaries were enjoying a personal, cultural, political and economic freedom.
But the reality was exactly the opposite. The CzechoSlovak Republic was nothing but a big concentration camp
for four million Slovaks, three and half million Germans,
seven hundred thousand Ukrainians, six hundred thousand
Magyars, one hundred fifty thousand Poles, etc., the Czechs
enjoying the privileged position of guards.
The real objective of the Czecho-Slovak Republic was
to deprive the different ethnic groups of their national
identity and, at their expense, to enlarge herself to the point
of becoming a power among the others of Europe.
The Slovaks, a very nationally selfconscious group, differing from the Czechs in language, traditions, culture, customs, and character, were guaranteed 1918 that the new Republic would be a confederation of two States: the Slovak and
the Czech. But the Czechs failed to keep their promises and
pacts and instead they treated Slovakia as a colony.
One of the weapons used to suppress the desire of the
Slovaks to be again a free and independent nation was the
censorship of the press, the most effective medium of communication. The aim was to blot out all remembrance of
Slovqk historical traditions, and to suppress the individuality
and evidence of an oid cultural nation in the very heart.
of Europe - a nation which has made its contributions to
the building up of Western Christian culture and civilization.
And, although the Czecho-Slovak Constitution had guaranteed freedom of the press, several laws were later enacted
to make censorship legal. But the Slovaks defended them-
94
SLOVAKIA
selves as well as they could in Parliament and with "underground" means of communication.
Czecho-Slovak Laws Concerning Freedom of Press, Speech,
and Association. Theory and Practice
The freedoms of press and association in the CzechoSlovak Republic were guaranteed in paragraph 113, (1) of
the Constitution accepted by the Revolutionary National
Assembly on the 29th of February, 1920:
Freedom of the press as well as the right to assemble peaceably
and without arms and to form associations is guaranteed. It is therefore in principle inadmissible to place the press under preliminary
censorship.I
Paragraph 117 guaranteed the freedom of expression
of opinion:
Every person may within the limits of the law express his or h er
opinion by word, in writing, in print, by picture, etc. The same applies
to legal persons within the limits of their competence. No one shall
suffer in the ,sphere of his work or emloyment for excercising this
right.2
According to these articles of the C o n s t i t u t i o n,
Czecho-Slovakia had no press law of its own. The press was
supposed to be free of Government interference and to
serve the genuine interests of the various ethnical groups
living in Czecho-Slovakia. It was supposed, also, that they
would be free to assemble in political, cultural, religious,
economical, etc. organizations and to secure through them
their rights.
Except for the Czechs, all other ethnical groups were
integrated in Czecho-Slovakia without being given opportunity to express their will freely.
With regard to the Slovaks, the Constitution was in
direct contradiction to the spirit and letter of the Cleveland and Pjttsburgh Pacts signed by the Slovaks and Czechs
in Cleveland, Ohio, October 5, 1915 and in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 30, 1918. 3 This latter was signed moreover
by President Tomas G. Masaryk. According to these two
pacts, Czecho-Slovakia was supposed to be a federation of
both the Slovak and the Czech States. 4
But these pacts were not included in the Constitution.
SLOVAKIA
!)5
The representatives for Slovakia who voted in Parliament for
the acceptance of this anti-Slovak Constitution were not elected by the people, but appointed by the Czecho-Slovak National Council in Prague from a minority group advocating
integration with the Czech nation.
The Constitution was in flagrant contradiction to the
spirit and the principles on which Czecho-Slovakia had been
created. In the first years of her existence, the discontent
of the Slovaks and of the other minorities with Czech imperialism and centralism early started to manifest itself, and
this particularly in the periodical press and at the meetings of
the political parties. The Czechs did not delay in their retaliation. They replaced the guarantees of paragraph 113 of
the Constitution with a series of laws by which the freedom
of the press was practically nullified. Not having a press law
of their own, the Czech majority in the Prague Parliament
made use of the old Austrian press law No. 119/ 1873 (May
23) and No. 142/ 1868 (October 15) of the Austrian Code,
and the Hungarian law No. XIV /1914 to suppress freedom
of the press. These were the oppressive laws of the old
Au.stro-Hungarian regime against which both Slovaks and
Czechs fought in the Parliaments of Vienna and Budapest.
It has been said repeatedly that Czecho-Slovakia was created
to liberate the Czechs and Slovaks from the Austro-Hungarian yoke. It is an ironic fact that Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk,
the first President of Czecho-Slovakia, who as deputy for
Bohemia, had condemned these laws in the Parliament of
Vienna, now signed and approved them as the laws of the
land, as law No 50/1923 (March 19), paragraph 34.5
The co-founder of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and her
second President, Dr. Eduard Benes, who was also theoretically a defender of the freedom of the press, also signed
law No. 50/1923.
The same law No. 50/ 1923 provided for the defense
of the Republic, and paragraph 34 stipulated the conditions under which the publication of periodicals might
be prohibited.
Law No. 3006 was drawn up on April 14, 1920; it was later
supplemented by law No. 125/ 1933 (July 10)7, according to
which the State's Security Bureau, without a judicial order
could demand the c o n f i s c a t i o n and opening of letters
96
SLOVAKIA
and other items transported by mail. It could prohibit
public meetings and it could impose special conditions
upon the activities of associations or prohibit them. Paragraph 10 was concerned with the press. The State's
Security Bureau could limit or impose special conditions for
the publication and distribution of periodicals, or prohibit
their publication. It could order the editor of a periodical to
present, two hours before its publication, copies for preventive censorship. The same Bureau could put under surveillance or prohibit the activities of printing shops, of distributing companies, and of press agencies. It could also prohibit possession of printing presses and other means of reproducing writings and illustrations by private persons.
Law No. 50/1923, for the defense of the Republic, was
enacted in a period when Czecho-Slovakia was fully recognized and her existence insured by International Peace
Treaties. This law was not addressed against her enemies
from abroad, but to deal with the growing dissatisfaction
from inside. Especially in Slovakia the discontent was alarming. The fact that the Czechs violated the Pacts of Cleveland
and Pittsburgh were the most powerful reasons for this
discontent.
Law 50/1923 was enacted in order to give the Czechs
a weapon to terrorize the dissatisfied Slovaks and the other
minorities. It fixed the penalty for military treason, for violation of State secrets, for offence to the President of the
Republic, for any challenge to commit penal acts or not to
fulfill legal obligations, for approving the crime, for associating against the State, for the spread of false reports, etc. All
the paragraphs of this law were appliable also to the periodical press.
Directly concerned with the periodical press was paragraph 34 of this law. It gave the Government's ooreaus
power to prohibit the publication of periodicals. The period of suspension of publication was established as one
month for periodicals published at least five times a week,
two months for those published at least three times a week,
and six months for those purlished less than this.
But this law seemed not to be strict enough for the
Czech Government. Ten years larer, law No. 50/1923 was
completed and changed by the law No. 124/ 1933 (July 10).8
This new law extended the list of "crimes and offences"
SLOVAKIA
97
for which the publication of a periodical could be suspended and gave the Government the right to enlarge the validity
of paragraph 34 by a simple government decree. The suspension period of periodicals was enlarged from one to
three months and from two to six months.
Not even that was enough for the Government of CzechoSlovakia. The Governmental Decree No. 150/1933 (July
18),9 published ten days later, again increased the number
of paragraphs which could be violated by the press and
added to the number of crimes and offences also the infringements of these laws.
One year later a new law No. 140/ 1934 was drawn up.
(July 10), 10 which changed and completed the law No 50/
1923, the law No. 124/ 1933 and the Government Decree
No. 150/ 1933. The number of possible penal acts was increased again. The Government was empowered to prolong
the validity of these laws for another two years. The distribution of transgressing periodicals could be prohibited in all
stores which sold the products of the State's monopoly (tobacco, stamps, salt, etc.) or in the buildings and stations of
the State owned railways (there were only State owned railways in Czecho-Slovakia). These periodicals could be also
deprived of the right to use special tariffs and of the right
of transportation by mail or by railroads. The same law
compelled all periodicals to publish free, without change
or comment, on their first or second page, by usual types
of letters, and in the largest edition, official declarations
of the President, the Vice-President, the Prime-Minister,
members of the Government, etc., appealing to this law.
A new Government Decree No. 163/ 1934 (July 16) 11
further extended the number of "crimes, offences and infringements" for which the publication of a periodical could
be suspended.
Two other government decrees, No. 157 / 1935 (July
13) 12 and No. 165/ 1937 (July 24) 13 , prolonged the validity
of the paragraph 34 of the law No. 50/ 1923 and the subsequent laws until the 13th July 1939.
Another law, No. 126/ 1933 (July 10) 14 was concerood
with the distribution (col portage) of periodicals. The distribution of periodicals which directly or indirectly subvert
or put blame on the independence, Constitutional unity, the
98
SLOVAKIA
integrity and the democratic and republican form of the
State or the democratic order in the Czecho-Slovak Republiccould be prohibited. This right could also be taken away
from those periodicals which "menace the public peace and
order, especially by publishing false news and news which
distort the truth". The distribution in Czecho-Slovakia of
periodicals published abroad could be also prohibited. It
was prohibited to distribute periodicals in the schools and
in the military quarters. The Regional Office was entitled
to prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in Czecho-Slovakia, while the Ministry of Interior in cooperation
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could prohibit the distribution of periodicals published in foreign countries.
Paragraph II of this law required publication of any
correction asked by a person who felt that the content of
some article published by the periodical was offensive to
him or that information given was untrue.
And finally the law No. 130/ 1936 (May 13)15 was enacted, which completed the previous National Defense laws for
the defense of the Republic. This law established capital punishment for many crimes against law No. 50/ 1923. It also
prohibited the publication of news regarding military treason
if not approved previously by the Ministry of National .
Defense.
All these laws and Government Decrees were climaxed
by • National Defense Law No. 131/ 1936 (May 13)16 for the
defense of the State. This law gave the Government absolute
power in a national emergency to suspend all laws, all
rights and liberties. It gave the Government the right to
censor the press, films, telegrams, telephone conversations,
letters, packages sent by mail, phonographs records, etc. It
established preventive censorship and gave the State's Security Bureau the power to prohibit the publication and distribution of periodicals. The importation of periodicals from abro.ad ·could be also prohibited. The law provided for the
establishment of a commission which would direct and carry
out the censorship policy.
The Government was given in fact dictatorial powers:
and this law was generally considered as the last nail in
the coffin of democracy in Czecho-Slovakia.
SLOVAKIA
99
Objectives and Methods of Czechoslovak
Censorship Policies
From the analysis of censored material it is possible to
learn much about the objectives pursued by the Czech Government in the case of Slovakia.
Previous mention has been made of the profound antagonism developed between the Slovaks and Czechs as a result
of the Czech violation of the Cleveland and Pittsburgh pacts.
The Czech wanted to denationalize the Slovaks by forcing
them to accept the false claim that Slovaks are Czechs and
that the Slovak language is a Czech dialect. To obtain this
aim, the Czechs made use of various means. They created a
wave of terrorism, using the armed forces, police, gendarmery and the C z e ch national organizations, especially
"Sokol" known for both its atheism and chauvinism. They
also sent hundreds of thousands of Czech teachers and Czech
Government officials into Slovakia, thereby forcing the Slovaks, who were denied jobs in their own country, to emigrate
because of hunger and unemployment.
They further contributed to the economic impaverishrnent of Slovakia by dismantling its heavy industry and transporting the productive machinery to Bohemia. In this way
production was stopped and the enterprises were forced to
dose. Many factory buildings were purposely demolished
.and many mines flooded.17 The steel, chemica:l, glass and
leather industries suffered most cruelly. When the workers,
deprived of their jobs demonstrated to prevent the dismantling of the factories and machinery, the Czech soldiers and
the gendarmery killed many of them. 18 In the period from
1918 to 1932, 261 enterprises were closed down in Slovakia.
From 1933 to 1937 another 425 enterprises were dismantled,
bringing the total number to 686. 19
Meanwhile, new industries were founded in Bohemia
which logically belonged in Slovakia, since Slovakia provided the raw materials used in them.20
The transportation tariffs in Slovakia were about 40 percent higher than in Bohemia and Moravia. Consequently the
Slovak coal was more expensive than coal imported from
Bohemia. 21
Further discrimination was manifest in the field of housing construction. 22
100
SLOVAKIA
From 1921 to 1923 Slovakia received only 6 per cent
of the State's subsidies for the unemployed, although the
unemployment in Slovakia was higher than in Bohemia. 23
From the sum assigned by the Government for the construction and maintenance of schools of higher education and
Universities, Slovakia received 10 per cent, while the educational institutions in Slovakia were to be built up almost
entirely. 24 The result: Slovakia had only one incomplete University and no Polytechnical Institute, while the Czechs had
several, and the German minority had two Universities and
two Polytechnical Institutes. Further, the Slovak University
was practically a Czech University, because the professors
named by the Government were all Czechs.
Salaries for the Slovaks were about 20 per cent lower
than for the Czechs. While Slovakia abounded in natural
resources, especially for the production of energy, the petroleum lamp was the usual source of light. The combined
savings of five Slovak citizens were equal to the savings of
a single Czech.
Czech capital absorbed whatever Slovak industry still
remained after its dismantling. Slovak banks were engulfed
by Czech banks, and foreign capital was allowed to supplant
the remaining Slovak capital. 25
When agrarian reform was inaugurated in Slovakia, only
21 per cent of the land was sold to Slovak peasants, while
the rest was distributed free to the Czechs. 26 The discrimination against Slovak peasants in transportation tariffs
and taxes resulted in frequent strikes. Instead of offering
to improve their desperate condition, the Government gave
the order to fire at the strikers.27 Their hopeless situation
led them to emigrate in large numbers to the U.S.A., Canada,
Argentina, France, Germany and Belgiurn. 28
Slovakia was treated like a colony by the Czechs. They
regarded Slovakia only as an object of exploitation, a reservoir of cheap labor and a market for the products of Czech
industries. The Czech Government aimed to keep Slovakia
as an underdeveloped agricultural country. 29 Practically all
the administrative positions in Slovakia were filled by Czechs,
whose salaries also were double those of the Slovaks. 30
In Slovakia political oppression worked hand in hand
with economic injustice.
Aware of Czech chauvinism, the Slovaks began early
SLOVAKIA
\'yd»od1 denne ~rem pondelk.a
Zdkladafel' a YO!ICA ; Andrei ffllnka
101
Br611slava,. slreda 6. m11e. t9H
1Grecki povsfalci chysfaju illok na Affleny
Rozvral na Balk6ne, alebo vffllZSlvo greckel vl6dy - Bulbarsko
vyslela voJsko na grkke brank:e
·• •11>1 ••• ~-••U ,.....,n,&aJ-.. ,.,,..,., ..
~i,---iol,f
. .•• ~ ~ - : . • ~ ,•
:'"
.:.:.•\.:=:
tf~i~~l~~t;~~~
~fiff;[f~!~1f[~tt¥.Jlf§ l{if;}~t~¥.K~~
The whitewashed newspapers had to be presented in a new form: A
corrected issue was printed after the confiscation
to organize politically. The great Slovak patriot Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka founded the Catholic and nationalist Slovak People's
Party. Its program aimed at autonomy for Slovakia in accordance with the decrees of the Pittsburgh Pact (1918). The
Protestant leader, poet, and writer, Rev. Martin Razus, restored the Slovak National Party. In order to hinder Slovak
political association, the Czechs established branches of
their own parties in Slovakia. By means of political intrigue
and corruption they attained a measure of success, but the
majority of Slovaks resolutely opposed them. Because of
102
SLOVAKIA
the forced intergration of Slovakia with Bohemia, and the
denial of Slovakia's right to self-determination, the fiftyfive Slovak deputies were invariably outvoted by the Czech
majority in the Prague Parliament.
The Czechs employed terrorist tactics also against Slovak political parties, imposing on them a relentless censorship of the press and disruption of their public meetings.
By such means they strove to impede direct communication
between the Slovak people and their political leaders.
The press was a high-powered tool in the hands of the
Slovak political parties. It introduced new ideas, it taught the
people to recognize and support their own national interest,
it pointed out the injustices committed against the Slovak
nation by the Government and it suggested ways to remedy
the situation. Public meetings served the same purpose, demonstrating by enthusiastic attendance the growing strength
of the Slovak nation.
Consequently, public meetings were dissolved by government agents whenever the speaker criticized the government, and troops and police were ordered to charge against
the protesting Slovaks. Many Slovaks were killed and wounded by Czech bullets.
The censor deleted from the press every criticism of
Government officials and legislative bodies, in order to cover
their misdeeds and keep the people uninformed. The second
purpose was to hinder opposition parties from communicating with their readers and voters.
In the hope of keeping such ideas in the background and
forcing on the Slovaks the false notion of a "Czechoslovak
nation and people", the Czech censor confiscated articles
dealing with Slovakia's national identity and its right to
self determination.
The Czech determination to eradicate religion from Slovak public life must remain under cover, hence the censor
suppressed all articles and reports of the desecration of
churches by the Czechs and the removal of crosses from
schools.
In the eyes of the Czechs it was a most serious crime
for the Slovak press to publicize the struggle of the Slovak
people for autonomy, for the right to govern themselves, to
run their own schools; in short, to enjoy all the rights of
nationhood belonging to them as a nation. The Czechs seem
SLOVAKIA
103
to have naively thought that without the press to remind
them of their rights the Slovaks would drop the issue.
The Slovaks were not allowed to read reports on CzechoSlovakia in press. The Czech Government feared that this
would more profoundly motiviate their political aspirations.
Practically all the statements and resolutions of the
Slovak political parties were censored in order to stifle
opposition and prevent the natural political development of
the Slovak nation.
Reports of the activity of Slovak organizations in the
United States of America were yet another object of the
censor's displeasure, because these organizations were strongly in favor of autonomy for Slovakia.
The two presidents of Czecho-Slovakia, Masaryk and
Bene~, were unassailable in the press. The slightest criticism,
whether by Czechs or by Slovaks, was taboo and automatically censored out. A legend was built up around these two
men, making them untouchable as if they were the apex of
perfection. To perpetuate it no criticism of their many human
foibles and moral lapses was tolerated.
The real objective of Czech cenzorship was to suppress
the facts of Slovak history with their underlying appeal to
self-respect and to strike out these glorious moments of the
past which could fortify the Slovak political and national
fight for the realization of their ideal of freedom and independence.
Censorship was thorough. It made impossible any attempt by the Slovaks and other minority groups to charge
the Czech government with undemocratic practices. Meanwhile the Czechs were using it to create a "great Czech
nation" at the expense of the other ethnic groups living in
Czecho-Slovakia and disregarding their right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness. Their ultimate goal was to
achieve a dominant position among the small States in Central Europe.
In a word, Czech censorship was a tool of Czech imperialism and its faithful servant. It was the ruthless Czech
antidote to the self-determination and national development
of the Slovak nation and the other minorities in the CzechoSlovak Republic. As such, Czech censorship was diametrically opposed to the principles of democracy, freedom, and
human progress.
104
SLOVAKIA
"Authority is conservative ... freedom is progressive .. .
conflict between the two is inevitable", says Lucy Maynard
Salmon, 31 in reference to freedom of the press.
Since Czech censorship was directed against human
progress, freedom, and democracy, the means it employed
could only have been wicked. It stopped at nothing to attain
its objectives. Nothing was immoral if it served the Czech
goal of domination.
Czech post office and railway employees often seized
entire editions of the opposition's periodicals and destroyed
them. Soldiers were often ordered to raid newspaper and
party offices to confiscate mailing lists and manuscripts.
This happened in Trnava, Leopoldov, Bratislava, and elsewhere. Sometimes the soldiers reduced the place to shambles. Consequently, readers in the capital city itself were
often deprived of their papers. Karol Sidor reported in the
March 22, 1919 issue of the Slovak:
" Orders have been given (,b y Czech officials) to destroy the
SLOVAK. Revorts have been pouring in from all parts of Slovakia
that the SLOVAK, ofl!!c!al PU!bl!cation of the Slovak 'People's Party,
has been seized by scoundrels and its sale and dlstriburtion prohibited."32
Kon~tantin Culen wrote:
"In the early yea,rs the SLOVAK was subjected to as many as
three censorsihips: political, military, and economic. Some issues
of the newspaper ,bore the inscription, "Thrice censored and corrected
edition". Even these multi-censored copies were sometimes thrown
out of trains en route by Czech mailmen. Slovak employees who
dared to subscribe to the Sl.lOVAK endangered their livelihood. And
when even this did not dauRt them, they were personally terrorized by the police and government of!lclals .33
Oftentimes newspapers were deprived of the right of
distribution (colportage). Post offices were instructed to
refuse money orders sent to the opposition newspapers.
Persons who subscribed to these newspapers were harassed
and many were dismissed from government jobs. 34
Court action was taken against editors of newspapers
which printed articles unwelcome to the censor. The editors
111.sually assumed responsibility for unsigned articles; hence,
many of them were in and out of jail.
In a censored article entitled "We protest" Msgr. Andrej
Hlinka wrote these bitter words:
SLOVAKIA
105
"We a re involved in doz ens, even hundreds of cour-t ca-ses. Hereafter I will assume full responsibility for every news article, whether
written by the editor or by Paul or Saul. J will appear before the
judge, I will answer the charges. And when I have been deprived
of freedom, when the iron door of my prison has dosed behind me,
when I am locked up and begin to burn like an expiatory candle on
the a ltar of the fa,therl and, then I will charge you, friends, deputies.
and leaders of the P eople's Party: •F ollow me! Let each of you
shoulder r esoonsibility for one, two, ten articles, an d all of us will
become involved with the courts. But no. I am wrong. Let us not get
so involved. Not of our own volition will we become entangled with
the courts. We will yield only to brutal compulsion. You Czechs will
have to drag us into the courts.
And when my right hand has become still and my mortal remains
have decomposed, I tell you that a great line will form behind me,
eager as I for the glory that is sure to follow.
7ou cannot silence us. You can only massacre us. But one tiling
I ask: Do not go on deceiving the world that you are our brothers
tsons of the same nation). Never will we consent to be Czechos lovaks ... Slova kia is ours an d we will defend our country against
you as we defended it against the Magyars. The more you incriminate
ns, the more you imprison us, the more forcef ully will we fight
against you."
As the representative and chairman of the People's
Party, Msgr. Andrej Hlinka spoke out boldly on this subject
in Parliament. In June 1922, in the debate arising from his
interpellation No. 3584 on the raid of the offices of the
Slovak and Eudove noviny, he described the attack as initiated and engineered by government agents. Not only did
the assailants wreck office equipment and furniture and
destroy books, but they were aided in their orgy of destruction by the police, who should have been maintaining order.
The chief of police of Bratislava, Dr. Slavicek, a Czech,
declared that he had been unable to check the raid because
the majority of his men were hostile to the Slovak People's
Party. Andrej Hlinka rightly demanded to know when the
Slovaks might expect to have the protection of law and
order. 35
Karol Sidor described the demolition and plundering of
the offices of the Slovak as follows:
On :!\fay 25, 1922 a huge rally was orga nized in Bratislava -to protest.
Several Slovak legiona ries and Slovak university students were
present. At one 'POint a Czech speaker railed against the SLOVAK.
dem <tndlnr; that it be placed under the strictest censorship. An aroused
Slovak legionary shouted: "Your aim is to cripple the Catholic press;
you would do better to suppress your own anti-Catholic and antiSlovak press." The legionary paid for these words with a cruel beating ...
A Slovak university student r eceived th e same treatment, bis
106
SLOVAKIA
clothes torn and covered with blood, after he had called out to an
abusive Czech speaker, "Please, talk to us in Slovak!" ...
·The speeches continued until 12: 30 p.m. At 1: 00 p.m. the first
group of demonstrators appeared in front of the editorial offices or
the SLOV.AK . . . Some 1,500 Czech legionaries escorted the demonstrators. Awaiting them was a group of 150-200 men and women who
had assembled from the villages to defend SLOVAK property. A
fight ensued, but the Czech legionaries with the aid of some 10(}
policemen, invaded the editorial offices and broke tables and chairs,
flung books, bound journals, manuscripts etc. out the windows.
(Czech) legionaries piled •the items into ca,r s and drove away.
Other (Czech) legionaries r aided the ,SLOV.AK's administrative
offices and worked havoc there also. They carried off valuaibles, including shares and mailing lists. The yard outside ,w as littered with
papers.
These raids were permitted, even abetted by the police, who together with the legionaries received praise and commendation in the
Czech press for their acts of des,truction.36
During the night of March 31, 1920, a certain Czech
army major Ludevit Palounek by name, placed a bomb in the
Lev printery in Ruzomberok in the hope of destroying the
voice of the People's Party and its organ of free discussion. 37
Even the mails were misused: derisive pamphlets were
inserted in the bundles of the Slovak, 38 as they were being
shipped to their destination.
With the growing tension in the relations between the·
Slovaks and Czechs, the censorship became more and more
despotic. After 1932, there were almost daily confiscations
of the Slovak press.
The censor received his instructions from the Ministry
of the Interior. If the censor found in the piece examined
something he considered inadmissible, he deleted it; the·
Attorney General then ordered the police to confiscate the
publication. The police seized the entire edition and burned
it. The publishing house or the editors could make an appeal
in court, or a board of representatives in Parliament could
protest to the Minister of the Interior, or of Justice, or both.
If the censorship was found unfair, the editors or publishers
could demand reimbursement for damages. But in most
cases they lost the appeal.
After confiscation, a newspaper, book, or journal was
printed in a new edition with the censored areas left blank.
It bore the inscription "Following confiscation, a new and
corrected edition" in the upper left corner of the front page
of the periodical, or on the cover of the book.
SLOVAKIA
107
After Slovakia achieved independence on March 14,
1939, government officials found in the archives of the
Attorney General confidential orders issued by the Czech
Government with instructions to the censor as to how many
times a week certain newspapers were to be confiscated.
After a stated number of confiscations, the periodical could
be suspended for three or six months, and after repeated
confiscations, it could be suspended indefinitely at the discretion of the censor. This was a most powerful weapon in
the hands of the Government, and it was effectively used
during the visit of President Edward Benes in Slovakia in
1933. Under the pretex of repeated confiscations, the newspapers Slovak, Slovenska pravda, Narodne noviny and the
political review Nastup were suspended, so as to prevent
any criticism of Benes's speeches in the press. It was on
this visit that he angered the Slovaks by declaring that they
must become Czechs.
The actions of the censor were despotic because he knew
that the Government would not fail to support him. The
Slovak and Slovenska pravda were confiscated almost every
day. The humoristic weeklies Osa and Kocur were also confiscated, along with the cultural monthlies Pero , Slovenske
pohl'ady and Elan. Almanacs, books, poetry collections, and
placards were not exempt. Sometimes periodicals were confiscated because of articles reprinted from other non-censored newspapers. For example a periodical was confiscated
because it contained a poem originally published in the
Slovak-American almanac Jednota. An editorial containing
quotations from a book by President Thomas G. Masaryk
was also confiscated. An article by the great Slovak writer,
Svatozar Hurban Vajansky, published in Hungary at the
~md of the 19th century, was censored when reprinted in
Slovak after World War I. Newspapers were confiscated for
using the hyphen in the name of the Republic "CzechoSlovakia" although early peace treaties carry the name in
this form. 39
On several specific occasions the Czechs declared that
it would be dangerous for the future of the Republic if freedom of speech and press were permitted in Slovakia.40
With confiscation being an almost daily occurence,
periodicals suffered very heavy losses. It is pertinent to
point out that while the Czech party press subsisted on
SLOVAKIA
108
government funds, the Slovak press depended entirely upon
the voluntary support of party members, together with subscription fees. The Slovak people understood perfectly the
great importance of the press and supported it generously.
Only in this way was the Slovak opposition press able to
survive such continuous economic strangulation by the Czech
Government.
Characteristic of the situation are words like the following: " . .. we must perforce decline to publish original articles on topics banned by the government and must limit ourselves to those which have already passed the censor." 41
This is not all. When Slovak representatives protested
in Parliament against the policies of the Government and
its agencies, their speeches in Parliament were censored
and denied publication in the parliamentary record Tisky
Poslaneck e Snemovny Nar odniho Shromazdeni
Ceskoslovensk e. The bimonthly Nastup wrote:
Republiky
" Instead of aick now ledging the human righ t to fr eedom of di scussion, th e Czechs pr oh ibited a utonomist meetings a nd r estricted
their publications. Now they have resorted to oth er meas ures.
"Th e P r esi de nt of th e Senate su ppressed a portion of Dr . Joseph
Buday's speech i n ·P a rlia men t. The Presidents of both C hambers of
Parl iamen t confiscated a major portion of the statement pr esented
by th e representatives of the Slovak People's Party.
"An exten ded (95 pages) and repo r tedly objective in ter pellation
of th e r epresentatives of the Slovak People's Par ty was als o censored by the Presidents of Par liament and denied publicati on.
" T his action was t a ken at a time w h en press censorshi p was so
stringent that no politician or political party could f r eely and publicly express a dissenting opinion as far as the Government was concerned.
"Ju Slovakia the natio na li st press is pres ently s ubjected to continuous sharp criticism a nd s uppression .. . In view of this we mus t
behold with a s tonishment the a d ditional measures taken in Parlia m ent
·to silence the autonomists who are already so effectively silenced by
press cens orship . Meanwhile •Slova k centr alists (i.e., Czech p a r tisans )
without hindrance flood Slovakia wit h their uncensored public_ations ."42
The newspaper Nar odne Noviny reported in its November 27, 1936 issue:
Statistics show that the number of confiscated publications in Czecho-Slovakia for the given years was as follows~
1929
1930
1934
Newspapers and periodicals ______ 3,370
Books ___ ______________ __________ 918
2,533
2,138
846
Confiscations
718
109
SLOVAKIA
Foreign books and periodicals _____ 255
Total ______ ________ 4,543
183
3,434
329
3,313
Of these confiscations, 60 to 70% involved Slovak books
and periodicals.
Censorship of Books
Writing under the pseudonym Andrej Zarnov, a student
at the University of Bratislava, named Frantisek Subik, made
his literary debut in 1925 with the publication of a book of
poems which already then showed the promise that was to
make him a leading Slovak poet. The title of the book was
Straz pri Morave (Sentry at the Morava River) . Finding it
too nationalistic, the censor ordered the entire edition confiscated and had it burned at police headquarters.
The representatives of the Slovak People's Party challenged this action in the Parliament. They asked the Minister
of the Interior and the Minister of Justice:
1) Whether they were aware of the confiscation of
these poems;
2) Whether they approved;
3) Whether both Ministers were disposed to secure
the validity of the Constitution which guarantees freedom
of the press;
4) Whether they were disposed to take appropriate
disciplinary action against the censor in Bratislava;
5) Whether they were ready to guarantee freedom of
the press in Slovakia equal to that in Bohemia.
Needless to say, the Czech majority refused to discuss
this urgent interpellation in Parliament. 43
On the occasion of Msgr. Andrej Hlinka's seventieth
birthday, Karol Sidor, representative in Parliament and editor
of the Slovak, published his biography, covering the years
1864-1926.
A great admirer and loyal follower of Hlinka, Sidor
presented his hero as the key figure in the Slovak political
and national struggle for freedom and independence.
This 554-page biography suffered 31 deletions totaling
some 295 lines, equal to seven pages of the book. It was
issued with the customary caption on the cover: "Po konfiskacii nove opravene vydanie" (After confiscation a new and
110
SLOVAKIA
corrected edition) and with blankspaces to show where the
censor had disapproved.
The following lines were deleted on pages 368-369,
from Sidor's description of the Czech attack on the meeting
of the Slovak People's Party in Zilina, August 17, 1919:
With draiwn bayonets, soldiers charged upon the people In the
square and scenes of horror ensued. Andrej Hlinka saw hi,s people
struck with rifl e 1butts and carried a,way as prisoners to the barracks.
Women from Kysuce exposed thei,r breasts to the bayonets and
shouted: "Strike here, you curs, and touch not Hlinka ! "
On October 10, 1920 Czech military units once more dispersed a meeting of the Slovak People's Party in Namestovo
and fired into the crowd, killing two Slovak peasants and
seriously wounding ten. On page 442 the description of this
savage act was deleted:
Bedfich Danek, a Czech lieutenant, scornfully asked a young
man weeping over the body of his slain father: "Why do you weep?
It ,w as Hlinka who killed him!" Namestovo came to ,be regarded a-s
a second Cernova.
The Czech press and the Government Press Agency CTK
wished to place the blame for this bloodshed on Hlinka. They
charged Hlinka with inciting the Slovaks against the Czechs.
Hlinka answered in the October 16, 1920 issue of the Slovak.
This portion of the article was deleted from the biography:
Yes, I did incite the people. I incited them and will continue
to Incite •them . My very presence incites them. So much so that it
stirs your murky conscience, stained with a ·b rother's blood. I have
incited and will continue to incite them to oppose t:he •b ase t,raud
you perpetrated against •the !Slovak n ation. W,e •w ill rise up to oppose
every injustice.
Why should we not be aroused against you, who seized me a year
ago in the dead of night and held me captive for six months at Mirov,
iBrodek, Podolie, to afford you an opportunity to demoralize and dis•
rupt .Slovakia? Should I have danced to your music when you placed
bombs in our "Lev" printery, •which had •been established with owhard•earned savin~s? I would be a cowardly traitor If I did not raise
my voice, if J did not search for a remedy and seek help.
We have incited and lest we be despised by Slovakia, we will
not stop inciting our people until w,e win autonomy from you.
On page 490 the censor deleted a reference to discrimination against the Slovaks in assigning government jobs:
The •Slovaks were unable to procure even the cheapest loaf or
government bread in Slovakia; (referring to jobs) their applications
were answered with a curt: "Impossible to grant", while t he Czech
people, often without qualification, were given the best paid jobs in
Slovakia.
SLOVAKIA
111
That is how the newspapers SLOVAK, NARODNIE NOVINY, and the
magazine, NASTUP, looked after censorship
A quotation on p. 506 from an "Appeal of the Representatives of the Slovak People's Party to the Minister of the
Interior" in Prague, September 4, 1923, was confiscated:
The authorities spread terror every-where. Civil servants planned the
disruption of meetings by force and public safety agencies did nothing
to -defend the victims; on the contrary, they cooperated with the
agressors. Holle, Nove Zamky, and ,t he riot at Brezova make it clear
as day that groups of assailants were organized to incHe rioting and
to damage private property.
Very heavily censored was the chapter in which Sidor
described Hlinka's arrest at midnight. The occasion was his
return from the Peace Conference in Paris, where he had
delivered to the delegates a Memorandum in which he demanded in the name of the Slovak nation that the Slovaks
be given national and civic freedom and their autonomy
guaranteed. Hlinka's words to one of his chaplains were
censored on page 385.
"Proclaim abroad to the wide world the kind of freedom we
enjoy in Slovakia. They have come to carry me off like a criminal
In the middle of the night when everybody is asleep ...
The press reported that I trembled. On the contrary, I felt like
a lion. I cared not whether they killed me or jailed me. My blood
112
SLOVAKIA
boiled. Indescribable feelings struggled within me. I could not tell
which was stronger: my love for my oppress-ed nation or my contempt of the intruders ... "
Following Hlinka's deportation, an account of the rebellions of the students and citizens of his parish town, Ruzomberok, was variously deleted as on pages 387, 392 and 393.
The description of the terrorism of the Czech soldiers
and employees in Slovakia was censored on page 444:
November 6, 1920 he (Rev. Frantisek Klein) reported in the
SLOVAK that he was traveling by train •with soldiers who insulted
him because he was reading the .SIJOV AK. One of ,them asked in
Czech: "Why doesn't someone kill tH!inka ?"
On pages 458-459 the account of the murderous attack
on Hlinka's life in Krupina, June 12, 1921, by a Czech, and
the insult to which he was subjected in Sahy two days later
by Czech railroadmen was expunged:
The following day, June 13, Hlinka set out with companions to
Sahy to report the Krupina incident to the "Zupan", [)r. Victor
Ravasz. As he was passing through the square a railroadman, named
S<tu~hlik and the school inspector, Bartolom/lj Krpelec, both Czechs,
confronted him with curses, calling him "bandit" and "agitator".
Later at the "zupan's" office, Stuchlik, with 60 co-workers, delivered the following ultimatum: The "zupan" must expel Andrej
iHlinka at once from ,the 1Hont "zupa" or suffer the consequences.
The railroadmen (all Czechs) also declared that they would not
permit Hlinka's train to leave the Sahy station.
·T he "zupan", after appealing to the Ministry in BraJtislava for
instructions, assured Blinka that the culprits in both Krupina and
Sahy •w ould ,be penalized as an example to others.
In the a,fternoon IHlinka ,boarded •the train at Sahy. The station
wa,s filled with people, waiting to see the outcome of the contest.
The rallroadmen held to their purpose. After a long while the zupan
arrive6l at ,t he station. The railroadmen demanded that -he order
Hlinka out of the train. Lenghty nego tiations followed. Meanwhile
Hlinka waited patiently within ...
Finally the "zupan" announced that the ,train was about to depart. At that moment a line of railroadmen formed below the windO'W
of Hlinka's compartment. They gave vent to their haitred -b y spitting
at Hlinka, cursing and maligning ·h im until the train moved out oE
sight.
Another incident which occurred in the railroad station
Trencianske Teplice, July 5, 1921, was deleted from page
459:
A Czech in the station, recogmzmg Hlinka, called out, "Hang
Hlinka ! " Andrej IHlinka stepped forward and asked him to identify
himself. The Czech continued to shout, but did not give his name ...
And a few lines further on the same page:
SLOVAKIA
113
Another •Czech took up the cry, shouting, "Hang Hllnka". The
p eople attacked h im, although ,Hlinka- made an effort to calm them.
Mea nwhil e the train arrived and he boarded it ,w ith his secretary
Ramaj . :Bishop Kmeeko a nd tMsgr. Tiso remained in the station, bu t
they were unable to quiet the p eople. Several Czechs were severely
beaten .
Other subjects censored in Sidor's book were: criticism
·o f President Masaryk's anti-Catholic attitude (page 286) ;
daims of job discrimination that while hundreds of thousands
of Czechs were given the best paid jobs in Slovakia, often
without qualification, more than 300,000 Slovaks were forced
to emigrate because of the discrimination against them (pages 345 and 490). Also censored were references to organized Czech terror against the Slovaks, to agression against
Hlinka and his followers, to denial of government protection in the exercise of freedom of speech and association,
and any account of the formation of defense groups of the
Slovak People's Party for the protection of its meetings
.against Czech terrorists. Among the deletions were several
lines about the general anti-Catholic attitude of the Czech
people (page 471).
Another censored book was Vo vazeni, written by a
young editor of the Slovak, Alexander Mach. 46 The author
had been jailed on a charge of conspiracy with Professor Dr.
Vojtech Tuka against the integrity of Czecho-Slovakia. After
serving part of the sentence, he was exonerated from complicity in the "plot" and released. A year later he published his
book about his term in prison. In a manifestly unjust trial
Dr. Vojtech Tuka was sentenced to 15 years and liberated
after 10 years, when Slovakia won her autonomy on October
·6, 1938.
From Mach's book the censor confiscated some 520 lines, totaling 13 pages, or 7 per cent of the 198 pages of the
book. Unfortunately, I do not know of any uncensored copy
of the book and can therefore quote nothing from it.
To illustrate the mental climate in which the author
wrote his book, I will cite some lines of his epilogue "Po
roku" (After one year):
I was in prisoa on charges which cannot at present be freely and
sincerely dis cussed. In preparing this accoun t I was hemmed in by
restrairut lest I again find myself rb ehind prison bars . I was obliged
to limit my remarks lest the censor fo11bid their publication. Difficulties in the selection of material abounded. It was not easy for
me to decide what to eliminate, what to omit ... Thus as I prepared
114
SLOVAKIA
my narrative rhe penal code was before me. Yet I have remained
completely frank; I did not change what I had •w ritten as a prisoner.
I preferred only .to eliminate the sensitive issues ...
Another example of the censorship of books is furnished by the interpellation presented in the Prague Parliament
by the representative Msgr. Dr. Jozef Tiso, concerning the
confiscation of the Kalendar Hlinkovej Slovenskej Eudovej
Strany na rok 1934 (Almanac of the Hlinka's Slovak People's
Party for the year 1934).
Two articles which appeared over the name of Msgr.
Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Party, were confiscated. In
these articles Hlinka warned the Czechs to stop persecuting
the Slovaks for claiming autonomy. Even Czech authors,
whom Hlinka quoted to illustrate his articles, were censored.
The title of the first article was "Za ~t'astne Slovensko" (For
a prosperous Slovakia). In the second article "Uprimne slovo o Nitre" (A frank comment on Nitra) Hlinka analyzed the
spontaneous explosion of Slovak discontent at the festivities
commemorating the 1,l00th anniversary of the first Christian church on Slovak territory, created in Nitra by Prince
Pribina in about 831 A. D. It was, Hlinka declared, a display
of resistance to the Prague Government, intent on exploiting these eminently Slovak festivities for their own purposes. Andrej Hlinka, who had been refused the right to speak
on the program, was carried up to the stage and backed by
his 200,000 followers, he read a statement in which he
solemnly affirmed Slovakia's adherence to its eleven hundred
years-old Christian traditions and proclaimed Slovakia's right
to territorial sovereignity.
This demonstration of outraged Slovak national pride
was observed by foreign diplomats and news reporters, who
were thus witnesses of the true will of the Slovak nation to
be free and the chauvinistic aim of the Czechs as expressed
in the Ottuv Obchodni Slovnik (Otta's Commercial Dictionary, 1921) volume 2, page 1217: "Slovakia shall be a colony
to us. It is an error to suppose that a colony cannot have
common frontiers with the mother country. An example of
this is Russia and Siberia."
Several lines from a poem by Ignac Grebac Orlov were·
also censored. Partially censored was the article entitled "Narodna jednota" (National unity), by Dr. Jozef Tiso on the·
necessity of national unity for the Slovaks. .
SLOVAKIA
115
From the article "K sedemdesiatke Andreja Hlinku"
(On the 70th anniversary of Andrej Hlinka) by Karol Sidor
this paragraph was deleted:
What occured in 11919, ,w hen 'Hlinka and other Slovak leaders
were jailed, the ISiLOVAK suspended, and terrorism unleashed everywhere, was now repeated on a larger scale.
In .September 193131 the 1SIJOVAK was suspended -f or 3 months ...
lik,ewise the .S'.liOVAiK TYZDENNIK (1Slovak Weekly) and the T!AT·•RA:N,SKY SLOVAK (Tatra Slovak). We were left without a voice ...
We were not permitted to w,rite, the people had nothing to read. And
the prisons were daily being filled with objectors. Hundreds of Slovaks were suJbjected ,to investigations about their participation In the
Nitra festivities ...
Dr. Karol Mederly's article "Obec a politika" (Community and politics) was also confiscated, for its insistence on
the right of the Slovaks to vote according to their conscience.
Pictures of Hlinka carried on the shoulders of University students to the Nitra stage, the procession of 200,000
Slovaks in Nitra, and even articles of comic and satiric content were censored.
The interpellation contains a complete rescript of the
articles confiscated in the almanac. 47
In conclusion the writer would like to mention here
that printed works of other minorities and political parties
were also confiscated by the censor.
CENSORSHIP OF PERIODICALS
The periodicals in Slovakia have a long tradition. The
oldest periodical published on Slovak territory was Schemnitzer N ewszeitung edited in Banska Stiavnica in German,
in 1540-1541. Latin periodicals also had their day.
The first periodical in the Slovak language was Presspurske noviny (Bratislava News - Pressburg is German for
:Bratislava,), published from 1783 to 17 87.
Following World War I, newspapers, reviews, and magazines promised to become more plentiful. This was especially welcome to Slovakia, where publications in the Slovak
language had been prohibited by Hungarian oppressors. Under
the Czecho-Slovak republic the Slovaks were prepared to
-enjoy the democratic freedom promised by the Pittsburgh
.P act and especially freedom of the press, speech, and association. Alas, they soon came to realize that the promises,
116
SLOVAKIA
as far as Slovakia was concerned, were empty words and
nothing more.
In Czecho-Slovakia, the newspapers were usually owned
and operated by political parties. There were very few socalled "independent newspapers". Yet even though labeled
"independent", some of these were nevertheless the tool of
a financial group, a political party or a governmental coalition.
The newspapers in Slovakia were of two kinds: government and so-called opposition.
Under opposition came the publication of the Slovak
People's Party, the Slovak National Party and the Communist
Party. The Hungarian and German minorities had a similar
classification of newspapers.
All these newspapers were characterized by their adherence to an ideology and the effort to propagate it. They
were interested in social and political problems, and they
never evaded any controversial issue. Their influence on the
formation of public opinion was considerable.
The rapid political evolution and maturation of the Slovak nation was due chiefly to the efforts of the political
press of the Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National
Party. The obstacles with the Czech administration plac~d
in their path by means of censorship, economic and political
pressure, by corruption and terrorism, by political trials and
murder in its effort to suppress the Slovak drive for in-dependence, only helped to accelerate and strenghten this
process. In their 20 years of forced cohabitation with the·
Czechs, the Slovaks achieved a rapid political evolution,
thanks to their press and they were thus prepared in the international crisis of 1938-1939 to proceed prudently toward
the realization of their national aspirations.
The press of the opposition encountered paralyzing difficulties in Czecho-Slovakia. In a debate before Parliament
Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, chairman of the Slovak People's Party
declared that under Hungary and Austria, unjustly as they
had been treated, the Slovaks and the Czechs had enjoyed
greater freedom of the press than in the new "brotherly"
State. of Czecho-Slovakia. 48
A resolution issued by the 14th Convention of the Social
Democratic Party in 1922 protested against the practice of
confiscation of the press. 49
SLOVAKIA
117
Jozef Vr ab e c, representative of the Slovak People's
Party, protested against the confiscation of the March 13,
1921 issue of Slovensky krest'ansky socialista, for its article
"Za more, za ocean" (Beyond the Sea, beyond the Ocean). 50
In this article the Czech Government was held responsible
for the emigration of thousands of Slovaks through its policy of job discrimination and its dismantling of Slovak industries.
Slovenske Eudove Noviny was confiscated because it
criticized the discriminatory policy against Slovak construction workers by a Czech construction enterprise, which led
to a bloody fight between the Slovak jobless workers and
the imported Czech workers. The police arrested the Slovaks. 51
In a parliamentary debate on Novembre 24, 1920, representative A. Bobok complained about the "terrible restriction of the press and opinion" in Czecho-Slovakia and
claimed the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. 52
In a debate in the House of Representatives, June 21,
1922 Msgr. Andrej Hlinka declared:
Each issue of the SLOVAK ts censored . . . ,I will show you a
startling example of freedom of the press. Here it is. (He shows censored issues of the ,S1L OVAK, rwith their blank columns). Everything
is censored from t he first word to the last.
That is suppo,sed to be freedom of the -press, freedom to express
an opinion . ..
iSee, here is the S1LOVEN,S,KA. JEIDNOTA ... here, SIJOVENSKA.
POLITl!KA. Here you see the freedom of the press for which I spent
4 years in jail.
Here is 1SlJOViIDNSKA. PRAVDA. Notice what has been deleted.
(He reads): "What Czech statistics s-h ow about •S lovak schools."
And mention of "Teaching the Slovak language" was eradicated.
Such freedom of the press do we enjoy in Slovakia! This has been
going on now since Mairch 25 - we are systematically criticized and
censored. And they tell the world we have freedom of the -press in
this Republic!
In Interpellation No. XXI/4226, April 26, 1923, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek interpellated the Minister
of Justice on the confiscation of the Slovak, April 25, 1923,
because it reprinted the article "Zapredana Orava a Spi§"
(Orava and Spis Betrayed) from the newspaper Denny hlas
(Daily voice) published in Cleveland, Ohio, April 3, 1923. In
this article the Czech diplomat Dr. Karel Pergler, who had
also signed the Pittsburgh Pact (1918), accused the CzechoSlovak Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Edvard Bene~ of
118
SLOVAKIA
having sold to the Poles the Slovak territories of Orava and
Spg for the coal districts of Karvina in Silesia, inhabited
by Poles. 54
The Slovak, December 11, 1923, was censored for declaring inaccurate and false the statement of President Dr. T.
G. Masaryk that the Slovaks and the Czechs were one and
the same nation and that Slovak is a dialect of the Czech
language.
Representative Rev. Pavol Machacek wrote as follows
in the article "Kati sa raduju" (The executioners rejoice) in
the August 10, 1922 issue of Slovenske l'udove noviny:
Heavy -f ines were imposed on the peasants. Financial burdens
forced artisans to close their shops . . . !Government officia1's confiscated articles reprinted from Czech newspapers ... They issued the
directive to destroy us at any cost.
And they succeeded. ·Since the first or Januwry our daily S'LOVAK has been confiscated 45 times and the SLOVENiSIKE Im.DOVE
NOWNY almost as many. Every confiscation meant a loss of 3,5004,000 crowns in damages. In thi-s brief period we were in arrears
1'70,000 crowns. The financial burden became .so greait that the S,J,;{}VAK was forced to cease publication.
In an interpellation to the Minister of Interior, representative Rev. Florian Tomanek declared:
The coalition government is not content to pass a cruel law,
which empowers the Attorney General to confiscate newspapers
before distribution. It did not hesitate to permit the violation of the
secrecy of registered mail in 'Slovakia without a court order. The
Plenipotentiary ordered the confiscation or an Open Letter addre!ised to the !President of the Republic, sent •b y :registered mail from
Americans of .Slovak extraction. ,I ndeed, the Minister, •D r. Kallay, has
empowered not only the post offices, but also the gendarmery and
the police to confiscate letters without notifying the addressee.55
The Slovak in its August 19, 1933 issue complained that
it had been confiscated six times in the previous week. The
only reason it was not seven times is that the paper is issued
only six times a week.
The same paper in its August 26, 1933 issue notes:
Yesterday's SLOVAK carried news of the confiscation of the
TATRA!NSKY SLIOV.AK. But the 1SLIOVAK, SDOVAK TYZDENNIK,
SLOVENS<KA BRAVDA, and the fortnightly tSLOVAK NA STRAZI of
Zilina suffered a similar fate. In the later paper, seven columns were
en<tirely deleted, so that it was issued •with two or its four pages
blank.
In the article56 "Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom" (A misunderstanding between
SLOVAKIA
119
the autonomist press and the censor of Bratislava), the author
-ks- (who is probably Karol Sidor, editor-in-chief of the
Slovak) wrote that in the previous week an issue of the Slovak had been confiscated because it reprinted in the Slovak
language an article about Slovakia written by a Frenchman,
Ebray, and published in the Pester Lloyd, a newspaper permitted in Czecho-Slovakia and available in the coffeehouses
of Bratislava to anybody who could read German.
In a parliamentary debate on the proposal of a new
press law, June 9, 1933, Representative Jozef Sivak declared:
I would venture to assert ,t hat the development and evolution of
d emocracy is best achieved by a ,f ree press ... ,I t is true that article
113 of our Constitution guarantees freedom of the press ... but it is
nothing ,but a pa per guairantee, as are all th e guarantees in this
Republic.
You know that by the Pit tsburgh !Pact the Slovaks were guarantP.ed
autonomy, but again this is only a paper guarantee . . . The feverish
zeal of the censor knows no limits. The Attorney General confiscates
everything. It is not possible in this day and age to w.rite the truth
about Czech discriminrution of the !Slovak laborer, to say anything
about the rights of •Slovak peasants, !Slovak workers, ,S lovak artisans
and shop-keepers. No one is, allowed to criticize the ,government or
individual officers. ·All is censored... even the statements of the
Board of Representatives of the Slovak \People's iParty ...
The following appeared in the article "Neustale habanie Slovaka" (The constant harassment of the Slovak) in its
August 22, 1933 issue:
Readers of the SLOVAK received the !Sunday edition with dismay.
The front page, with six deletions, showed how heavily the hand of
the censor had struck.
On no account are we p ermitted to criticize ithe government. An
article in which Msgr. Andrej Hlinka ,s et forth the significance of
the Nitra centennary celebration on August 13, 1933 and praised the
Slovaks tfor itheir participation in it, was censored. Confiscated also
was an article by 1S enator Andrej Janecek, in which he assumed
responsibility for (his part in) the Nltra episode.
A report on the investigation of several partici pants in the Nltra
festivities was confiscaited, although the government had encouraged
attendance.
Other confiscations were: Part of the report on the fiasco perpetrated by government parties in Nitra who, although a minority in
the district, had convened to protest · the €Vents of August 13, 1933 ; ·
Slav repor ts on •t he Nitra centenary; ·Reflections on the Pittsburgh
Pact.
It is not unusual for us to b e subjected to confiscations - evea
dally. But what the censor did with our !Sunday edition outrageously surpass·e s anything ever attempted before.
Our party will adopt -s uitable measures to defend our consti-
120
SLOVAKIA
t uti onal r igh t to free dom of th e press, denied us by th e " lords" i n
the governm ent. W e will e m ploy a ll possible means to r each on r
read er s.
On its anniversary the Slovak was confiscated for the
editorial "Patnast' rokov Slovaka" (Fifteen years of the Slovak), which conveyed the impressions of its readers on the
reappearance of the Slovak after three months' suspension by
the Attorney General. The same issue was confiscated for
its information about the activities of Americans of Slovak
descent in the United States, a reprint from Osadne hlasy
(Parish News ), a Slovak weekly in Chicago, Illinois, and one
part of an article by a Czech signatary of the Pittsburgh
Pact. 57
Interpellation No. 1193/ IX, November 10, 1937, proffered by representatives Karol Sidor and Dr. Martin Sokol
was motiviated by the confiscation of two articles in Slov enska pravda and Slovak, November 10 and 11, 1937. The title
of the two articles was "Zakony demonstracii". They included a report on the spirited demonstrations of the studets of Bratislava University, demanding the slovakization
of the University, of government bureaus, and of the army
and police in Slovakia, under the slogan "Slovakia for the
Slovaks". It carried an account of the brutal intervention of
Czech police, who severely beat the students with sabres and
clubs. An illustration showing a hand brandishing a club
(used by the police ) was also confiscated. The headline "Demand plebiscite for Slovak autonomy!" was deleted from
the February 10, 1938 issue of the Slovak, but the same line
was left by the censor in the text of the article. Such inconsistencies in the practice of censorship were frequent.
For this reason the Czech journalist Dr. Benes (not the
President Dr. Benes) could declare in the organ of the Union
of Czecho-Slovakia Journalists:
The pr ess is practically ou tlawed in Czechoslovakia . .. a nd fr ee•
dom of the press •has become degenerated by confisca tions .58
Such a statement, naturally, could not have been published in Slovakia.
In an evening discussion at the Czechoslovak National
Council, the Czech editor Jan· Hrabanek declared that the
articles of the Constitution concerning freedom of the press
were not respected, that a permit for printing newspapers
SLOVAKIA
121
was required, that the publication of periodicals was too
often suspended and the right of distribution forfeited on
the basis of a mere suspicion, without any conviction of a
penal act. 59
After 1932, when young Slovak members of government
parties were more attuned to the ideas and attitudes of the
majority of the Slovak nation, the governmental press in the
Slovak language also began to appear with blank pages.
In the May 5, 1939 issue (page 90) of Zem (Soil) a political magazine of young Agrarians, the editor wrote an article
entitled "Komu osozi cenzura?" (Who Benefits from censorship?) Among other things he said:
Newspapers with blank pages ... that is a product of the censor.
The author sees thi.s miscarrriage of his intellectual effort and loses
heart. Readers are cheated by receiving blank newspapers . . . Jn
recent times the censor is busier than ever before. Formerly only
newspapers which habHually pabl!shed a rticles sharply criticizing
the government were censored. These were chiefly the papers of the
opposition. •B ut that is a. thing of the past. Nowadays even the newsp a pers of government pal'ties are censored and they appear now with
the familiar blank spaces.
What was most offensive to the Slovaks was the confiscation of the literary magazine Slovenske Pohl'ady, No.
l0A, 1932, published with the date of October 28, the "Day
of Freedom", the official national festivity of the CzechoSlovak Republic. Slovenske Pohl'ady, founded in 1846, had
never been confiscated before. It had always stood as a
symbol of the independent cultural life of the Slovaks and
was dear to the heart of every Slovak. Why was this revered
non-political periodical censored? Its editor Dr. Stefan Krcmery, submitted to criticism the Czechs in Slovakia, because
they did not read or buy Slovak books and despised Slovak
literature. In the other censored article he reviewed very
favorably a new volume of poems Hlas krvi (The Voice of
blood), published by Andrej Zarnov, author of the confiscated volume of poems Straz pri Morave, mentioned on page 53.
The cultural magazines Pero (Pen), Pramen (Source),
Elan (Impetus) and DAV (The Masses) and the humoristic
periodical Osa (Wasp) and Kocur (Cat) were also confiscated several times.
122
SLOVAKIA
CENSORSHIP OF THE PRESS OF OTHER NATIONALITIES
LIVING IN CZECHO-SLOV AKIA
The Slovak press was not alone in the battle for freedom of the press. Other ethnical groups living in CzechoSlovakia were also hindered in the free expression of ideas.
It is true that the Czech Government was much more lenient
toward the Germans and Magyars, who were favorably situated and could appeal to the German Reich and Hungary for
moral and financial support.
But the case of the Ukrainians living in the territory of
"Subcarpathian Russia" was similar to that of the Slovaks.
By the Peace Treaties of Saint Germain-en-Laye, France, on
October 10, 1919, this territory which had belonged to Hungary before World War I was incorporated in Czecho-Slovakia
as an autonomous entity. Its position in the Czecho-Slovak
Republic was to be that of a federated state. But, as in the
Slovak case, the Czechs failed to honor their obligations and
the Ruthenians were treated as another Czech colony. Its
political and economic exploitation was in open contradiction
to the terms of the St. Germain-en-Laye treaties. The po:..
sition of the Subcarpathian Ruthenians was as hopeless as
that of the Slovaks. But this poor and exploited nation was
also aware of its national origin and of the Czech aims of
domination. Its representatives in the Prague Parliament and
its periodicals followed generally the same line as that of
the Slovaks. They demanded their rights, guaranteed by the
peace treaties, especially the right of national self-determination.
·
The Czech methods of domination in Subcarpathian
Russia were similar to those employed in Slovakia: military
and political terrorism, economic exploitation and impoverishment, political corruption and censorship, combined
with the curtailing of freedom of speech and association.
In Parliament the Ruthenians reacted in the same way
as the Slovaks.
The January. 31, 1926 issue of the newspaper Karpatska
pravda (Carpathian truth), published in Uzgorod, was censor·ed in its editorial "Continuous Oppression" for this statement:
The cup is full to overflowing. ·T he poor people of Subcarpathian
Ruthenia, ruthl essly oppressed ·by the Czech bourgeoisie, suffers cold,
SLOVAKIA
123
unemploy men t, hu nger, pove r ty a nd e ndles·s mis,ery. Eig-h teen years we
h ave lived in "fr ater nal" union with Czecho,S lovak ia, but nothing
h as ·been do ne to improve social cond Hions .. .so
On April 8, 1937 Representative Dr. S. A. Fencik interpellated the Minister of the Interior on the confiscation of
issue No. 216 of Na§ put (Our way ), published in Uzgorod.
The periodical was confiscated on the pretex that the censored article might disturb the public peace. It was entitled
"Voice of a Slovak" and included a quotation from the daily
Slovak, March 19, 1937, stating that the establishment by
Prague of a "Gubernatorial Council" for Subcarpathian Russia is but a surrogate for the autonomy guaranteed by the
Constitution. The article was not confiscated in the Slovak,
but the Na§ put was confiscated for informing its readers
.a bout the Slovak' s views.
The No. 212 issue of Na§ put, 1937 was confiscated on
the same pretex, i. e. that it might disturb the public peace.
The article "Autonomy" was confiscated for the lines:
" ... this a utonomy is guaranteed only on paper . To this day it
h as not been r ealized. In eighteen yea.rs no effort has been made to
b egi n to put it into effect."61
The press of the Czech opposition also shared the fate of
that of the other nationalities. Only a very insignificant percentage of Czechs however, voted for their opposition parties.
The others were generally satisfied with their privileged
position and had no desire to change it.
On September 16, 1930 the representatives of the Czech
National Democracy, Dr. Karel Pergler and Ji.ti Sti'ibrny
interpellated the Minister of Justice on the confisc ation of the
periodical Franta, vol. III. No. 21 , March 6, 1930:
Despite the guarantees of freedom or speech and press contained
i n the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak •Republic, o ur legislative
bodies have not checked or even improved the preventive censorship inconsistent with democracy, especially in peacetime. Under a
r egi me li k e ours one wou ld not expect a censor.s hip and confiscation
policy which ·r enders impossible a decent and desirable criticism of
ideas and political principles h el d by government functionaries. But
the exact opposite is the ca,se. In this Repu1blic it is not permitted
to discuss people in the government and their views on any topic.
As a proo1' of my assertion, I have here several periodicals that suf·fered con fiscation. The classic example of the confiscation policy
adopted by the government in contradiction to the most basic concepts
of freedom of the press and discussion, was the confiscation of the
March 6, 19·30 issue of F'RQ)l''DA. The article "Two Concepts" by F.
Schwartz was the offender ...
124
SLOVAKIA
This article contained criticism of Dr. Tomas G. Masaryk, President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Another article "Co je vice nez 7. marec" (What is more significant
than March 7) written by Josef Vodracka and published in
the same issue, was also confiscated, because of its criticism
of Masaryk's philosophy of Czech statehood. (March 7 was
Masaryk's birthday and a national holiday.) In the article
"Napoleonsky rys" (Napoleonic feature), published in the
same issue, a description of Masaryk's charact€r was also
censored. Another article "Muz Bible" (Biblical man) by
Kamil Masin was censored for its designation of Masaryk
as a "messianist" (man of Providence). In the same issue
also F. Petrik's article "Rozsevac a znec" (Sower and harvester) on the ideological inconsequence of Masaryk's philosophy and F. Schwarz's article "Souhlasime s Masarykem"
(We agree with Masaryk) along with several other articles
were censored.
The interpellation continued:
The press wa·s at one time the principal means of maintaining
freedom and national consciousness. In the Czecho,Slovak Republic,
the press has become the .frightening destroyer of every freedom
because an honest and independent press has been annihilated. It
serves now as ~ blindfold for the people ...62
This example shows that censorship in Czecho-Slovakia
was like an octopus which extended its arms into all areas
of public life and impeded the march of democracy and the
natural evolution of the various ethnical groups.
SLOVAK DEFENSE AGAINST THE EFFECTS
OF CENSORSHIP
A direct result of the systematic violation of freedom of the press by governmental censorship was that Slovak political parties were denied normal communication with
their members. At the disposal of the Government were the
police, the army, the gendarmry and about 300,000 privileged Czech functionaries in Slovakia, whose task it was to
hinder the activity of Slovak political forces, working and
fighting for the freedom and independence of Slovakia.
The people of Slovakia, deprived of the most effective
means of communication, the press, which was constantly,
almost daily, confiscated, the radio was State-owned and
controlled, and never at the disposal of opposition parties,
SLOVAKIA
125
were more and more interested in knowing, what new injustice was committed against the Slovak nation.
Several methods of rendering the censorship less effective were developed by the political parties. These political parties, who owned many of the newspapers, constantly
challenged the respective Ministers in Parliament by interpellations. Their interpellations were always published, together with the censored articles, in the Tisky Poslanecke
Snemovny N<irodniho Shromazdeni Repub liky Ceskoslovenske (a publication comparable to the U.S. Congressional
Record) and this procedure gave them immunity and the
right to be reprinted in the newspapers. But it was not unusual for the censor to confiscate even these immunized
articles and interpellations.
The interpellation had to be signed by at least twenty
representatives. Small parties, which lacked this number,
obtained the necessary signatures from the representatives
of other opposition parties. The interpellations were addressed to the Minister of the Interior, or the Minister of Justice.
The reply of the Government to the interpellation,
which also requested that the matter be discussed, was usually negative.If a written answer was requested, the Minister
almost invariably approved the procedure of the censor.
Here is an example:
Reply of the Government to the interpellation of representative
Andrej Hlinka and associates concerning .the confiscation of the dally
SLOVAK, No. 105, May 9, 1934 (No. 2712/VII). - The confiscation
of the portions adduced In the lnterpellatlon . . . executed by the
office -of the Attorney General in Bratislava, •w as exa mined by the
regional court In Bratislava and approved In full. The complaint challenging this decision was rejected by the 1Prlme Minister: J. Malypetr.63
If nothing was found wrong in the censored article, the
reply to the interpellation was:
.. . I find that some portions adduced in interpellation No. 3610/·
XIV were confiscated without a legal r eason. I informed the office
of the Attorney General in Nitra that thes e articles ... are nothini;:
more than poli,tical r eflections and attacks and their suppression
cannot be justified by law. I hope that similar cases will not be
repeated .. ,64
But the censorship policy was not modified by a few
decisions in favor of the opposition's press.
Another procedure used by the opposition press to
126
SLOVAKIA
counteract the effects of censorship was to send the first
printed copy to the censor's office and simultaneously to
deliver several hundred copies to the public vendors. The
Bratislava readers were usually waiting and so at least some
of them were able to obtain uncensored copies, which passed clandestinely from hand to hand. The procedure was the
same for the towns and villages near the capital city of Bratislava. Workers, employees, railroadmen and occasional
travelers, women from the villages selling vegetables in the
market, all cooperated in smuggling the uncensored copies
of newspapers out of Bratislava. Most helpful in this distribution of uncensored copies were the Slovak railroadmen.
Each town in which the train stopped, had its copy of the
uncensored newspaper. This was done with the utmost caution, since those involved could have been charged with a
criminal act against the security of the State at the risk of
imprisonment or loss of job.
After the censor completed his job, the Attorney-General ordered the police to confiscate the newspaper. The
policemen seized the unsold uncensored copies from the
news-stands. In coffeehouses they seized uncensored copies
from the hands of readers, who had not reali21ed in good
time the presence of the officers and failed to hide their
copies.
Articles from confiscated political, social and cultural
periodicals, were typed and distributed among interested
people, chiefly university students and graduates, who formed little clubs to discuss them.
The same was done with confiscated books or volumes
of poetry. The writer recalls how, after the publication of
Sidor's and Mach's books, mentioned previously, he was
given one typewritten copy of the censored parts of the
books, and was required to type at least fiV'e new copies
and distribute them among five other persons. Such distribution was possible only among persons who were trustworthy and of the same political convictions. The result was
that almost everybody in Slovakia could have his own copy
of the censored parts of the books. The secretariats of the
political parties cooperated with students, workers and peasants in this underground press and the solidarity of the
nation as a whole was wonderful. It is true that many people
were caught and penalized, but that was the risk.
SLOVAKIA
127
Students in foreign countries supplied information about
the views of the foreign press on the Slovak problem and
themselves published the Slovak viewpoint in foreign newspapers. They smuggled into the country articles about Slovakia from the foreign press. The customs examination of
Slovak students traveling abroad or returning from foreign
countries was viery thorough.
The clandestine importing of news reports from abroad
was even more dangerous than the distribution of censored
articles in Slovakia. If caught in possession of any news item
unfavorable to Czecho-Slovakia, a person could be prosecuted for "association with the enemies of the State", for espionage, or for plotting against the State.
Information brought from abroad was discussed only
in small confidential groups of students and intellectuals,
and secret reports were given to certain leaders of political
parties. The Czechs were not generally able to identify the
persons responsible for this smuggling of information. But
they never forgot. During his studies in Zagreb (Croatia)
in 1937 or 1938, one of my friends wrote several articles
about the oppression of the Slovaks in Czecho-Slovakia. For
these and other articles written for the Croatian press ten
years later in 1947 he was sentenced by a Czech Communist
"people's court" to eight years in prison.
CONCLUSION
Freedom of the press consist~ in the free gathering of
information, in free communication, in the free publication
of information, in the free printing and distribution of published information and in the free subscription and free
reading of published information.
In Czecho-Slovakia these freedoms were very limited
and in Slovakia they were practically non-existent.
If one succeeded in gathering information, it became
impossible to communicate it if the Czechs felt that it criticized or threatened their hegemony.
To publish such information signified sure intervention
of the censor and meant the consequent confiscation of the
entire edition of the book or periodical, in which it was
published.
To diffuse information confiscated by the censor was
128
SLOVAKIA
considered by the Czechs as an act against the security of
the State.
The freedom to subscribe to and to read published information was also very limited. Anyone found to be in possession
of censored information was ,exposed to the danger of being
arrested and penalized.
From pertinent material available to the writer and
from his own experiences in Czecho-Slovakia in the years
1918-1938, he has reached the conclusion that despite the
constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press, censorship in its most drastic form was widely employed against
the opposition and the minorities in direct contradiction to
the Constitution and the so-called "democratic" system
which it guaranteed.
Public opinion in Slovakia could not manifest itself
freely in the press and information was diffused chiefly
through the channels generally resorted to by underground
organizations.
The people of Slovakia learned to read and interpret
the blank spaces of the censored newspapers and what they
"read" this way was much more unfavorable to the Czech
system than the impression the censored words would have
provoked.
The impossibility of frank discussion had created an
atmosphere of hatred in which the Slovaks renounced once
and for all any discussion with the Czechs. They began to
take their own course which led logically to the unanimous
declaration of the independent Slovak Republic, March 14,
1939, by the autonomous Slovak Parliament.
Censorship applied against the Slovaks proved that
freedom cannot be suppressed indefinitely, because it is a
part of the condition of our life, our development, and our
progress. In its essence our soul is free. Whoever suppresses
the freedom of others, will himself lose freedom. The Czechs
lost their freedom on the very day when the Slovaks declared
their independence. Bohemia became a Protectorate of Germany. When with the aid of the Soviet army and through
the indifference of the Western world, the Czechs enslaved
the Slovaks a second time after World War II, they lost their
freedom too, and became a satelite of Soviet Russia. In order
SLOVAKIA
129
to keep the Slovaks in Czech slavery, they sold their own
freedom to the Muscowite tyrant, exposing to Red danger
the entire Central and Occidental Europe.
The words of the great Slovak poet Jan Kollar (17931852) are most appropriate here:
Whoever respects the freedom of others
Is himself worthy of freedom.
Whoever enslaves with handcuffs
Is himself a slave ! 65
FOOTNOTES
1.
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction by Ji:ri Hoetzl and V. Joachim, American Association for
International Conciliation, Pt,blications, No. 179 (October 1922),
2.
3.
Ibid., p. 443.
Karl Falk, "Strife in Czechoslovakia: The German Minority
Question", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV, (March 15, 1938), p. 4.
The Cleveland Pact stipulated that the Slovaks and Czechs
would form II federative union of states. Slovakia was to enjoy
complete national autonomy, including its own Parliament and
government administration, its own political and financial institutions, complete freedom to develop culturally and the right
to use Slovak as its official language. The form of government
was to be democratic, operating in a union of two autonomous
states. The Pittsburgh Pact guaranteed that "Slovakia shall have
its own administration, its own tribunals and its own Parliament. Slovak shall be the official language in schools, in government offices and in public life in general."
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 23 (March
31, 1923), pp. 207-218.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizen£ statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1920) .
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 708-709.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 44 (July
p. 441.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8
15, 1933), p. 707.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Ibid. ( 1933) p. 771.
Ibid. Part 56 (July 7, 1934) pp. 513-516.
Sbirka zakonu a nafizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. (1934), p. 598.
Ibid. (1935), p. 527.
Ibid. (1937), p. 786.
Ibid. Part 44 (July 15, 1933) pp. 709-714.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Part 35, (May
23, 19i6) pp. 477-479.
I!Jid. pp. 479-541.
Imrich Stanek, Zrada a pad. (Praha: Statnf Nakladatelstvf Politicke Literatury, 1958), p. 33.
SLOVAKIA
130
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 41.
Ibid., p. 33.
Ibid., p. 34.
Imrich Stanek, Op. cit., p. 34.
Ibid., p. 35.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
loc. cit.
Ibid., pp. 38-39.
Ibid., p. 39.
Ibid., p. 40.
Ibid., p. 32.
Ibid., pp. 41-43.
Lucy Maynard Salmon, The newspaper and authority. (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1923), p. 3.
Karol Sidor, Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926), Bratislava: Knihtlaciaren Sv. Andrej a, 1934), p. 359.
Culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Machacek, Pavol. "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske .l!udove Novi·
ny", (August 10, 1923). pp. 1-2.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 150, (1922).
Karol Sidor, Op. cit., pp. 487-488.
Ibid., p. _426.
Ibid., p. 425.
Culen, Konstantin, "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
C. A. Macartney, Hungary and her successors, pp. 137-139.
"Azda takto", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 163.
"Nerovny boj", Nastup, (November 1, 1933), p. 162.
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 5280, (1925).
Head of a region.
Administrative region of Slovakia.
Sano Mach, Vo viheni, (Bratislava: Jednota, 1930).
Ceskoslovenska Republika, Niirodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, 'l)sky, No. 2799, (1934).
Culen, Konstantin. "Slaboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
Ceskoslovenska Socialne demokraticka strana. Protokol sjazdu
z 12. a 22. aprila 1922, p. 203.
Ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka·
Snemovna, Tisky, 1. volebni obdobi, 2. zasedani, No. 1882, 1921.
Op. cit., No. IV/4098, 1923.
(;ulen, Kon~tantin, "Slcboda tlace v CSR", Bratstvo, (May 23,
1951).
SLOVAKIA
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
fi3.
64.
65.
131
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 3584, (June 21, 1922.).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. XXI/4226, (April 26, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. VI/4636, (May 27, 1924).
Slovak, July 23, 1933.
Slovak, J anuary 26, 1934.
Tisk a novinari, XII, No. 5, (1938).
Druhy kruh diskusnich vecerii Narodni Rady ceskoslovenske",
Cechoslovak a nase zahranici. Vsenarodni mesicnik. Vol. XV,
No. 4-5, (April-May, 1935), p. 100.
ceskoslovenska Republika, Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 1937, VI. volebne obdobi, 5 zasedani, No.
876/ VI, April 8.
Ibid, XV/4226, (May 25, 1923).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, 628/IX, (September 16, 1930).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, No. 2951, (1934).
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka
Snemovna, Tisky, I. volebni obdobi, 5. zasedani, No. 2591, (July
28, 1922), pp. 10-11.
Jan Kollar, Slavy dcera. 1824.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
<::incik, Joseph G. Anglo-Saxon and Slovak-Avar Patterns of the
Cuthbert Gospel. Series Cyrilomethodiana, v. 1. Cleveland: Slovak
Institute, 1958.
Delaney, Edward L. False freedom . Los Angeles: Sequoia University
Press, 1954.
Diplomaticus. The Czechs and their minorities. London, Thornton
Butterworth, (1938).
Durcansky, Ferdinand. Pohl'ad na slovensku politicku minitlost'. Bratislava: Ludotypia, 1943.
Hrusovsky, Frantisek. Slovenske dejiny. 6th ed. Turciansky Sv. Martin:
Matica Slovenska, 1940.
Kerr, Walter. Criticism and censorship. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1956.
Kimball, Young and Lawrence, Raymond D. Bibliography on censorship
and propaganda. University of Oregon publications, v. 1, 1928.
Journalism series, No. 1. Eugene: University Press, 1928.
Mach, Sano. Vo viizeni. Censored ed. Bratislava: Jednota, 1930.
Macartney, C. A. Hungary and her successors. The treaty of Trianon
and its consequences, 1919-1937. New York, Oxford University
Press, 1937.
McKean, Richard et al. The freedom to read. Perspective and program.
New York: R. R. Bowker, 1957.
SLOVAKIA
132
Miskovic, Alojz and Pisut, Milan. Dejiny slovenskej literatury pre VI.
triedu slovenskych gymnazii a pre ucitel'ske akademie. Bratislava:
Statne nakladatel'stvo, 1941.
Mraz, Andrej. Die Literatur der Slovaken. Berlin: Volk und Reich
Verlag, n. d.
Salmon, Lucy Maynard. The newspaper and authority. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1923.
Seton-Watson, R. W. A history of the Czechs and Slovaks. New York:
Hutchinson and Co., 1943.
Sidor, Karol. Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Censored ed. Bratislava:
Knihtlaciareii Sv. Andreja, 1934.
-Andrej Hlinka (1864-1926). Uncensored ed. Bratislava: Knihtlaciarer1
Sv. Andreja, 1934.
- Slovcici v zahranicnom odboji. Bratislava: Jednota, 1928.
Slovensky Oslobodzovaci vybor. Prcivo Slovcikov na samostatnost' vo svet•
le dokumentov. Sv. 1: Biela kniha. By Ferdinand Durcansky. Buenos
Aires: Dorrego, 1954.
Stanislav, Jan. Slovanski apostoli Cyril a Metod • ich cinnost' vo Vel'ko•
moravskej risi. Bratislava: Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slovaca, 1945.
Thomas, S. Harris. Czechoslovakia in European history. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1944.
Zubek, Theodoric J., O.F.M., S.T.D. The Church of silence in Slovakia.
Published by John J. Lach, 1956.
PAMPHLETS
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur la necessite de plebiscite
en Slovaquie. Paris: 1946.
Comite d'action Slovaque. Aide-memoire sur l'existence de la Republique Slovaque et sur la necessite de conclure le traite de paix avec
elle. Paris: 1946.
Durcansky, Ferdinand. The international asp zct of the Slovak question.
New York: Slovak Liberation Committee, 1954.
Jakobson. R. Slavic languages. New York: Columbia University Press,
1955.
Slovak Action Committee, Slovak National Council in London, Slovak
League of America and Canadian Slovak League of Canada.
Memorandum presented to the Peace Conference concerning
the rationality of existence of Czecho-Slovakia. Paris: 1946.
Th e Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact. (Chi cago) : The Slovak Catholic
Federation of America, 1934.
Stewart, John F. Slovakia, its people and right to sovereign independence and freedom. Information leaflets, No. 7. Edinburgh: Scottish
League for European Fre<>dom, n. d.
PERIODICALS AND ARTICLES
"Azda takto," Ncistup (Nove.' llber 1, 1933).
ceskoslovensko a na.se zahrar,;i:i, XV, No. 4-5 (April-May, 1935).
"The Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic", with introduction
SLOVAKIA
133
by Jiri Hoetzl and V. Joachim. American Association for International Conciliation, Publications, No. 179) (October, 1922).
culen, Konstantin. "Sloboda tlace v cSR", Bratstvo (May 23, 1951).
Falk, Karl. "Strife in Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports, XIV
(March 15, 1938).
Hlinka, Andrej. "Protestujeme", Slovak (December 22, 1921). "Komu
osozi cenzura?", Zem, III, No. 9 (May 5, 1937).
Machacek, Pavel "Katovia sa raduju", Slovenske l'udove noviny, (August
10, 1923).
"Nedorozumenie medzi autonomistickou tlacou a bratislavskym cenzorom", Slovak, (August 27, 1933).
"Nerovny boj", Nastup (November 1, 1933) .
"Neustale habanie Slovaka", Slovak (August 27, 1933).
" O cenzure", Slovak (May 16, 1934).
"Pracuje cenzura pre stat alebo pre politicke strany?", Slovak (September 15, 1933).
"Preco nas cenzurovali", Slovak (April 29, 1934).
"150 rocna cenzura rakuska platna este aj v republike", Slovak (June
11, 1933).
Slovak (June 11, 1933).
Slovak (September 15, 1933).
Slovak (January 26, 1934).
Slovak (June 13, 1934).
Taylor, Paul B. "Partition of Czechoslovakia", Foreign Policy Reports,
(November 15, 1938).
- "Germany's expansion in Eastern Europe", Foreign Policy Reports,
XV (May 15, 1939).
Tisk a novinai'i, XII, No. 5 (1938).
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
ceskoslovenska Republika. Narodni Shromazdeni, Poslanecka Snemovna.
Tisky. Years: 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924. 1925, 1926, 1929, 1930, 1934,
1935.
Sbirka zakonu a narizeni statu ceskoslovenskeho. Years: 1920, 1922,
1923, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1~37.
THESIS
Woytko, Sister Mary Gabrielle, 0.P. Slovakia's road to statehood.
A Study of the efforts of Slovakia to secure national independence.
Thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Duquesne University
as a thesis under the title "A study of the efforts of Slovakia to
secure national independence" in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. (Published by John
Lach, 1957).
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
Censorship Policies in Czecho-Slovakia 1918-1938
Description
An account of the resource
Eugene Urban
Slovakia, Vol. 15 (No. 38), 1965
pp. 93-133
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Urban, Eugen A., 1914-1972
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1965
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ccbaf6e105a1562a3a2ca084f3216c4a.pdf
ba4b071bf816f2d575bf1ec730393488
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
117
20 ) Ottokar Prohaszka , A Nacionalizmusr6l (About Nationalism) (Budapest, 1925), p. 61.
21) Orszaggyiiles-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvise l5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 424, February 18, 1907.
22) Ibid., I, 284. July 7, 1906.
23) Milan Hodza, Federation in Central Europe (New York, 1942), p. 40.
24 ) One example: Speech by Gyorgy Szmrecsanyi. Orszaggyules-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvisel5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 411-417. February 16, 1907.
25 ) Vladislav Stastny, ed., Slovanstvi v narodnim zivote techu a Slovaku
(Praha , 1968), p. 328.
26 ) Ludwig vo n Gogolak, Beitriige zur Geschichte des slowakischen
Volkes (Mtinchen, 1963 ), p. 98.
27 ) Seton-Watson, op. cit., p. 93.
*
*
*
Centennial of Slovak Health
Spas in the Tatra Mountains
Rev. Andrew V. Pier, O.S.B.
This year (1975) marks the 100th anniversary of public
establishment of the now famous health centers in two
High Tatra regions, namely, Novy Smokovec and strbske
Pleso, and at Lucivna, located at the northern end of the
Low Tatra mountains in Slovakia.
At Novy Smokovec located at the foot of the forested
slope leading upward to the Slavkovsky peak was the first
Slovak health resort set aside for tuberculosis patients
a hundred years ago. The low humidity, year-round sunshine
and intense ultra-violet radiation, crisp atmosphere at the
high altitude of some 8,000 feet, low atmospheric pressure
.. . these health factors lend themselves to a natural center
for the relief and cure of not only pulmonary ailments and
chronic respiratory troubles, but contribute greatly to the
cure of diseases of the thyroid gland and various neuroses.
For the healthy Novy Smokovec is a natural winter sports'
resort and a tourist attraction the rest of the year. Accommodations are modest but adequate.
�118
SLOVAKIA
Converted from a hunting-lodge the strbske Pleso lake
region soon become a popular summer resort and a winter
attraction for ski enthusiasts soon after its opening to the
public before the end of the 19th century. But it, too, has
reserved certain arE:laS to treat patients suffering from
asthma, bronchitis and allergies afflicting the lungs. The
Institute of Asthmatology there has done wonders in relieving and curing asthma sufferers.
Several years ago the strbske Pleso Tatra mountain
resort became known throughout the world when the world
ski championships were held there. Visitors from all parts
of the world had words of praise not only for the natural
beauty of the location but also for the hospitality of the
Slovak people. The Hviezdoslav, Krivan and other hotels
offer modern accommodations to thousands of guests who
come to strbske Pleso annually for their health or for
recreation summer or winter.
Lucivna is exclusively a health resort at the foot of the
Tatras. It is located in a magic woodland region in the
northern foothills of the Low Tatra mountain range. Most
of the patients are children suffering from respiratory
diseases although after World War I and II Lucivna served
for a time to cure veterans suffering from diseases of the
lungs.
While we are on the subject of health, perhaps it is
well to note here that in other parts of Slovakia: Piest'any,
Trencianske Teplice, Presov, Sliac and a dozen others as
well, the natural thermal springs are the source of mineral
waters that help to relieve and cure thousands of patients
suffering from rheumatism, heart trouble, nervous disorders, high blood pressure and various other internal
ailments.
A closing remark is a personal observation. No wonder
that not one but several neighbors of the lands inhabited
by the Slovaks since the 5th or 6th century have longingly
gazed with covetous eyes at the country which is so richly
endowed by the Creator. At the moment a new pair of eyes,
those of a most powerful neighbor at the east end of
Slovakia, is fastened acquisitively on the Presov-Poprad
area. It is our hope and prayer that the Slovaks will be able
to turn this menacing gaze upward for conquest in space
instead of foreign conquest at their expense.
�
SLOVAKIA
117
20 ) Ottokar Prohaszka , A Nacionalizmusr6l (About Nationalism) (Budapest, 1925), p. 61.
21) Orszaggyiiles-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvise l5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 424, February 18, 1907.
22) Ibid., I, 284. July 7, 1906.
23) Milan Hodza, Federation in Central Europe (New York, 1942), p. 40.
24 ) One example: Speech by Gyorgy Szmrecsanyi. Orszaggyules-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvisel5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 411-417. February 16, 1907.
25 ) Vladislav Stastny, ed., Slovanstvi v narodnim zivote techu a Slovaku
(Praha , 1968), p. 328.
26 ) Ludwig vo n Gogolak, Beitriige zur Geschichte des slowakischen
Volkes (Mtinchen, 1963 ), p. 98.
27 ) Seton-Watson, op. cit., p. 93.
*
*
*
Centennial of Slovak Health
Spas in the Tatra Mountains
Rev. Andrew V. Pier, O.S.B.
This year (1975) marks the 100th anniversary of public
establishment of the now famous health centers in two
High Tatra regions, namely, Novy Smokovec and strbske
Pleso, and at Lucivna, located at the northern end of the
Low Tatra mountains in Slovakia.
At Novy Smokovec located at the foot of the forested
slope leading upward to the Slavkovsky peak was the first
Slovak health resort set aside for tuberculosis patients
a hundred years ago. The low humidity, year-round sunshine
and intense ultra-violet radiation, crisp atmosphere at the
high altitude of some 8,000 feet, low atmospheric pressure
.. . these health factors lend themselves to a natural center
for the relief and cure of not only pulmonary ailments and
chronic respiratory troubles, but contribute greatly to the
cure of diseases of the thyroid gland and various neuroses.
For the healthy Novy Smokovec is a natural winter sports'
resort and a tourist attraction the rest of the year. Accommodations are modest but adequate.
�118
SLOVAKIA
Converted from a hunting-lodge the strbske Pleso lake
region soon become a popular summer resort and a winter
attraction for ski enthusiasts soon after its opening to the
public before the end of the 19th century. But it, too, has
reserved certain arE:laS to treat patients suffering from
asthma, bronchitis and allergies afflicting the lungs. The
Institute of Asthmatology there has done wonders in relieving and curing asthma sufferers.
Several years ago the strbske Pleso Tatra mountain
resort became known throughout the world when the world
ski championships were held there. Visitors from all parts
of the world had words of praise not only for the natural
beauty of the location but also for the hospitality of the
Slovak people. The Hviezdoslav, Krivan and other hotels
offer modern accommodations to thousands of guests who
come to strbske Pleso annually for their health or for
recreation summer or winter.
Lucivna is exclusively a health resort at the foot of the
Tatras. It is located in a magic woodland region in the
northern foothills of the Low Tatra mountain range. Most
of the patients are children suffering from respiratory
diseases although after World War I and II Lucivna served
for a time to cure veterans suffering from diseases of the
lungs.
While we are on the subject of health, perhaps it is
well to note here that in other parts of Slovakia: Piest'any,
Trencianske Teplice, Presov, Sliac and a dozen others as
well, the natural thermal springs are the source of mineral
waters that help to relieve and cure thousands of patients
suffering from rheumatism, heart trouble, nervous disorders, high blood pressure and various other internal
ailments.
A closing remark is a personal observation. No wonder
that not one but several neighbors of the lands inhabited
by the Slovaks since the 5th or 6th century have longingly
gazed with covetous eyes at the country which is so richly
endowed by the Creator. At the moment a new pair of eyes,
those of a most powerful neighbor at the east end of
Slovakia, is fastened acquisitively on the Presov-Poprad
area. It is our hope and prayer that the Slovaks will be able
to turn this menacing gaze upward for conquest in space
instead of foreign conquest at their expense.
�
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
1975, Vol. 25
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 25 (No. 48), 1975.
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
1975
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
117
20 ) Ottokar Prohaszka , A Nacionalizmusr6l (About Nationalism) (Budapest, 1925), p. 61.
21) Orszaggyiiles-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvise l5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 424, February 18, 1907.
22) Ibid., I, 284. July 7, 1906.
23) Milan Hodza, Federation in Central Europe (New York, 1942), p. 40.
24 ) One example: Speech by Gyorgy Szmrecsanyi. Orszaggyules-Nyomtatvanyai-Kepvisel5h6.z-Napl6, VII, 411-417. February 16, 1907.
25 ) Vladislav Stastny, ed., Slovanstvi v narodnim zivote techu a Slovaku
(Praha , 1968), p. 328.
26 ) Ludwig vo n Gogolak, Beitriige zur Geschichte des slowakischen
Volkes (Mtinchen, 1963 ), p. 98.
27 ) Seton-Watson, op. cit., p. 93.
*
*
*
Centennial of Slovak Health
Spas in the Tatra Mountains
Rev. Andrew V. Pier, O.S.B.
This year (1975) marks the 100th anniversary of public
establishment of the now famous health centers in two
High Tatra regions, namely, Novy Smokovec and strbske
Pleso, and at Lucivna, located at the northern end of the
Low Tatra mountains in Slovakia.
At Novy Smokovec located at the foot of the forested
slope leading upward to the Slavkovsky peak was the first
Slovak health resort set aside for tuberculosis patients
a hundred years ago. The low humidity, year-round sunshine
and intense ultra-violet radiation, crisp atmosphere at the
high altitude of some 8,000 feet, low atmospheric pressure
.. . these health factors lend themselves to a natural center
for the relief and cure of not only pulmonary ailments and
chronic respiratory troubles, but contribute greatly to the
cure of diseases of the thyroid gland and various neuroses.
For the healthy Novy Smokovec is a natural winter sports'
resort and a tourist attraction the rest of the year. Accommodations are modest but adequate.
118
SLOVAKIA
Converted from a hunting-lodge the strbske Pleso lake
region soon become a popular summer resort and a winter
attraction for ski enthusiasts soon after its opening to the
public before the end of the 19th century. But it, too, has
reserved certain arE:laS to treat patients suffering from
asthma, bronchitis and allergies afflicting the lungs. The
Institute of Asthmatology there has done wonders in relieving and curing asthma sufferers.
Several years ago the strbske Pleso Tatra mountain
resort became known throughout the world when the world
ski championships were held there. Visitors from all parts
of the world had words of praise not only for the natural
beauty of the location but also for the hospitality of the
Slovak people. The Hviezdoslav, Krivan and other hotels
offer modern accommodations to thousands of guests who
come to strbske Pleso annually for their health or for
recreation summer or winter.
Lucivna is exclusively a health resort at the foot of the
Tatras. It is located in a magic woodland region in the
northern foothills of the Low Tatra mountain range. Most
of the patients are children suffering from respiratory
diseases although after World War I and II Lucivna served
for a time to cure veterans suffering from diseases of the
lungs.
While we are on the subject of health, perhaps it is
well to note here that in other parts of Slovakia: Piest'any,
Trencianske Teplice, Presov, Sliac and a dozen others as
well, the natural thermal springs are the source of mineral
waters that help to relieve and cure thousands of patients
suffering from rheumatism, heart trouble, nervous disorders, high blood pressure and various other internal
ailments.
A closing remark is a personal observation. No wonder
that not one but several neighbors of the lands inhabited
by the Slovaks since the 5th or 6th century have longingly
gazed with covetous eyes at the country which is so richly
endowed by the Creator. At the moment a new pair of eyes,
those of a most powerful neighbor at the east end of
Slovakia, is fastened acquisitively on the Presov-Poprad
area. It is our hope and prayer that the Slovaks will be able
to turn this menacing gaze upward for conquest in space
instead of foreign conquest at their expense.
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
Centennial of Slovak Health Spas in the Tatra Mountains
Description
An account of the resource
Rev. Andrew V. Pier, O.S.B.
Slovakia, Vol. 25 (No. 48), 1975
pp. 117-118
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Pier, Andrew W., 1910-2003
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1975
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/f7c9d1a75e0451ddb6cf16ce129e65fa.pdf
50aa08ee2cb27a68097dac0f0dcc5754
PDF Text
Text
57
SLOVAKIA
PAST AND PRESENT OF
CHRISTIAN DEMOCRACY IN SLOVAKIA
JOSEPH A. MIKUS
Firom 1918 untirl 1948, Ohristian democracy was a dominant poliltical fo11ce ,i n S}ovrukia. Orig1nated ,u nder Hungarian rll!le at the >beginning olf the twentieth cenrtn.ury, Sloviak
Chilistiian demo·c r-rucy realflf,iirmed i.itself and a,r ose ,v i1ctorious
from ,t he i:dedl'og~all. cha:O's whicli existed in Czecho-iSlovakia and in Centrail EuTope af1ter 1918. W:hi'le Trj,anon Hunga,r y was the vidiim of the Oommilliru.Sm of Belia Kuihn in
1919, SociaJl Demo:crat:s fomne:d the .strongest :po1itica1 pairty
in Czecho.,Sloivaikia. It remains t'he histodcal merit of the
great Slovaik Caitholi:c and nationa[ leader, Msg1r. Andrew
Hlinlka, for having saved Slo,vaJkia from spi.ri.itual anarchy.
As founder of ,t he Slovak Peo:ple'·s Party amd. i.ts. leader,
Hli:nlka designed for .SlovaJkia the right way of Christian
demoCTa'Cy. 'Tihe ,program of his party w:as Ito work "foir God
and the nation." - What did it mean?
From the .r eligious standpoint, the People's Party always defended the Oa;tholic tramtion of the country against
a narrow and panti-cmlarist Ozecih Husritiscrn which attempted
to conquer the Slovak people. In the hard spirituaJl struggle
Slovakia remained loyally on the side of the Roman Catholic Chu:rc:h amd in opposirt:ion to .t'he effo,r t of the governmental circles of P:mgiue which used ail[ the iresauirces. of the
State to bring ,a bowt the "emancipati on" of Ozecho~Slovakia from the infllueI11Ce ~ Rome. T. G . Ma:saryk authored
the •s 'logans "Asway from Rome" and •~Rome must ibe brought
to tria•l and ,e;onrvioted !" The Slovruks were decidedly opposed ,to the estiaJb!lishment of the soJcal,led national "Czechoglovruk cihurClh" in Sil01v;akia, whtch .they re:cognirzed onl,y
as a tool orf foreign spi.rii.itil.la1 influence.
1
From the naJtionall point orf view, the People's Party
defended the natUTal rights of the Sloivak nation which
were systema:tiica:Uy being abbTe-viated by the Prague Administration. The Czecho-S1-o;vak State in 1918, was sUipposed to be a federal union, such as the United States, be-
�58
SLOVAKIA
tween two equial par.tneTs, Ozechia (Bohemia, Moravia and
SHesia) and Slova~ia, with a common cm,rency, forei1gn policy and m~litaey defel1$e. In fa.dt, howeveT, the Ce;echs
ar'bitraril;y ohanged this nationally drualistic State into a
strong centralized, umoorian "Czoohoslovaik" State by the
Cons,titution of Fe/brua:ry 29, 1920, which was imipdsed on
the Slo:vak nation lby the so-Oal[ed "RevoluJtiorrary Pa,rliament" tihat had .been handpicked by the Prague Government.
In this way, .u nder Czech :r,ule, the SlOIV'aks were deprived of thek nationa!l rights and ;b ecame an initernal minority. In 1923, the Czech major1ty in Parfa1ment su,ppressed
the ind'iJviidu,a,l consti'burtionaJ libertiies of minorities (the
right olf free press•, tree spooclh, free asseniibl,y, etc) by
adopting the Internal Seicurirty Aot. (No. 50-1923) which
indica.ted alil efforts to;wa~d federa!lisrn as subversive. So,
"OrechoslloviaJkia" never was, in fad, a country of f:ree politiica,l ins't!ituitfons, nor a t:riue democratic State.
For these reasons, the SloJVlalk People's Party claimed in accordanice with dispositions of .t he Cleveland (191'5 ) and
the Pilttshw-gh (1918) agreements signed by the Slovaik
League of Ameriica and various Czech organmaitions - a
dualist federation, which would bring to an end the privileged situaition of the Czechs and carry on the pr.inci,ple of
equaility of bolth :peOiples in the oommon Staite If the Slovak peop'le were dlisiposed, in spkit and in ,t he interests of
Christian integration, to abandon ceI1ta·i n national prerogatives in favor of a Czecho-iSlovaJk federal government, it was
not at a1Jl disposed to relinquish the Slov<aJk nationa!l idea in
favor of a Czech, that is a foreign nationalism.
From the point of view of foreign policy, the Slovaik
Peoiple's Pairty strongly .cr.ftici'Zed the miilita,:r,y alliance
which MT. Benes signed in 1935 in Moscow with the Soviet
Union.
After the M'Uilich Agreement, when Hiit:Jler was giiven a
fa:·ee hand in Central EJwro.pe by the Western Powers, Slova;k Christian democra:cy, the biggest 1po[irtica1 force in Slovakia, was charged with the task to cond~, at su.ch a d:iJfficuilt stage, th~ policy of thalt country. Foir such a small
1
�SLOVAKIA
59
nation it was very hrurd, ind:eeld, both spiritually and politically, to oppose eff~ctiivcly a totalitarian sys'tem such as
Nazism. An iimipaI"tia:l historiography wiM, nevertheless,
recognize the resist'a.rrce which Msgr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slov•aJk Repulblic, devcloped diuring World War
II against the attempt of Nazism to estaJb'lish i.tself in his
rarucaUy pro-German elements in the Sloivak Government,
represenited m:aJinly by Vojtech Tu!k•a, the Brime Minister
and the Minister of Fore,i,gn Affaiirs, and Afexander Mach,
the Minister of Interior. The 'l:'uka-iMaich cornlbine iplayed uip
to the Namis to win t!heir favor and thus to e:Hmina'te Tiso
and his regime and ,puit 'l:'uka and his followers in their
place. But they l,ruaked popular suipport. Being .previailed upon
by the SlOIVak hiera~hiy and the people, Msgr. Joseph Tiso
..::.ecided to stay at his .p ost, and stay he did to the very end.
Tiso's merit consists in hiruving saved Slovakia and his
people from territorial d'ismeimlbeI1Inent, which was planned
by Hungary and Gemniany, as proved at the Nuremberg
trials, and in h'a!V,i ng preserved from Na'2li influence the spiritual individua!lilty of Slov,aJkia whose Christian tradition
goes back to the eighth century.
But Christian democra'Cy in Sfovakia faced its hardest
task after 1'94,5. Slovalkia was at that time occupied by the
Soviet Aruny and talken OIVer by Mir. Benes's Government
forrr:ed in the shadow of the Kremlin. Since that time Slovakia has been exposed to a terrific ideological and po'lttical
pressure from t he outside.
In the elections in 1946. ChPi:sitian democra·c y in Slovakia manifested its strength. The Cathoilics, instructed by
their hieiraTchy, gave an heroic example of great political
disciopJ.i.ne. They •v oted for ,t he Slovalk Democratic Party,
which gained 62 p€!r cent of the total ~lectorai vote; meanwhile in Czechia 56 per cent voted for pro-Communist parties ( 42 per cent for the Communists and 14 -p er cent for
the Social Democrats). Those elections were the :b est expression of the Western orientation of the Slovaik people and of
the fatal pro~Soviet position of the Czechs. In this distinction we .
the internal ,p aradox of Czecho-Slova,kia. Though
territorially farther West, the Czechs looked to Soviet Rus-
see
�60
SLOVAKIA
sia as their best ally and protector, while the S[o,vaiks, the
immediate neighbors of the Soviet Union, looked to the
Western Powers. The Benes~Gottwa!ld regime regarded this
altitude of the Sl~aks as "trea:cherouis" and, theTefore,
decided to do s01rnething aJbout it to save face in Moscow.
In the autumn of 1947, under the pretext oif con1eealing
a girouip of "sepaJI1aJtists and consptrators agaiins.t the secwrity of ,t,he State," the Sl:ovak Demo'CraNc Party was attacked
- not ontlry ,b y the Cotnmiun.ists, Qt.I't the Ozec,h democratic
par,ties, too - !n ruch a way that it could never recover
from the blo,w ''.Dwo thoU1Sand of its memlbers were imprisonoo, among them thrne olf its: deputies (iBugar, Kempny,
Stasko) and. bne of its representatiJVes in the_ GoJVernment
of the "Nationrul Fronrt," Vi'Ce~Premier John Uirsiny. With
this "coup de fooce'' by which fta:gue imposed on democratic
Slovakia a Oo:mrmunist ma:jorrty in the autonomous. Government in Bmtislava, the biggest political fac'tor in that
country was crushed. HaJVing removed in this manner their
strongest opponent in the Prague P.arJiament, the Communists coulld afterwards easiil y consoHda.te their ,p osition,
shi,fting sirrnply from the system of "Na'tiona'1 Front" to that
of the "M_a rxist majority."
Contrary to what Mr. Hubert Ripka states in his book
"Le coup d'Etat de Prague en 1948," there was, therefore, no
revolution in Prague in February 1948. There was only a
change in the internal structure of the government.
'Jihe present situation oi Christian demoomc,y in Slo·v akia is that of a resisting force to the Communist impact.
This resistance is both religious and national.
Catholiroism in Slovakia is a proven eounter-force to
Communis:n. By the imprisonment of three Bishops, Msgr.
V:oJtassruk, Msgr. Buza:lka and Msgr. Gojclic, and by keeping
in house-arrest others of the Hierarchy, .the Chrur.ch finds it
icrr:ipossilble to full.fill its obligations. But though there aire
several hundred priests in jaH, though aH the Catholic lay
elite has been "eliminated," though Christian demooracy
as a poliiticail force has been crushed, . the Sl01V'8Jk peopie
neventheless have retained a deep re!i,gious ooillViiction a:nd
have defended chU'I'Ches an:d 'Priests with no more than
�61
SLOVAKIA
sticks and bare hands against the intervention of the State
police.
From the naHonal point of view, present-day OzechoSlavaJkia offers Vhe Slovaks nothing common to a national
'Staite. 'Bheir mherenit and ,a utonomous rights hruve been repudiated by Prag;ue once again. Ozecho~S!lwalkia today is
simply one of the nll!mer()!U:s Socia[ist Reipuibl,ic.s of the Soviet orbit. Slovrukia has been depri·v ed of naitionail liberty in
the name of the SocialiSIID preached by Moscow and executed
by Prague. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that there is
only one possible solution to the situation: the application
of the right of national self-determination within the framework of a Federated Europe. This 'belief is shaired by the
Slovak Lea,g ue of America and by aJl:l organie;ations of Slo-, J.!k political ref,u,gees in the free world.
Slovak Ohnist:ian deimocraoy counts and relies on a
nu1C'l eus oif prominent exi1ed peI'.sonallitities in the United
.Jtrutes and Canada : some former Deiputies orf the Praigue
Parlrarrnernt (Dr. :EJmanruel Boehm, St€iphen B1 aslko, John
Daxner, Dr. Michael Zi:brin, Rev. Ferdinad Mondok, Dr.
Francis Orlicky, Siteiphen BeniaJk), se;veral professors (Dr.
J,o seph Cin:cik, Rev. Bonarventwre Ewe, Dr. Francis. Hrrusovsky, Reiv. Joseph PaJpin), nU1merous writers and jaurnaJlists
George Gajdos-Bre~a, Rev. Nicha1as Sprinc, Constantine
Ct.den, Dr. Joseipih Pa.iuco, Louis Kandra, Charles Sitrmen,
John Okal'). and s.evera!l former Sllova!k diploona;ts (Charles
Sidor, Dr. John Kassovk, Dr. Joseiph Kirs'Cihibaum, Dr. Joseph OmiliaJk) . All these men consider the United Statt•s as
a fixed poh11t i;n the unive~se of Archi!Inides, frOim which it
wilfil be possi,ble one day, by spiritual and physi.cal strength,
to rock Communism from its foundations. They are most
willing to conbrilbute their aJbilities and talents to effect the
h'beration of Centra!l ffiurope and the formation of a European Federati'On with a free Slovrukia in it
1
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
•
"The importance of our trea ty with the U. S.
S. R. is self-evident. Soviet Russia is rapidly freeing Europe from
Nazi tyranny. Close ties have always existed between Russia and
Czechoslovakia, and they have now been strengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, which is bound to play the leading
role in Europe after the war." - (Jan Mas aryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944) .
�
57
SLOVAKIA
PAST AND PRESENT OF
CHRISTIAN DEMOCRACY IN SLOVAKIA
JOSEPH A. MIKUS
Firom 1918 untirl 1948, Ohristian democracy was a dominant poliltical fo11ce ,i n S}ovrukia. Orig1nated ,u nder Hungarian rll!le at the >beginning olf the twentieth cenrtn.ury, Sloviak
Chilistiian demo·c r-rucy realflf,iirmed i.itself and a,r ose ,v i1ctorious
from ,t he i:dedl'og~all. cha:O's whicli existed in Czecho-iSlovakia and in Centrail EuTope af1ter 1918. W:hi'le Trj,anon Hunga,r y was the vidiim of the Oommilliru.Sm of Belia Kuihn in
1919, SociaJl Demo:crat:s fomne:d the .strongest :po1itica1 pairty
in Czecho.,Sloivaikia. It remains t'he histodcal merit of the
great Slovaik Caitholi:c and nationa[ leader, Msg1r. Andrew
Hlinlka, for having saved Slo,vaJkia from spi.ri.itual anarchy.
As founder of ,t he Slovak Peo:ple'·s Party amd. i.ts. leader,
Hli:nlka designed for .SlovaJkia the right way of Christian
demoCTa'Cy. 'Tihe ,program of his party w:as Ito work "foir God
and the nation." - What did it mean?
From the .r eligious standpoint, the People's Party always defended the Oa;tholic tramtion of the country against
a narrow and panti-cmlarist Ozecih Husritiscrn which attempted
to conquer the Slovak people. In the hard spirituaJl struggle
Slovakia remained loyally on the side of the Roman Catholic Chu:rc:h amd in opposirt:ion to .t'he effo,r t of the governmental circles of P:mgiue which used ail[ the iresauirces. of the
State to bring ,a bowt the "emancipati on" of Ozecho~Slovakia from the infllueI11Ce ~ Rome. T. G . Ma:saryk authored
the •s 'logans "Asway from Rome" and •~Rome must ibe brought
to tria•l and ,e;onrvioted !" The Slovruks were decidedly opposed ,to the estiaJb!lishment of the soJcal,led national "Czechoglovruk cihurClh" in Sil01v;akia, whtch .they re:cognirzed onl,y
as a tool orf foreign spi.rii.itil.la1 influence.
1
From the naJtionall point orf view, the People's Party
defended the natUTal rights of the Sloivak nation which
were systema:tiica:Uy being abbTe-viated by the Prague Administration. The Czecho-S1-o;vak State in 1918, was sUipposed to be a federal union, such as the United States, be-
�58
SLOVAKIA
tween two equial par.tneTs, Ozechia (Bohemia, Moravia and
SHesia) and Slova~ia, with a common cm,rency, forei1gn policy and m~litaey defel1$e. In fa.dt, howeveT, the Ce;echs
ar'bitraril;y ohanged this nationally drualistic State into a
strong centralized, umoorian "Czoohoslovaik" State by the
Cons,titution of Fe/brua:ry 29, 1920, which was imipdsed on
the Slo:vak nation lby the so-Oal[ed "RevoluJtiorrary Pa,rliament" tihat had .been handpicked by the Prague Government.
In this way, .u nder Czech :r,ule, the SlOIV'aks were deprived of thek nationa!l rights and ;b ecame an initernal minority. In 1923, the Czech major1ty in Parfa1ment su,ppressed
the ind'iJviidu,a,l consti'burtionaJ libertiies of minorities (the
right olf free press•, tree spooclh, free asseniibl,y, etc) by
adopting the Internal Seicurirty Aot. (No. 50-1923) which
indica.ted alil efforts to;wa~d federa!lisrn as subversive. So,
"OrechoslloviaJkia" never was, in fad, a country of f:ree politiica,l ins't!ituitfons, nor a t:riue democratic State.
For these reasons, the SloJVlalk People's Party claimed in accordanice with dispositions of .t he Cleveland (191'5 ) and
the Pilttshw-gh (1918) agreements signed by the Slovaik
League of Ameriica and various Czech organmaitions - a
dualist federation, which would bring to an end the privileged situaition of the Czechs and carry on the pr.inci,ple of
equaility of bolth :peOiples in the oommon Staite If the Slovak peop'le were dlisiposed, in spkit and in ,t he interests of
Christian integration, to abandon ceI1ta·i n national prerogatives in favor of a Czecho-iSlovaJk federal government, it was
not at a1Jl disposed to relinquish the Slov<aJk nationa!l idea in
favor of a Czech, that is a foreign nationalism.
From the point of view of foreign policy, the Slovaik
Peoiple's Pairty strongly .cr.ftici'Zed the miilita,:r,y alliance
which MT. Benes signed in 1935 in Moscow with the Soviet
Union.
After the M'Uilich Agreement, when Hiit:Jler was giiven a
fa:·ee hand in Central EJwro.pe by the Western Powers, Slova;k Christian democra:cy, the biggest 1po[irtica1 force in Slovakia, was charged with the task to cond~, at su.ch a d:iJfficuilt stage, th~ policy of thalt country. Foir such a small
1
�SLOVAKIA
59
nation it was very hrurd, ind:eeld, both spiritually and politically, to oppose eff~ctiivcly a totalitarian sys'tem such as
Nazism. An iimipaI"tia:l historiography wiM, nevertheless,
recognize the resist'a.rrce which Msgr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slov•aJk Repulblic, devcloped diuring World War
II against the attempt of Nazism to estaJb'lish i.tself in his
rarucaUy pro-German elements in the Sloivak Government,
represenited m:aJinly by Vojtech Tu!k•a, the Brime Minister
and the Minister of Fore,i,gn Affaiirs, and Afexander Mach,
the Minister of Interior. The 'l:'uka-iMaich cornlbine iplayed uip
to the Namis to win t!heir favor and thus to e:Hmina'te Tiso
and his regime and ,puit 'l:'uka and his followers in their
place. But they l,ruaked popular suipport. Being .previailed upon
by the SlOIVak hiera~hiy and the people, Msgr. Joseph Tiso
..::.ecided to stay at his .p ost, and stay he did to the very end.
Tiso's merit consists in hiruving saved Slovakia and his
people from territorial d'ismeimlbeI1Inent, which was planned
by Hungary and Gemniany, as proved at the Nuremberg
trials, and in h'a!V,i ng preserved from Na'2li influence the spiritual individua!lilty of Slov,aJkia whose Christian tradition
goes back to the eighth century.
But Christian democra'Cy in Sfovakia faced its hardest
task after 1'94,5. Slovalkia was at that time occupied by the
Soviet Aruny and talken OIVer by Mir. Benes's Government
forrr:ed in the shadow of the Kremlin. Since that time Slovakia has been exposed to a terrific ideological and po'lttical
pressure from t he outside.
In the elections in 1946. ChPi:sitian democra·c y in Slovakia manifested its strength. The Cathoilics, instructed by
their hieiraTchy, gave an heroic example of great political
disciopJ.i.ne. They •v oted for ,t he Slovalk Democratic Party,
which gained 62 p€!r cent of the total ~lectorai vote; meanwhile in Czechia 56 per cent voted for pro-Communist parties ( 42 per cent for the Communists and 14 -p er cent for
the Social Democrats). Those elections were the :b est expression of the Western orientation of the Slovaik people and of
the fatal pro~Soviet position of the Czechs. In this distinction we .
the internal ,p aradox of Czecho-Slova,kia. Though
territorially farther West, the Czechs looked to Soviet Rus-
see
�60
SLOVAKIA
sia as their best ally and protector, while the S[o,vaiks, the
immediate neighbors of the Soviet Union, looked to the
Western Powers. The Benes~Gottwa!ld regime regarded this
altitude of the Sl~aks as "trea:cherouis" and, theTefore,
decided to do s01rnething aJbout it to save face in Moscow.
In the autumn of 1947, under the pretext oif con1eealing
a girouip of "sepaJI1aJtists and consptrators agaiins.t the secwrity of ,t,he State," the Sl:ovak Demo'CraNc Party was attacked
- not ontlry ,b y the Cotnmiun.ists, Qt.I't the Ozec,h democratic
par,ties, too - !n ruch a way that it could never recover
from the blo,w ''.Dwo thoU1Sand of its memlbers were imprisonoo, among them thrne olf its: deputies (iBugar, Kempny,
Stasko) and. bne of its representatiJVes in the_ GoJVernment
of the "Nationrul Fronrt," Vi'Ce~Premier John Uirsiny. With
this "coup de fooce'' by which fta:gue imposed on democratic
Slovakia a Oo:mrmunist ma:jorrty in the autonomous. Government in Bmtislava, the biggest political fac'tor in that
country was crushed. HaJVing removed in this manner their
strongest opponent in the Prague P.arJiament, the Communists coulld afterwards easiil y consoHda.te their ,p osition,
shi,fting sirrnply from the system of "Na'tiona'1 Front" to that
of the "M_a rxist majority."
Contrary to what Mr. Hubert Ripka states in his book
"Le coup d'Etat de Prague en 1948," there was, therefore, no
revolution in Prague in February 1948. There was only a
change in the internal structure of the government.
'Jihe present situation oi Christian demoomc,y in Slo·v akia is that of a resisting force to the Communist impact.
This resistance is both religious and national.
Catholiroism in Slovakia is a proven eounter-force to
Communis:n. By the imprisonment of three Bishops, Msgr.
V:oJtassruk, Msgr. Buza:lka and Msgr. Gojclic, and by keeping
in house-arrest others of the Hierarchy, .the Chrur.ch finds it
icrr:ipossilble to full.fill its obligations. But though there aire
several hundred priests in jaH, though aH the Catholic lay
elite has been "eliminated," though Christian demooracy
as a poliiticail force has been crushed, . the Sl01V'8Jk peopie
neventheless have retained a deep re!i,gious ooillViiction a:nd
have defended chU'I'Ches an:d 'Priests with no more than
�61
SLOVAKIA
sticks and bare hands against the intervention of the State
police.
From the naHonal point of view, present-day OzechoSlavaJkia offers Vhe Slovaks nothing common to a national
'Staite. 'Bheir mherenit and ,a utonomous rights hruve been repudiated by Prag;ue once again. Ozecho~S!lwalkia today is
simply one of the nll!mer()!U:s Socia[ist Reipuibl,ic.s of the Soviet orbit. Slovrukia has been depri·v ed of naitionail liberty in
the name of the SocialiSIID preached by Moscow and executed
by Prague. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that there is
only one possible solution to the situation: the application
of the right of national self-determination within the framework of a Federated Europe. This 'belief is shaired by the
Slovak Lea,g ue of America and by aJl:l organie;ations of Slo-, J.!k political ref,u,gees in the free world.
Slovak Ohnist:ian deimocraoy counts and relies on a
nu1C'l eus oif prominent exi1ed peI'.sonallitities in the United
.Jtrutes and Canada : some former Deiputies orf the Praigue
Parlrarrnernt (Dr. :EJmanruel Boehm, St€iphen B1 aslko, John
Daxner, Dr. Michael Zi:brin, Rev. Ferdinad Mondok, Dr.
Francis Orlicky, Siteiphen BeniaJk), se;veral professors (Dr.
J,o seph Cin:cik, Rev. Bonarventwre Ewe, Dr. Francis. Hrrusovsky, Reiv. Joseph PaJpin), nU1merous writers and jaurnaJlists
George Gajdos-Bre~a, Rev. Nicha1as Sprinc, Constantine
Ct.den, Dr. Joseipih Pa.iuco, Louis Kandra, Charles Sitrmen,
John Okal'). and s.evera!l former Sllova!k diploona;ts (Charles
Sidor, Dr. John Kassovk, Dr. Joseiph Kirs'Cihibaum, Dr. Joseph OmiliaJk) . All these men consider the United Statt•s as
a fixed poh11t i;n the unive~se of Archi!Inides, frOim which it
wilfil be possi,ble one day, by spiritual and physi.cal strength,
to rock Communism from its foundations. They are most
willing to conbrilbute their aJbilities and talents to effect the
h'beration of Centra!l ffiurope and the formation of a European Federati'On with a free Slovrukia in it
1
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
•
"The importance of our trea ty with the U. S.
S. R. is self-evident. Soviet Russia is rapidly freeing Europe from
Nazi tyranny. Close ties have always existed between Russia and
Czechoslovakia, and they have now been strengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, which is bound to play the leading
role in Europe after the war." - (Jan Mas aryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944) .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
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
57
SLOVAKIA
PAST AND PRESENT OF
CHRISTIAN DEMOCRACY IN SLOVAKIA
JOSEPH A. MIKUS
Firom 1918 untirl 1948, Ohristian democracy was a dominant poliltical fo11ce ,i n S}ovrukia. Orig1nated ,u nder Hungarian rll!le at the >beginning olf the twentieth cenrtn.ury, Sloviak
Chilistiian demo·c r-rucy realflf,iirmed i.itself and a,r ose ,v i1ctorious
from ,t he i:dedl'og~all. cha:O's whicli existed in Czecho-iSlovakia and in Centrail EuTope af1ter 1918. W:hi'le Trj,anon Hunga,r y was the vidiim of the Oommilliru.Sm of Belia Kuihn in
1919, SociaJl Demo:crat:s fomne:d the .strongest :po1itica1 pairty
in Czecho.,Sloivaikia. It remains t'he histodcal merit of the
great Slovaik Caitholi:c and nationa[ leader, Msg1r. Andrew
Hlinlka, for having saved Slo,vaJkia from spi.ri.itual anarchy.
As founder of ,t he Slovak Peo:ple'·s Party amd. i.ts. leader,
Hli:nlka designed for .SlovaJkia the right way of Christian
demoCTa'Cy. 'Tihe ,program of his party w:as Ito work "foir God
and the nation." - What did it mean?
From the .r eligious standpoint, the People's Party always defended the Oa;tholic tramtion of the country against
a narrow and panti-cmlarist Ozecih Husritiscrn which attempted
to conquer the Slovak people. In the hard spirituaJl struggle
Slovakia remained loyally on the side of the Roman Catholic Chu:rc:h amd in opposirt:ion to .t'he effo,r t of the governmental circles of P:mgiue which used ail[ the iresauirces. of the
State to bring ,a bowt the "emancipati on" of Ozecho~Slovakia from the infllueI11Ce ~ Rome. T. G . Ma:saryk authored
the •s 'logans "Asway from Rome" and •~Rome must ibe brought
to tria•l and ,e;onrvioted !" The Slovruks were decidedly opposed ,to the estiaJb!lishment of the soJcal,led national "Czechoglovruk cihurClh" in Sil01v;akia, whtch .they re:cognirzed onl,y
as a tool orf foreign spi.rii.itil.la1 influence.
1
From the naJtionall point orf view, the People's Party
defended the natUTal rights of the Sloivak nation which
were systema:tiica:Uy being abbTe-viated by the Prague Administration. The Czecho-S1-o;vak State in 1918, was sUipposed to be a federal union, such as the United States, be-
58
SLOVAKIA
tween two equial par.tneTs, Ozechia (Bohemia, Moravia and
SHesia) and Slova~ia, with a common cm,rency, forei1gn policy and m~litaey defel1$e. In fa.dt, howeveT, the Ce;echs
ar'bitraril;y ohanged this nationally drualistic State into a
strong centralized, umoorian "Czoohoslovaik" State by the
Cons,titution of Fe/brua:ry 29, 1920, which was imipdsed on
the Slo:vak nation lby the so-Oal[ed "RevoluJtiorrary Pa,rliament" tihat had .been handpicked by the Prague Government.
In this way, .u nder Czech :r,ule, the SlOIV'aks were deprived of thek nationa!l rights and ;b ecame an initernal minority. In 1923, the Czech major1ty in Parfa1ment su,ppressed
the ind'iJviidu,a,l consti'burtionaJ libertiies of minorities (the
right olf free press•, tree spooclh, free asseniibl,y, etc) by
adopting the Internal Seicurirty Aot. (No. 50-1923) which
indica.ted alil efforts to;wa~d federa!lisrn as subversive. So,
"OrechoslloviaJkia" never was, in fad, a country of f:ree politiica,l ins't!ituitfons, nor a t:riue democratic State.
For these reasons, the SloJVlalk People's Party claimed in accordanice with dispositions of .t he Cleveland (191'5 ) and
the Pilttshw-gh (1918) agreements signed by the Slovaik
League of Ameriica and various Czech organmaitions - a
dualist federation, which would bring to an end the privileged situaition of the Czechs and carry on the pr.inci,ple of
equaility of bolth :peOiples in the oommon Staite If the Slovak peop'le were dlisiposed, in spkit and in ,t he interests of
Christian integration, to abandon ceI1ta·i n national prerogatives in favor of a Czecho-iSlovaJk federal government, it was
not at a1Jl disposed to relinquish the Slov<aJk nationa!l idea in
favor of a Czech, that is a foreign nationalism.
From the point of view of foreign policy, the Slovaik
Peoiple's Pairty strongly .cr.ftici'Zed the miilita,:r,y alliance
which MT. Benes signed in 1935 in Moscow with the Soviet
Union.
After the M'Uilich Agreement, when Hiit:Jler was giiven a
fa:·ee hand in Central EJwro.pe by the Western Powers, Slova;k Christian democra:cy, the biggest 1po[irtica1 force in Slovakia, was charged with the task to cond~, at su.ch a d:iJfficuilt stage, th~ policy of thalt country. Foir such a small
1
SLOVAKIA
59
nation it was very hrurd, ind:eeld, both spiritually and politically, to oppose eff~ctiivcly a totalitarian sys'tem such as
Nazism. An iimipaI"tia:l historiography wiM, nevertheless,
recognize the resist'a.rrce which Msgr. Joseph Tiso, the President of the Slov•aJk Repulblic, devcloped diuring World War
II against the attempt of Nazism to estaJb'lish i.tself in his
rarucaUy pro-German elements in the Sloivak Government,
represenited m:aJinly by Vojtech Tu!k•a, the Brime Minister
and the Minister of Fore,i,gn Affaiirs, and Afexander Mach,
the Minister of Interior. The 'l:'uka-iMaich cornlbine iplayed uip
to the Namis to win t!heir favor and thus to e:Hmina'te Tiso
and his regime and ,puit 'l:'uka and his followers in their
place. But they l,ruaked popular suipport. Being .previailed upon
by the SlOIVak hiera~hiy and the people, Msgr. Joseph Tiso
..::.ecided to stay at his .p ost, and stay he did to the very end.
Tiso's merit consists in hiruving saved Slovakia and his
people from territorial d'ismeimlbeI1Inent, which was planned
by Hungary and Gemniany, as proved at the Nuremberg
trials, and in h'a!V,i ng preserved from Na'2li influence the spiritual individua!lilty of Slov,aJkia whose Christian tradition
goes back to the eighth century.
But Christian democra'Cy in Sfovakia faced its hardest
task after 1'94,5. Slovalkia was at that time occupied by the
Soviet Aruny and talken OIVer by Mir. Benes's Government
forrr:ed in the shadow of the Kremlin. Since that time Slovakia has been exposed to a terrific ideological and po'lttical
pressure from t he outside.
In the elections in 1946. ChPi:sitian democra·c y in Slovakia manifested its strength. The Cathoilics, instructed by
their hieiraTchy, gave an heroic example of great political
disciopJ.i.ne. They •v oted for ,t he Slovalk Democratic Party,
which gained 62 p€!r cent of the total ~lectorai vote; meanwhile in Czechia 56 per cent voted for pro-Communist parties ( 42 per cent for the Communists and 14 -p er cent for
the Social Democrats). Those elections were the :b est expression of the Western orientation of the Slovaik people and of
the fatal pro~Soviet position of the Czechs. In this distinction we .
the internal ,p aradox of Czecho-Slova,kia. Though
territorially farther West, the Czechs looked to Soviet Rus-
see
60
SLOVAKIA
sia as their best ally and protector, while the S[o,vaiks, the
immediate neighbors of the Soviet Union, looked to the
Western Powers. The Benes~Gottwa!ld regime regarded this
altitude of the Sl~aks as "trea:cherouis" and, theTefore,
decided to do s01rnething aJbout it to save face in Moscow.
In the autumn of 1947, under the pretext oif con1eealing
a girouip of "sepaJI1aJtists and consptrators agaiins.t the secwrity of ,t,he State," the Sl:ovak Demo'CraNc Party was attacked
- not ontlry ,b y the Cotnmiun.ists, Qt.I't the Ozec,h democratic
par,ties, too - !n ruch a way that it could never recover
from the blo,w ''.Dwo thoU1Sand of its memlbers were imprisonoo, among them thrne olf its: deputies (iBugar, Kempny,
Stasko) and. bne of its representatiJVes in the_ GoJVernment
of the "Nationrul Fronrt," Vi'Ce~Premier John Uirsiny. With
this "coup de fooce'' by which fta:gue imposed on democratic
Slovakia a Oo:mrmunist ma:jorrty in the autonomous. Government in Bmtislava, the biggest political fac'tor in that
country was crushed. HaJVing removed in this manner their
strongest opponent in the Prague P.arJiament, the Communists coulld afterwards easiil y consoHda.te their ,p osition,
shi,fting sirrnply from the system of "Na'tiona'1 Front" to that
of the "M_a rxist majority."
Contrary to what Mr. Hubert Ripka states in his book
"Le coup d'Etat de Prague en 1948," there was, therefore, no
revolution in Prague in February 1948. There was only a
change in the internal structure of the government.
'Jihe present situation oi Christian demoomc,y in Slo·v akia is that of a resisting force to the Communist impact.
This resistance is both religious and national.
Catholiroism in Slovakia is a proven eounter-force to
Communis:n. By the imprisonment of three Bishops, Msgr.
V:oJtassruk, Msgr. Buza:lka and Msgr. Gojclic, and by keeping
in house-arrest others of the Hierarchy, .the Chrur.ch finds it
icrr:ipossilble to full.fill its obligations. But though there aire
several hundred priests in jaH, though aH the Catholic lay
elite has been "eliminated," though Christian demooracy
as a poliiticail force has been crushed, . the Sl01V'8Jk peopie
neventheless have retained a deep re!i,gious ooillViiction a:nd
have defended chU'I'Ches an:d 'Priests with no more than
61
SLOVAKIA
sticks and bare hands against the intervention of the State
police.
From the naHonal point of view, present-day OzechoSlavaJkia offers Vhe Slovaks nothing common to a national
'Staite. 'Bheir mherenit and ,a utonomous rights hruve been repudiated by Prag;ue once again. Ozecho~S!lwalkia today is
simply one of the nll!mer()!U:s Socia[ist Reipuibl,ic.s of the Soviet orbit. Slovrukia has been depri·v ed of naitionail liberty in
the name of the SocialiSIID preached by Moscow and executed
by Prague. The Slovaks are firmly convinced that there is
only one possible solution to the situation: the application
of the right of national self-determination within the framework of a Federated Europe. This 'belief is shaired by the
Slovak Lea,g ue of America and by aJl:l organie;ations of Slo-, J.!k political ref,u,gees in the free world.
Slovak Ohnist:ian deimocraoy counts and relies on a
nu1C'l eus oif prominent exi1ed peI'.sonallitities in the United
.Jtrutes and Canada : some former Deiputies orf the Praigue
Parlrarrnernt (Dr. :EJmanruel Boehm, St€iphen B1 aslko, John
Daxner, Dr. Michael Zi:brin, Rev. Ferdinad Mondok, Dr.
Francis Orlicky, Siteiphen BeniaJk), se;veral professors (Dr.
J,o seph Cin:cik, Rev. Bonarventwre Ewe, Dr. Francis. Hrrusovsky, Reiv. Joseph PaJpin), nU1merous writers and jaurnaJlists
George Gajdos-Bre~a, Rev. Nicha1as Sprinc, Constantine
Ct.den, Dr. Joseipih Pa.iuco, Louis Kandra, Charles Sitrmen,
John Okal'). and s.evera!l former Sllova!k diploona;ts (Charles
Sidor, Dr. John Kassovk, Dr. Joseiph Kirs'Cihibaum, Dr. Joseph OmiliaJk) . All these men consider the United Statt•s as
a fixed poh11t i;n the unive~se of Archi!Inides, frOim which it
wilfil be possi,ble one day, by spiritual and physi.cal strength,
to rock Communism from its foundations. They are most
willing to conbrilbute their aJbilities and talents to effect the
h'beration of Centra!l ffiurope and the formation of a European Federati'On with a free Slovrukia in it
1
WHO SAi D IT? -
•
•
•
"The importance of our trea ty with the U. S.
S. R. is self-evident. Soviet Russia is rapidly freeing Europe from
Nazi tyranny. Close ties have always existed between Russia and
Czechoslovakia, and they have now been strengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, which is bound to play the leading
role in Europe after the war." - (Jan Mas aryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944) .
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Christian Democracy in Slovakia
Description
An account of the resource
Joseph A. Mikuš
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 2 (7), July 1953
pp. 57-61
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Mikuš, Joseph A., 1909-2005
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
July 1953
LCNAF+dates
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/a01fa46f3883973925608e41e6246ea6.pdf
9f80c494a979434be4c2efa3cf00fa40
PDF Text
Text
16
SLOVAKIA
CHRISTMAS IN THE WW TATRA REGION
By Robert A. Heckert
A fow yeairs ago it was .my good fortune to. spend the
Christmas hol'idays in the Low Tatra region orf Slovakia.
A'bourt two days :b efore ChTistmas I haJppened. to be in
Prague, feeling rather disconsolate a;bout the prospect of
spending this Christmas alone in a foreign city, when suddenly and quite unexpected.iy I r~eived an iruvitation to
come to Slovakia. WitJh eager anticipation I accepted.
That very night I lef.t Prague ,b y train, for my destination was 400 miles to the east, and it was most important
that I slhOIU!ld ,b e in the town of Banska Bystrica on Christmas Eve. 'Dhe train was crowded with all s.o.rts orf people,
all joyously looiking forwaird, de~ite clouds on t!he .p olitical
horizon to sipendinig the holidays at home or in the mountains. Scores of young soldiers there were, and like boys
in any country in the world, they we-re proud oif their uniforms and indescrilbably hasppy in the knowledge that they
wen:e going hOime to sweetheart., to Mother and Father, and
the family hearth.
It was stil.l daJI'.k when we reaidhed BratislaJva on the
Dant11be. Most of the town was still asloop, 1b ut quite a
large delegation of holiday seekers got on our train tJhere.
Many orf them were Hungarians, some were Austria.ins, but
most were Slovaks, and I was the only .Ame:rican. Almost
everybody was carryilllg a pair of skis, for rpe,oiple in this
part orf the WOI'ld feel like a holiday is not complete without skis.
As we left BratiStlava behind we were oive•r taiken by the
ever...recurri:ng miracle orf d8Jwn. Slowly 1!hrough the early
morning hou~s our train wound its way up the mountain
vaHey, now white with fresh fallen snow. At each village
station a proud peasant father and mother were there to
welcome a son who was coming from the big city fa,r away.
Pride, humility and deep affection mingled to produce a
scene, ciharacteri:Sltically SlovaJk, which has left a permanent
maTk on this olbserver.
�SLOVAKIA
17
It was albout noon when our train reached the. town of
Banska Bystrilca. Uipon emerging from the train I felt at
on'Ce that I was in a spot in whidh charm and grandeur were
mi·n gled in.a wondrous way. In the distance on alil sides were
snow--covered mountadns, damzling in the sun. At a lower
altitude was a ,b elt oif forests, and in tihe center of this
magnificent panorama was the old town of Banska Bystrica, a peil'lfect gem in a perfect setting. Then it was that I
U!Ilderstood why it was called "The Pea.I'll of 'Sl01va!kia." The
spiTes in its old medieval church, the ancient ruined castle
aloog the rirver, the color a1I1d quaintness of the old houses,
all com!bined to giive me the feeling that I was in a dream
world.
/My hosts were at the station to meet me. They put
me to 'b ed at once, for I had had no sl~ on the train the
nig,ht before .
.A!bout six o'clock in the eveniillg I was awa!kened by
the pealing of clhiurch bells. I arose at once, and quickly
made myself ready for the evening's fesitirvities, for in Slova'ki.a. tihe grea;t moment oif the year comes on Ohristmas
Eve. As if 'b y magic a doorr wa.c;. opened,. and I was ushered
into a. new and gforio:us kimgdb!In. The room was lighted with
candles, 8Jlld the people in the, room seemed to be transfigured by some mir.aJcUlous power into wonderf.u!l beiillgs. It was
Christmas filve. There in a corner of the room was a Christmas tree, and rut the taible in the center of the room stood
the grrundmother, the father and mother, and the children.
They seemed to ibe hruppy to haJVe a guest from faroff Ameri'Ca on this unique occasion.
We sat do1W1I1 to a simple meal of which the princ:iipal
dish was fresh caz,p. The fish , as we iknow, was the firrstknown Christian symb.ol, going back to tihe time of the
Apostles in the first centuriy A.D. After this simiple sUipper
the famH.y ,g rowp gathered around the Christmas tree 3.IIld
exchanged gifts. This was followed by the singing of carols
and 0th.err ChTistian hymns, and also· folik-<Songs, with the
father aJccompa,nying on a gwtarr. There was singing until
albout .ten o'dodk, wlhen a1l retired for the night.
Next morning, when I loo\ked out the window, I saw
that a fresh mantle of snow had fal.len that night. This
�18
SLOVAKIA
made all tlhe skiers hruppy, for it meant that there would
be good skimg through the holidays. Skiing is especia:Hy fine
when fresh light snow has fa:Hen on an old layeT of snow
thart has pa,oked. The under layer of paJcked snow serves
as a solid cushion, while the top layer of fresh snow is li:ke
the wax that is added to a hardwood dancing floOT. •' ·.
Following church in the ea•rly morning we htked··buf to
.
a hili whiclh was good for skiing aJbout three mHes from
the
center of the town. Soores. of people we,r e a'lready there when
we came. SmaH chHdren as, young as six yearrs were on
skis, some .of them showing remrurlkarble ~ill and courage.
In many cases tlhere were whole frumiiies on skis, father . and
motheT, and the chilidren.
L
'.. -·
• -l,.
You can ima:gine what healthy appetites we had 'Yhen
we got ba;clk after this exer.cise in the healthy mount?,in
air. Often a;fter Slllpper and a rest, we would talc~ , a little
strroH throUJgh the main street of the town. Pewsamts in_their
gor.geous costUJffies rud:ded a riot of color to this most colorful of seasons. It was a ravishing sight to see a red-<cheeked
peasant .g irl with a hrund-iworiked, vari-icolored kerchief round
her darik hair, and wearing a go·r geous hand-worked dress
that must have taJken a year to make. The lo,w er part of her
dress was pr~domina:ntly red, in contrast to her black leather
boots, whi~h crume up almost to her knees. She was rivalled
by several dozen girls in costume, rolliclding in the sno..w,
with a trooip olf men, also in peasa:nt costume, at their heels.
We could hear beaiuti!ful Christmas mus~c floating in the air,
coming fu-om somewheTe in the nearest mountain above the
town. 'I1he whoJe scene, with sound effects, seemed to be too
bea:urtiiful to be true.
One day we .decided to visit a village a;bout six miles
away. We ,p ut on good heaivy warm boots, and lots of
sweaters, and carried some lunch with us, for we kne,w that
we would .be gone most of the day. It was a delightful hike
through forest land in la<rge part, and over the country
roa,ds. Several times we passed gypsies, w!ho are ,quite numerous in this part olf the wodd. Not infrequently they
would be carrying a stringed musical instTUJffient, by which
many of them earned their living in the towns. On and
�SLOVAKIA
19
on we walked. Often, as we were approaching the toip of a
hill, or a cross..road, there loomed beforre us a carved,
wooden c:rulcifix, liifo-si•ze, silhouetted against t!he clea·r blue
sky, a centuiries-oM feature off the SlO!Vak landscaipe, aind
sym'bol of a reliigioin deep}y :iimbedded in the Sloivak heart,
the heaJrts of the over.whelming majority. 'Dhis fact came
home to me arud left its indelilble ma;:r,k rus we hilked through
the snow.
Finally we reruched the village. As we came lllp the main
street of the viHruge all the boys and girls, arrd all the dogs
came rushing orut to greet us with wild-eyed curiosity.
The dogs barlked as they had never barlked before, and they
and the children suirrounded .us as we .progressed to:ward the
centerr of tJhe vinage. The news of our coming sipread like
wildfire, and when the v:iillage may,or heard it he quickly prepared to greet us. He was a fine Slovak type, gentle, as
most of them are, with small eyes, deHcate chin, and a Roman nose. The SloivaJks have been caJled the "doveJJ.ike"
people.
When the village mayor heard that I was froim Amer.
ica, . .he said that one of his villagers had lived in America
a long time, but had come bacik to his native viJlage to fore
the rest of his days. We werut to, see him. He was quite an
old man now and had already been baok in his homeland
for some years. He had for.gotten much aJbout America,
but he recalled that his life had been one of hard work,
of su:f.fering, and of saving. He had wonked in the steel mill
at Johnstown, PennsyJ.vania. When he told us tJhat, I saluted him as a fellow-worker, for in my own youth I had
to.i'led i'n the grim and gri:my steel miills o.f Pennsylrvania
some 35 years ago, side by side with many a sorn of Slovakia, and in the glare of the furnaices dUJring loo.g nights, I
had listened to some of them pourin1g tales of Slovakia
into my ears. The old man looked out the window of his
cottage with contentment. He was content to die here in
his natiive villruge on his native soiJ.
We went into se;veral homes in the village. In one of
the peasant huts a little girl of a!bout ten years was sitri,pping and deaning goosefeathers to be used for featherbeds
�20
SLOVAKIA
-and pill.lows. The :tlloor o.f the hwt was earthen, and in one
corner was a huge stove made of bricik. Porcelainware hung
on the walls, anrli on a talble was a huge Bible. The father
was there, 1but the motlher had gone to mariket in town that
morning to sehl her eggs, and butter and cheese. The father
had felt honored that we had come to his home. He gave us
fresh mHk to drink with the Lunch that we had br011i:,c0iht
along, and he told us stories rubout 1id'e in the village. He
asked me whether I lklllew certain individuals wiho had gone
to America f11om this villruge. They had never been heard
from again aifter they went ruwaiy. He mentioned names and
places in different parts of the United States, but, a:las, he
fai-led to realize the enornnous distances jn Arrnerica, and my
extremely limited acqu1ai,n tanceshi1p with tihe Slo.valk immigrrution in America .
Like all SloviaJk peasants, the :poople in this village
wore .picturesque costumes. Americans of Slovak birth am.d
upbringing do not need to 1be told that costumes from one
village to another in .Slova1cia may vary only in some sliglht
debaN, but the variation in d~il is unique to each particular
villruge, and mariks the inhaJbit,a nt of a particular village.
The practiced dbsez,ver, upon seeing a peasant in a market
town among crowds of pea,srunts on market day, oan name
the villaige from which the peasant comes lby noting the
disti.n:otirve detail in :hiiis or her costume.
Toward lrute afternoon o<f this day in tlhe vi!hlage we
started baclk to BaJilSka Bystrica. On the road we ·met the
peasant mother returning from maliket, trrud!gi:ng along
through the snow with a heruvy pruClk on her 1b aak. She had
walked six miles to the mairiket tfurough the snow very
early that morning wi1Jh her healVY pruck, and now she was
wallking back with another heavy load of t'hirnigs she had
bought for the family . But she was all smiles when she
crume abreast of us, and she stopped to ta:llk. S!he was full
of all that happened that day in tlhe toiwn, rund she had to
teH us aJbout it. After a whHe she put her b~g bag on her
baidk again, showered us with compliments rund good wishes,
waved a smiling farewell, and went off down the road
toward the village. She had left a wonderi,f.ul wa.T!IIJ.,tJh in our
hearts, this little Slovruk woman, whose name I could not
�SLOVAKIA
21
say, but who-se simple, rug,ged, yet sweet .personality will
remain with me fur a, long while.
The .s un was setting as we came to the toip of the
last hill overlooiking the town oif Banska By:strioa. 'Dhe
North Star was already out, and in the east a full ...rounded
moon cast a sHrveey beam Oiver the crest of tlh.e mountain
and in a few miootes shown in her fu11 splendor. Soon a
light aJPpea;red in the tOWill, and then anOither, and still anotiheT; and then we could hear the farofd' sound of clh.urch
bells with tbek ethereal purity of tone, wih ich can be heard
only in Eu~pe. And then silence reigned again. For a whiile
we.stood there in that sacred silence, beholding the glory of
God in the heawens and illlVokiillg His bleSS1I11g upon the people of Ba.nska Bystriica and 1..11pon the children Olf men everywhere.
A few minutes later we reentered tlh.e town and thus
ended our druy's pilgrimage.
Next diary I journeyed iba:ck to Prague. Miy ho.liday wa'S
ov~. But a:s long as I li:ve I shaH remember that season
spent in the Low 'Datras with peculiar vividness and satisfaction. I hope sincere:ly thait many of you, my readers,
m!i,y some day have the pri;vilege oif sojourning in. that picturesque and memomlble lamrl - Slovakia, wh:i.ch I lo,ve.
• • •
WHO SAID IT?
"We can ottl:y repeat ,t hat neither Austria nor Hungary,
and prolbaJbly not even Gerunany, nor even the Slovaks, woun.d
a:cceipt in the iong I'lliil. tlle existence of Czoohoslovakia.
Therefore -t he graftmg olf OzoohoslovaJkia on to a Danubian
federation is hair&y possilble. In such a framewo.nk she would
simiplry continue to lbe what she was in her prevfous existence: an international oalamity. The position would !be d.iifferent in .the case of Bohemfa and Moravia being separated
from Slovakia. The od'ten repeated argument that Czeohoslova:kia's brea;king l.llp into her naJtural components wO'U!ld
cause an even gireaiter disfoca:tion in the DanrUl'be Basin, fails
to convince, if one rea!li.zes that such a part.iition. is the essentia1l iprerequisite oif the oreation o'f a greater State entity."
- F. 0. Miik.sche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, pp. 215-21'6 ; FaJber and Faiber, Ltd., London).
�
16
SLOVAKIA
CHRISTMAS IN THE WW TATRA REGION
By Robert A. Heckert
A fow yeairs ago it was .my good fortune to. spend the
Christmas hol'idays in the Low Tatra region orf Slovakia.
A'bourt two days :b efore ChTistmas I haJppened. to be in
Prague, feeling rather disconsolate a;bout the prospect of
spending this Christmas alone in a foreign city, when suddenly and quite unexpected.iy I r~eived an iruvitation to
come to Slovakia. WitJh eager anticipation I accepted.
That very night I lef.t Prague ,b y train, for my destination was 400 miles to the east, and it was most important
that I slhOIU!ld ,b e in the town of Banska Bystrica on Christmas Eve. 'Dhe train was crowded with all s.o.rts orf people,
all joyously looiking forwaird, de~ite clouds on t!he .p olitical
horizon to sipendinig the holidays at home or in the mountains. Scores of young soldiers there were, and like boys
in any country in the world, they we-re proud oif their uniforms and indescrilbably hasppy in the knowledge that they
wen:e going hOime to sweetheart., to Mother and Father, and
the family hearth.
It was stil.l daJI'.k when we reaidhed BratislaJva on the
Dant11be. Most of the town was still asloop, 1b ut quite a
large delegation of holiday seekers got on our train tJhere.
Many orf them were Hungarians, some were Austria.ins, but
most were Slovaks, and I was the only .Ame:rican. Almost
everybody was carryilllg a pair of skis, for rpe,oiple in this
part orf the WOI'ld feel like a holiday is not complete without skis.
As we left BratiStlava behind we were oive•r taiken by the
ever...recurri:ng miracle orf d8Jwn. Slowly 1!hrough the early
morning hou~s our train wound its way up the mountain
vaHey, now white with fresh fallen snow. At each village
station a proud peasant father and mother were there to
welcome a son who was coming from the big city fa,r away.
Pride, humility and deep affection mingled to produce a
scene, ciharacteri:Sltically SlovaJk, which has left a permanent
maTk on this olbserver.
�SLOVAKIA
17
It was albout noon when our train reached the. town of
Banska Bystrilca. Uipon emerging from the train I felt at
on'Ce that I was in a spot in whidh charm and grandeur were
mi·n gled in.a wondrous way. In the distance on alil sides were
snow--covered mountadns, damzling in the sun. At a lower
altitude was a ,b elt oif forests, and in tihe center of this
magnificent panorama was the old town of Banska Bystrica, a peil'lfect gem in a perfect setting. Then it was that I
U!Ilderstood why it was called "The Pea.I'll of 'Sl01va!kia." The
spiTes in its old medieval church, the ancient ruined castle
aloog the rirver, the color a1I1d quaintness of the old houses,
all com!bined to giive me the feeling that I was in a dream
world.
/My hosts were at the station to meet me. They put
me to 'b ed at once, for I had had no sl~ on the train the
nig,ht before .
.A!bout six o'clock in the eveniillg I was awa!kened by
the pealing of clhiurch bells. I arose at once, and quickly
made myself ready for the evening's fesitirvities, for in Slova'ki.a. tihe grea;t moment oif the year comes on Ohristmas
Eve. As if 'b y magic a doorr wa.c;. opened,. and I was ushered
into a. new and gforio:us kimgdb!In. The room was lighted with
candles, 8Jlld the people in the, room seemed to be transfigured by some mir.aJcUlous power into wonderf.u!l beiillgs. It was
Christmas filve. There in a corner of the room was a Christmas tree, and rut the taible in the center of the room stood
the grrundmother, the father and mother, and the children.
They seemed to ibe hruppy to haJVe a guest from faroff Ameri'Ca on this unique occasion.
We sat do1W1I1 to a simple meal of which the princ:iipal
dish was fresh caz,p. The fish , as we iknow, was the firrstknown Christian symb.ol, going back to tihe time of the
Apostles in the first centuriy A.D. After this simiple sUipper
the famH.y ,g rowp gathered around the Christmas tree 3.IIld
exchanged gifts. This was followed by the singing of carols
and 0th.err ChTistian hymns, and also· folik-<Songs, with the
father aJccompa,nying on a gwtarr. There was singing until
albout .ten o'dodk, wlhen a1l retired for the night.
Next morning, when I loo\ked out the window, I saw
that a fresh mantle of snow had fal.len that night. This
�18
SLOVAKIA
made all tlhe skiers hruppy, for it meant that there would
be good skimg through the holidays. Skiing is especia:Hy fine
when fresh light snow has fa:Hen on an old layeT of snow
thart has pa,oked. The under layer of paJcked snow serves
as a solid cushion, while the top layer of fresh snow is li:ke
the wax that is added to a hardwood dancing floOT. •' ·.
Following church in the ea•rly morning we htked··buf to
.
a hili whiclh was good for skiing aJbout three mHes from
the
center of the town. Soores. of people we,r e a'lready there when
we came. SmaH chHdren as, young as six yearrs were on
skis, some .of them showing remrurlkarble ~ill and courage.
In many cases tlhere were whole frumiiies on skis, father . and
motheT, and the chilidren.
L
'.. -·
• -l,.
You can ima:gine what healthy appetites we had 'Yhen
we got ba;clk after this exer.cise in the healthy mount?,in
air. Often a;fter Slllpper and a rest, we would talc~ , a little
strroH throUJgh the main street of the town. Pewsamts in_their
gor.geous costUJffies rud:ded a riot of color to this most colorful of seasons. It was a ravishing sight to see a red-<cheeked
peasant .g irl with a hrund-iworiked, vari-icolored kerchief round
her darik hair, and wearing a go·r geous hand-worked dress
that must have taJken a year to make. The lo,w er part of her
dress was pr~domina:ntly red, in contrast to her black leather
boots, whi~h crume up almost to her knees. She was rivalled
by several dozen girls in costume, rolliclding in the sno..w,
with a trooip olf men, also in peasa:nt costume, at their heels.
We could hear beaiuti!ful Christmas mus~c floating in the air,
coming fu-om somewheTe in the nearest mountain above the
town. 'I1he whoJe scene, with sound effects, seemed to be too
bea:urtiiful to be true.
One day we .decided to visit a village a;bout six miles
away. We ,p ut on good heaivy warm boots, and lots of
sweaters, and carried some lunch with us, for we kne,w that
we would .be gone most of the day. It was a delightful hike
through forest land in la<rge part, and over the country
roa,ds. Several times we passed gypsies, w!ho are ,quite numerous in this part olf the wodd. Not infrequently they
would be carrying a stringed musical instTUJffient, by which
many of them earned their living in the towns. On and
�SLOVAKIA
19
on we walked. Often, as we were approaching the toip of a
hill, or a cross..road, there loomed beforre us a carved,
wooden c:rulcifix, liifo-si•ze, silhouetted against t!he clea·r blue
sky, a centuiries-oM feature off the SlO!Vak landscaipe, aind
sym'bol of a reliigioin deep}y :iimbedded in the Sloivak heart,
the heaJrts of the over.whelming majority. 'Dhis fact came
home to me arud left its indelilble ma;:r,k rus we hilked through
the snow.
Finally we reruched the village. As we came lllp the main
street of the viHruge all the boys and girls, arrd all the dogs
came rushing orut to greet us with wild-eyed curiosity.
The dogs barlked as they had never barlked before, and they
and the children suirrounded .us as we .progressed to:ward the
centerr of tJhe vinage. The news of our coming sipread like
wildfire, and when the v:iillage may,or heard it he quickly prepared to greet us. He was a fine Slovak type, gentle, as
most of them are, with small eyes, deHcate chin, and a Roman nose. The SloivaJks have been caJled the "doveJJ.ike"
people.
When the village mayor heard that I was froim Amer.
ica, . .he said that one of his villagers had lived in America
a long time, but had come bacik to his native viJlage to fore
the rest of his days. We werut to, see him. He was quite an
old man now and had already been baok in his homeland
for some years. He had for.gotten much aJbout America,
but he recalled that his life had been one of hard work,
of su:f.fering, and of saving. He had wonked in the steel mill
at Johnstown, PennsyJ.vania. When he told us tJhat, I saluted him as a fellow-worker, for in my own youth I had
to.i'led i'n the grim and gri:my steel miills o.f Pennsylrvania
some 35 years ago, side by side with many a sorn of Slovakia, and in the glare of the furnaices dUJring loo.g nights, I
had listened to some of them pourin1g tales of Slovakia
into my ears. The old man looked out the window of his
cottage with contentment. He was content to die here in
his natiive villruge on his native soiJ.
We went into se;veral homes in the village. In one of
the peasant huts a little girl of a!bout ten years was sitri,pping and deaning goosefeathers to be used for featherbeds
�20
SLOVAKIA
-and pill.lows. The :tlloor o.f the hwt was earthen, and in one
corner was a huge stove made of bricik. Porcelainware hung
on the walls, anrli on a talble was a huge Bible. The father
was there, 1but the motlher had gone to mariket in town that
morning to sehl her eggs, and butter and cheese. The father
had felt honored that we had come to his home. He gave us
fresh mHk to drink with the Lunch that we had br011i:,c0iht
along, and he told us stories rubout 1id'e in the village. He
asked me whether I lklllew certain individuals wiho had gone
to America f11om this villruge. They had never been heard
from again aifter they went ruwaiy. He mentioned names and
places in different parts of the United States, but, a:las, he
fai-led to realize the enornnous distances jn Arrnerica, and my
extremely limited acqu1ai,n tanceshi1p with tihe Slo.valk immigrrution in America .
Like all SloviaJk peasants, the :poople in this village
wore .picturesque costumes. Americans of Slovak birth am.d
upbringing do not need to 1be told that costumes from one
village to another in .Slova1cia may vary only in some sliglht
debaN, but the variation in d~il is unique to each particular
villruge, and mariks the inhaJbit,a nt of a particular village.
The practiced dbsez,ver, upon seeing a peasant in a market
town among crowds of pea,srunts on market day, oan name
the villaige from which the peasant comes lby noting the
disti.n:otirve detail in :hiiis or her costume.
Toward lrute afternoon o<f this day in tlhe vi!hlage we
started baclk to BaJilSka Bystrica. On the road we ·met the
peasant mother returning from maliket, trrud!gi:ng along
through the snow with a heruvy pruClk on her 1b aak. She had
walked six miles to the mairiket tfurough the snow very
early that morning wi1Jh her healVY pruck, and now she was
wallking back with another heavy load of t'hirnigs she had
bought for the family . But she was all smiles when she
crume abreast of us, and she stopped to ta:llk. S!he was full
of all that happened that day in tlhe toiwn, rund she had to
teH us aJbout it. After a whHe she put her b~g bag on her
baidk again, showered us with compliments rund good wishes,
waved a smiling farewell, and went off down the road
toward the village. She had left a wonderi,f.ul wa.T!IIJ.,tJh in our
hearts, this little Slovruk woman, whose name I could not
�SLOVAKIA
21
say, but who-se simple, rug,ged, yet sweet .personality will
remain with me fur a, long while.
The .s un was setting as we came to the toip of the
last hill overlooiking the town oif Banska By:strioa. 'Dhe
North Star was already out, and in the east a full ...rounded
moon cast a sHrveey beam Oiver the crest of tlh.e mountain
and in a few miootes shown in her fu11 splendor. Soon a
light aJPpea;red in the tOWill, and then anOither, and still anotiheT; and then we could hear the farofd' sound of clh.urch
bells with tbek ethereal purity of tone, wih ich can be heard
only in Eu~pe. And then silence reigned again. For a whiile
we.stood there in that sacred silence, beholding the glory of
God in the heawens and illlVokiillg His bleSS1I11g upon the people of Ba.nska Bystriica and 1..11pon the children Olf men everywhere.
A few minutes later we reentered tlh.e town and thus
ended our druy's pilgrimage.
Next diary I journeyed iba:ck to Prague. Miy ho.liday wa'S
ov~. But a:s long as I li:ve I shaH remember that season
spent in the Low 'Datras with peculiar vividness and satisfaction. I hope sincere:ly thait many of you, my readers,
m!i,y some day have the pri;vilege oif sojourning in. that picturesque and memomlble lamrl - Slovakia, wh:i.ch I lo,ve.
• • •
WHO SAID IT?
"We can ottl:y repeat ,t hat neither Austria nor Hungary,
and prolbaJbly not even Gerunany, nor even the Slovaks, woun.d
a:cceipt in the iong I'lliil. tlle existence of Czoohoslovakia.
Therefore -t he graftmg olf OzoohoslovaJkia on to a Danubian
federation is hair&y possilble. In such a framewo.nk she would
simiplry continue to lbe what she was in her prevfous existence: an international oalamity. The position would !be d.iifferent in .the case of Bohemfa and Moravia being separated
from Slovakia. The od'ten repeated argument that Czeohoslova:kia's brea;king l.llp into her naJtural components wO'U!ld
cause an even gireaiter disfoca:tion in the DanrUl'be Basin, fails
to convince, if one rea!li.zes that such a part.iition. is the essentia1l iprerequisite oif the oreation o'f a greater State entity."
- F. 0. Miik.sche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, pp. 215-21'6 ; FaJber and Faiber, 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
16
SLOVAKIA
CHRISTMAS IN THE WW TATRA REGION
By Robert A. Heckert
A fow yeairs ago it was .my good fortune to. spend the
Christmas hol'idays in the Low Tatra region orf Slovakia.
A'bourt two days :b efore ChTistmas I haJppened. to be in
Prague, feeling rather disconsolate a;bout the prospect of
spending this Christmas alone in a foreign city, when suddenly and quite unexpected.iy I r~eived an iruvitation to
come to Slovakia. WitJh eager anticipation I accepted.
That very night I lef.t Prague ,b y train, for my destination was 400 miles to the east, and it was most important
that I slhOIU!ld ,b e in the town of Banska Bystrica on Christmas Eve. 'Dhe train was crowded with all s.o.rts orf people,
all joyously looiking forwaird, de~ite clouds on t!he .p olitical
horizon to sipendinig the holidays at home or in the mountains. Scores of young soldiers there were, and like boys
in any country in the world, they we-re proud oif their uniforms and indescrilbably hasppy in the knowledge that they
wen:e going hOime to sweetheart., to Mother and Father, and
the family hearth.
It was stil.l daJI'.k when we reaidhed BratislaJva on the
Dant11be. Most of the town was still asloop, 1b ut quite a
large delegation of holiday seekers got on our train tJhere.
Many orf them were Hungarians, some were Austria.ins, but
most were Slovaks, and I was the only .Ame:rican. Almost
everybody was carryilllg a pair of skis, for rpe,oiple in this
part orf the WOI'ld feel like a holiday is not complete without skis.
As we left BratiStlava behind we were oive•r taiken by the
ever...recurri:ng miracle orf d8Jwn. Slowly 1!hrough the early
morning hou~s our train wound its way up the mountain
vaHey, now white with fresh fallen snow. At each village
station a proud peasant father and mother were there to
welcome a son who was coming from the big city fa,r away.
Pride, humility and deep affection mingled to produce a
scene, ciharacteri:Sltically SlovaJk, which has left a permanent
maTk on this olbserver.
SLOVAKIA
17
It was albout noon when our train reached the. town of
Banska Bystrilca. Uipon emerging from the train I felt at
on'Ce that I was in a spot in whidh charm and grandeur were
mi·n gled in.a wondrous way. In the distance on alil sides were
snow--covered mountadns, damzling in the sun. At a lower
altitude was a ,b elt oif forests, and in tihe center of this
magnificent panorama was the old town of Banska Bystrica, a peil'lfect gem in a perfect setting. Then it was that I
U!Ilderstood why it was called "The Pea.I'll of 'Sl01va!kia." The
spiTes in its old medieval church, the ancient ruined castle
aloog the rirver, the color a1I1d quaintness of the old houses,
all com!bined to giive me the feeling that I was in a dream
world.
/My hosts were at the station to meet me. They put
me to 'b ed at once, for I had had no sl~ on the train the
nig,ht before .
.A!bout six o'clock in the eveniillg I was awa!kened by
the pealing of clhiurch bells. I arose at once, and quickly
made myself ready for the evening's fesitirvities, for in Slova'ki.a. tihe grea;t moment oif the year comes on Ohristmas
Eve. As if 'b y magic a doorr wa.c;. opened,. and I was ushered
into a. new and gforio:us kimgdb!In. The room was lighted with
candles, 8Jlld the people in the, room seemed to be transfigured by some mir.aJcUlous power into wonderf.u!l beiillgs. It was
Christmas filve. There in a corner of the room was a Christmas tree, and rut the taible in the center of the room stood
the grrundmother, the father and mother, and the children.
They seemed to ibe hruppy to haJVe a guest from faroff Ameri'Ca on this unique occasion.
We sat do1W1I1 to a simple meal of which the princ:iipal
dish was fresh caz,p. The fish , as we iknow, was the firrstknown Christian symb.ol, going back to tihe time of the
Apostles in the first centuriy A.D. After this simiple sUipper
the famH.y ,g rowp gathered around the Christmas tree 3.IIld
exchanged gifts. This was followed by the singing of carols
and 0th.err ChTistian hymns, and also· folik-<Songs, with the
father aJccompa,nying on a gwtarr. There was singing until
albout .ten o'dodk, wlhen a1l retired for the night.
Next morning, when I loo\ked out the window, I saw
that a fresh mantle of snow had fal.len that night. This
18
SLOVAKIA
made all tlhe skiers hruppy, for it meant that there would
be good skimg through the holidays. Skiing is especia:Hy fine
when fresh light snow has fa:Hen on an old layeT of snow
thart has pa,oked. The under layer of paJcked snow serves
as a solid cushion, while the top layer of fresh snow is li:ke
the wax that is added to a hardwood dancing floOT. •' ·.
Following church in the ea•rly morning we htked··buf to
.
a hili whiclh was good for skiing aJbout three mHes from
the
center of the town. Soores. of people we,r e a'lready there when
we came. SmaH chHdren as, young as six yearrs were on
skis, some .of them showing remrurlkarble ~ill and courage.
In many cases tlhere were whole frumiiies on skis, father . and
motheT, and the chilidren.
L
'.. -·
• -l,.
You can ima:gine what healthy appetites we had 'Yhen
we got ba;clk after this exer.cise in the healthy mount?,in
air. Often a;fter Slllpper and a rest, we would talc~ , a little
strroH throUJgh the main street of the town. Pewsamts in_their
gor.geous costUJffies rud:ded a riot of color to this most colorful of seasons. It was a ravishing sight to see a red-<cheeked
peasant .g irl with a hrund-iworiked, vari-icolored kerchief round
her darik hair, and wearing a go·r geous hand-worked dress
that must have taJken a year to make. The lo,w er part of her
dress was pr~domina:ntly red, in contrast to her black leather
boots, whi~h crume up almost to her knees. She was rivalled
by several dozen girls in costume, rolliclding in the sno..w,
with a trooip olf men, also in peasa:nt costume, at their heels.
We could hear beaiuti!ful Christmas mus~c floating in the air,
coming fu-om somewheTe in the nearest mountain above the
town. 'I1he whoJe scene, with sound effects, seemed to be too
bea:urtiiful to be true.
One day we .decided to visit a village a;bout six miles
away. We ,p ut on good heaivy warm boots, and lots of
sweaters, and carried some lunch with us, for we kne,w that
we would .be gone most of the day. It was a delightful hike
through forest land in la<rge part, and over the country
roa,ds. Several times we passed gypsies, w!ho are ,quite numerous in this part olf the wodd. Not infrequently they
would be carrying a stringed musical instTUJffient, by which
many of them earned their living in the towns. On and
SLOVAKIA
19
on we walked. Often, as we were approaching the toip of a
hill, or a cross..road, there loomed beforre us a carved,
wooden c:rulcifix, liifo-si•ze, silhouetted against t!he clea·r blue
sky, a centuiries-oM feature off the SlO!Vak landscaipe, aind
sym'bol of a reliigioin deep}y :iimbedded in the Sloivak heart,
the heaJrts of the over.whelming majority. 'Dhis fact came
home to me arud left its indelilble ma;:r,k rus we hilked through
the snow.
Finally we reruched the village. As we came lllp the main
street of the viHruge all the boys and girls, arrd all the dogs
came rushing orut to greet us with wild-eyed curiosity.
The dogs barlked as they had never barlked before, and they
and the children suirrounded .us as we .progressed to:ward the
centerr of tJhe vinage. The news of our coming sipread like
wildfire, and when the v:iillage may,or heard it he quickly prepared to greet us. He was a fine Slovak type, gentle, as
most of them are, with small eyes, deHcate chin, and a Roman nose. The SloivaJks have been caJled the "doveJJ.ike"
people.
When the village mayor heard that I was froim Amer.
ica, . .he said that one of his villagers had lived in America
a long time, but had come bacik to his native viJlage to fore
the rest of his days. We werut to, see him. He was quite an
old man now and had already been baok in his homeland
for some years. He had for.gotten much aJbout America,
but he recalled that his life had been one of hard work,
of su:f.fering, and of saving. He had wonked in the steel mill
at Johnstown, PennsyJ.vania. When he told us tJhat, I saluted him as a fellow-worker, for in my own youth I had
to.i'led i'n the grim and gri:my steel miills o.f Pennsylrvania
some 35 years ago, side by side with many a sorn of Slovakia, and in the glare of the furnaices dUJring loo.g nights, I
had listened to some of them pourin1g tales of Slovakia
into my ears. The old man looked out the window of his
cottage with contentment. He was content to die here in
his natiive villruge on his native soiJ.
We went into se;veral homes in the village. In one of
the peasant huts a little girl of a!bout ten years was sitri,pping and deaning goosefeathers to be used for featherbeds
20
SLOVAKIA
-and pill.lows. The :tlloor o.f the hwt was earthen, and in one
corner was a huge stove made of bricik. Porcelainware hung
on the walls, anrli on a talble was a huge Bible. The father
was there, 1but the motlher had gone to mariket in town that
morning to sehl her eggs, and butter and cheese. The father
had felt honored that we had come to his home. He gave us
fresh mHk to drink with the Lunch that we had br011i:,c0iht
along, and he told us stories rubout 1id'e in the village. He
asked me whether I lklllew certain individuals wiho had gone
to America f11om this villruge. They had never been heard
from again aifter they went ruwaiy. He mentioned names and
places in different parts of the United States, but, a:las, he
fai-led to realize the enornnous distances jn Arrnerica, and my
extremely limited acqu1ai,n tanceshi1p with tihe Slo.valk immigrrution in America .
Like all SloviaJk peasants, the :poople in this village
wore .picturesque costumes. Americans of Slovak birth am.d
upbringing do not need to 1be told that costumes from one
village to another in .Slova1cia may vary only in some sliglht
debaN, but the variation in d~il is unique to each particular
villruge, and mariks the inhaJbit,a nt of a particular village.
The practiced dbsez,ver, upon seeing a peasant in a market
town among crowds of pea,srunts on market day, oan name
the villaige from which the peasant comes lby noting the
disti.n:otirve detail in :hiiis or her costume.
Toward lrute afternoon o<f this day in tlhe vi!hlage we
started baclk to BaJilSka Bystrica. On the road we ·met the
peasant mother returning from maliket, trrud!gi:ng along
through the snow with a heruvy pruClk on her 1b aak. She had
walked six miles to the mairiket tfurough the snow very
early that morning wi1Jh her healVY pruck, and now she was
wallking back with another heavy load of t'hirnigs she had
bought for the family . But she was all smiles when she
crume abreast of us, and she stopped to ta:llk. S!he was full
of all that happened that day in tlhe toiwn, rund she had to
teH us aJbout it. After a whHe she put her b~g bag on her
baidk again, showered us with compliments rund good wishes,
waved a smiling farewell, and went off down the road
toward the village. She had left a wonderi,f.ul wa.T!IIJ.,tJh in our
hearts, this little Slovruk woman, whose name I could not
SLOVAKIA
21
say, but who-se simple, rug,ged, yet sweet .personality will
remain with me fur a, long while.
The .s un was setting as we came to the toip of the
last hill overlooiking the town oif Banska By:strioa. 'Dhe
North Star was already out, and in the east a full ...rounded
moon cast a sHrveey beam Oiver the crest of tlh.e mountain
and in a few miootes shown in her fu11 splendor. Soon a
light aJPpea;red in the tOWill, and then anOither, and still anotiheT; and then we could hear the farofd' sound of clh.urch
bells with tbek ethereal purity of tone, wih ich can be heard
only in Eu~pe. And then silence reigned again. For a whiile
we.stood there in that sacred silence, beholding the glory of
God in the heawens and illlVokiillg His bleSS1I11g upon the people of Ba.nska Bystriica and 1..11pon the children Olf men everywhere.
A few minutes later we reentered tlh.e town and thus
ended our druy's pilgrimage.
Next diary I journeyed iba:ck to Prague. Miy ho.liday wa'S
ov~. But a:s long as I li:ve I shaH remember that season
spent in the Low 'Datras with peculiar vividness and satisfaction. I hope sincere:ly thait many of you, my readers,
m!i,y some day have the pri;vilege oif sojourning in. that picturesque and memomlble lamrl - Slovakia, wh:i.ch I lo,ve.
• • •
WHO SAID IT?
"We can ottl:y repeat ,t hat neither Austria nor Hungary,
and prolbaJbly not even Gerunany, nor even the Slovaks, woun.d
a:cceipt in the iong I'lliil. tlle existence of Czoohoslovakia.
Therefore -t he graftmg olf OzoohoslovaJkia on to a Danubian
federation is hair&y possilble. In such a framewo.nk she would
simiplry continue to lbe what she was in her prevfous existence: an international oalamity. The position would !be d.iifferent in .the case of Bohemfa and Moravia being separated
from Slovakia. The od'ten repeated argument that Czeohoslova:kia's brea;king l.llp into her naJtural components wO'U!ld
cause an even gireaiter disfoca:tion in the DanrUl'be Basin, fails
to convince, if one rea!li.zes that such a part.iition. is the essentia1l iprerequisite oif the oreation o'f a greater State entity."
- F. 0. Miik.sche - a Czech - in UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, pp. 215-21'6 ; FaJber and Faiber, 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
Christmas in the Low Tatra Region
Description
An account of the resource
Robert A. Heckert
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 4 (9), December 1953
pp. 16-21
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Heckert, Robert A.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1953
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/c0c29f35f38e18e769727286a469d9d8.pdf
26789962c72a9d57cb89eaef06ff226a
PDF Text
Text
18
SLOVAKIA
CHURCHES IN A VISE
Frances McPoyne
It hias often been said that Czecho-Slovakia is Moscow's
most obedient satellite. What is there a'b out this little nation that has earned for it such an uncomplimentary name 'i
Is it by plan or mere accident that a Christian Westernoriented country should become such a loyal servant of :the
Kremlin?
To know and understand another people one must at
least have an idea as to that people's language, history,
music and its religious development. A little volume entitled Kirchen in der Zange (Churches in a Vise), published
by the Munich University Press and Publishing House, Dr.
C. Wolf and Son, one of a series on Central European
Sources and Documents, d ~ exclusively with Czecho Slovakia and describes the plight of the churches in that
country today.
Czecho..Slovakia is territorially about as large as the
State of New York. At its birth in 1919 it did not consist
of one et!hnic people, the "Czechoslovaks," for there exists
no such people. It contained Czechs, Slovaks, Germans, and
others. The census of 1930 gives the following breakdown:
7.2 million Czechs, 2.3 million Slovaks, 3.3 million Sudeten
Germans (they were native to Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia
and did ndt enter with Hitler in 1939), 550,000 Ukrainians,
700,000 Magyars, 190,000 Jews, 130,000 Poles and others.
According to the same statistics the religious breakdown
was 73.5 % Roman Caltholic, 7.6 % Evengelican Lutheran,
5.3 % Czech National Church (in Slovakia 0.4 % ), 2.4%
Israelite, 5.4% ofiller and 5.8 % non-affil'iated. The Catholics
in the present-day "People's Democratic" OSSR are estimated at 75 % of the population, the Evengeiicals at 8 % .
For obvious reasons it is impossible to obtain a more exact tabulation.
To rightly comprehend the situation, let it be said that
feelings were generally drawn along nationality lines rather
than on religious ones, even prior to the Communist putsch
in Czecho-Slovakia. Such an attitude made it possible, for
�SLOVAKIA
19
example, for the Slovak Catholic priest Andreas IIlinlm.
. to win support not only among his co-religious fellowSlovaks but from the Sl ovak Protestants too. By the same
token the Ca'tholic Slovaks never merged witJh tlhe Catholic
Czechs to form a People's Party in the Prague Parliament.
The 92 % Roman Catholic Sudeten population, to cite a
second example, repeatedly voted for Lutheran Pastor
Gottfrid Wehrenfennig as the president of their Volksverein. It is important, therefore, to bear these nationaHty
differences and tensions in mind when tracing the trend
of politiool events in Czecho-Slovakia.
•
Due to the bitter feeling between Czechs and Germans
at the close of World War II and due perhaps to certain
pro-Slav leanings of the Czedh people, it was possi1ble for
Czedh collaboration with the Communists to make a bolo
public hand-shake in the form of a pastoral letter which
welcomed the Czec'h two-year plan as "a road to happiness
and prosperity for the fatherland" and urged the faithful
to support it.
A special event that shows how smoothly tJhe near
Church-Communist betrothal was working out, was the
consecration on December 8, 1946, of Joseph Beran, Archbishop of Prague and primate of Bohemia. No less a rrominent Communist than Premier Klement Gottwald not
only attended the church ceremonies but followed the various steps in the consecration with prayerbook in hand
and congratulated the archbishop in the name of the entire
government.
So convinced at the time was the archbishop of the
chances for good Church-Communist relations that he made
no attempt to counteract the decrees of Dr. EdvaTd Benes
calling for the brutal expulsion from the land of all native
Sudeten German inhabitants. The driving out of the 92 %
Roman Catholic Sudeten Germans was even acceded to by
Primate Beran as "imperative." Not until tJhe draft of a new
law seeking to nationalize the nation's schools did Archbishop
Beran realize he had hitc'hed his wagon to the wrong star.
His reaction was to try to effect a coalition of all the
country's churches. When tihe government then confiscated
all Church property and decided to give the clergy the sta1
�20
::,LOVAKIA
tus of any other governm ent employee, Beran issued a
stateme nt - made on the heels of governm ent efforts to
win the clergy for Commu nist Party member ship - in
which he declared : "No Christia n and above all no priest
dare align himself with an ideology that question s the existence of a soul or immorta lity."
On May 10, 1948, a "uniform list" of candida tes for
the revived Popular Front was drawn up, aimed to convince other countrie s that the Czech people had always
been eager to embrace Commun ism. Gottwal d's cabinet
did its utmost to win church support for that election campaign. 'Dhe head of the Orthodo x Church in the CSSR vehemenrtly stated that the casting of a white (inval'id) vote
was tantamo unt to cowardl y flight from responsi bility for
the future of the State. The Israelite Council called on its
member s to vote for the Gottwa!ld Commu nist governm ent,
believin g that it meant "a chance for quiet develop ment of
the Jewish commun ity." The Central Council of the "Czechoslova k Church" declared : "It is the civil duty of every
church member to vote so as to manifes t national unity."
The election banner of the Evangel ical Bruderk irche was
much more ,c onserva tive: "Let us strive for true unity in
truth and justice." The Catholic Chul"ch refused to be misled by a tempora ry let-up in persecut ion of churchm en and
refraine d from promisin g the regime its confidence. It simply declined to adopt any election slogan whatsoe ver.
By Novemb er 1949, Archbis hop Beran had signed his
last pastoral letter. On March 11, 1951, t'he Czeclh State
police had taken him prisoner and silenced him perfuaps for
all time. Parallel ing Beran's disappea rance came Sovietstyle "scare" tactics aimed at the clergy in general, with
arrests and sentence s to prison. Not eager to create martyrs for either Luthera nism or Rome, the Communis'ts promised freedom to those it had interned provided they
would march with the regime. In the meantim e properti es
and building s of both Catholic and otJher denomin ations
had been confisca ted, their building s turned into museum s
or Commu nist headqua rters. In addition to the expropr iation of the clergy - a move thaJt not only meant materia l
gains for the governm ent - an added blow had been
�SLOVA KIA
21
struck design ed to make all men of the oloth mere tools of
the State. Robbe d of their indepe ndence , they were to be
reduce d to puppe ts by having to qualify for office on the
same basis as all other public jobhol ders. Their salary,
payme nt for lodgin g, and for the educat ion of their children in the case of the non-C atholic s, all were pll't on the
level of State employ ees. The admin istrati on was to approve all appoin tments to office and be free to refuse a
candid ate on "politi cal" ground . Such appoin ltment s are not
valid accord ing to church law but it is relativ ely easy for
the Red regime to fool a simple pavish ioner into bel'ieving
that they are.
In order to functio n as priest or preacih er, in church or
other religio us society , the person in questi on must take an
oath which reads : "I will suppo rt the govern ment with
every means in my power ." Since the bishop s realize d that
a segme nt of the priests would be accept ing govern ment
pay they consen ted, approv ing the oath with the follow ing
provis o: Insofa r as it would not conflic t with God's rights
and Churc h rights. The bishop s themse lves decline d to accept State pay.
How about religio us instruc tion in Czedh o-Slov akia?
As such, it is not forbid den. It may on~y be given to those
childre n, howev er, whose father s have submi tted a writte n
reques t for it to the school princip al. Again the scare tactic is used, since fhe author ities know thaJt many a parent
will refrain from submi tting such a petitio n lest pressu re
be exert ed on him by P rty functio naries , threat ening loss
of job or the like. A second type of scare tactic is tlhe fact
that often the very person s selecte d to give tlhe religio us
instruc tion are in reality loyal Comm unists. With the State
reser~ ing the right to say who can or cannol t be priests and
minist ers of the gospel , it will natura Hy choose for instruc tion in religio us doctrin e such clergy men who are willing
to compr omise. Anoth er facet of the intimi dation tactic is
the placin g in t'he path of those wlho remain loyal to tlheir
religio us upbrin ging obstac les to their higher educat ion.
The family attitud e itself is impor tant in mould ing the attitude of the child, and strong religio us familie s are natura lly
consid ered a block to the spread ing of Comm unist ideas.
�22
SLOVAKIA
Once the Reds succeeded in liquidating the "unteachables," those who refused to follow the Party line, the remaining mmisters and priests had three paths to choose
f.rom: (1) They could become ideological and practical collaborators with Communism, the road traveled by Jan
Plojhar, a Catholic priest who, it is said, never wanted to be
a priest in the first place, or Josef Hromadka, a Lutheran
minister and Vice-President of the World Council of Reformed Churches (2). Like Archbishop Beran, having
learned that compromise cannot work, this growp have become members of a resistance movement, (3) are those
who have fallen in line with tfhe masses and when in Rome,
do as the Romans do.
Down through history persecutions have led to a
deepening of religious life. In Czecho-Slovakia the government has had little success with its efforts to promote a
substitute for religious activity in the form of youth initiation ceremonies, name-giving and the like. Perhaps an
old Czech adage is again proving to be right: "When the
spirit is drunk, God is forgotten. Only when trouble comes
do we really learn to know Him."
•
•
•
NEW STRICTURES ON BENES
Karl Kem
Even outside Sudeten German circles Edward Benes'
political genius is gradually being recognized for tfhe mere
legend that it was. Czech hisltorians, too, are beginning to
contribute to the truth. Josef Korbel's report "The Communist Subversion of Czechoslovakia 1938-1945" is additional
proof to that effect. The book has received much publicity.
MaJlmo's leading Swedish newspa,per Arbetet has published
a lengthy review of it. 'l'lhe Neue Zurcher Zeitung takes
ponderous stock of some of the mistakes made by Benes,
"that shrewd diplomat," at a time when judicious people
clearly foresaw "where friendship with Moscow would lead
him and his country."
The review in Arbetet was written by the young Fm.n
Jorn Donner. The author who spent some weeks in Prague
�
18
SLOVAKIA
CHURCHES IN A VISE
Frances McPoyne
It hias often been said that Czecho-Slovakia is Moscow's
most obedient satellite. What is there a'b out this little nation that has earned for it such an uncomplimentary name 'i
Is it by plan or mere accident that a Christian Westernoriented country should become such a loyal servant of :the
Kremlin?
To know and understand another people one must at
least have an idea as to that people's language, history,
music and its religious development. A little volume entitled Kirchen in der Zange (Churches in a Vise), published
by the Munich University Press and Publishing House, Dr.
C. Wolf and Son, one of a series on Central European
Sources and Documents, d ~ exclusively with Czecho Slovakia and describes the plight of the churches in that
country today.
Czecho..Slovakia is territorially about as large as the
State of New York. At its birth in 1919 it did not consist
of one et!hnic people, the "Czechoslovaks," for there exists
no such people. It contained Czechs, Slovaks, Germans, and
others. The census of 1930 gives the following breakdown:
7.2 million Czechs, 2.3 million Slovaks, 3.3 million Sudeten
Germans (they were native to Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia
and did ndt enter with Hitler in 1939), 550,000 Ukrainians,
700,000 Magyars, 190,000 Jews, 130,000 Poles and others.
According to the same statistics the religious breakdown
was 73.5 % Roman Caltholic, 7.6 % Evengelican Lutheran,
5.3 % Czech National Church (in Slovakia 0.4 % ), 2.4%
Israelite, 5.4% ofiller and 5.8 % non-affil'iated. The Catholics
in the present-day "People's Democratic" OSSR are estimated at 75 % of the population, the Evengeiicals at 8 % .
For obvious reasons it is impossible to obtain a more exact tabulation.
To rightly comprehend the situation, let it be said that
feelings were generally drawn along nationality lines rather
than on religious ones, even prior to the Communist putsch
in Czecho-Slovakia. Such an attitude made it possible, for
�SLOVAKIA
19
example, for the Slovak Catholic priest Andreas IIlinlm.
. to win support not only among his co-religious fellowSlovaks but from the Sl ovak Protestants too. By the same
token the Ca'tholic Slovaks never merged witJh tlhe Catholic
Czechs to form a People's Party in the Prague Parliament.
The 92 % Roman Catholic Sudeten population, to cite a
second example, repeatedly voted for Lutheran Pastor
Gottfrid Wehrenfennig as the president of their Volksverein. It is important, therefore, to bear these nationaHty
differences and tensions in mind when tracing the trend
of politiool events in Czecho-Slovakia.
•
Due to the bitter feeling between Czechs and Germans
at the close of World War II and due perhaps to certain
pro-Slav leanings of the Czedh people, it was possi1ble for
Czedh collaboration with the Communists to make a bolo
public hand-shake in the form of a pastoral letter which
welcomed the Czec'h two-year plan as "a road to happiness
and prosperity for the fatherland" and urged the faithful
to support it.
A special event that shows how smoothly tJhe near
Church-Communist betrothal was working out, was the
consecration on December 8, 1946, of Joseph Beran, Archbishop of Prague and primate of Bohemia. No less a rrominent Communist than Premier Klement Gottwald not
only attended the church ceremonies but followed the various steps in the consecration with prayerbook in hand
and congratulated the archbishop in the name of the entire
government.
So convinced at the time was the archbishop of the
chances for good Church-Communist relations that he made
no attempt to counteract the decrees of Dr. EdvaTd Benes
calling for the brutal expulsion from the land of all native
Sudeten German inhabitants. The driving out of the 92 %
Roman Catholic Sudeten Germans was even acceded to by
Primate Beran as "imperative." Not until tJhe draft of a new
law seeking to nationalize the nation's schools did Archbishop
Beran realize he had hitc'hed his wagon to the wrong star.
His reaction was to try to effect a coalition of all the
country's churches. When tihe government then confiscated
all Church property and decided to give the clergy the sta1
�20
::,LOVAKIA
tus of any other governm ent employee, Beran issued a
stateme nt - made on the heels of governm ent efforts to
win the clergy for Commu nist Party member ship - in
which he declared : "No Christia n and above all no priest
dare align himself with an ideology that question s the existence of a soul or immorta lity."
On May 10, 1948, a "uniform list" of candida tes for
the revived Popular Front was drawn up, aimed to convince other countrie s that the Czech people had always
been eager to embrace Commun ism. Gottwal d's cabinet
did its utmost to win church support for that election campaign. 'Dhe head of the Orthodo x Church in the CSSR vehemenrtly stated that the casting of a white (inval'id) vote
was tantamo unt to cowardl y flight from responsi bility for
the future of the State. The Israelite Council called on its
member s to vote for the Gottwa!ld Commu nist governm ent,
believin g that it meant "a chance for quiet develop ment of
the Jewish commun ity." The Central Council of the "Czechoslova k Church" declared : "It is the civil duty of every
church member to vote so as to manifes t national unity."
The election banner of the Evangel ical Bruderk irche was
much more ,c onserva tive: "Let us strive for true unity in
truth and justice." The Catholic Chul"ch refused to be misled by a tempora ry let-up in persecut ion of churchm en and
refraine d from promisin g the regime its confidence. It simply declined to adopt any election slogan whatsoe ver.
By Novemb er 1949, Archbis hop Beran had signed his
last pastoral letter. On March 11, 1951, t'he Czeclh State
police had taken him prisoner and silenced him perfuaps for
all time. Parallel ing Beran's disappea rance came Sovietstyle "scare" tactics aimed at the clergy in general, with
arrests and sentence s to prison. Not eager to create martyrs for either Luthera nism or Rome, the Communis'ts promised freedom to those it had interned provided they
would march with the regime. In the meantim e properti es
and building s of both Catholic and otJher denomin ations
had been confisca ted, their building s turned into museum s
or Commu nist headqua rters. In addition to the expropr iation of the clergy - a move thaJt not only meant materia l
gains for the governm ent - an added blow had been
�SLOVA KIA
21
struck design ed to make all men of the oloth mere tools of
the State. Robbe d of their indepe ndence , they were to be
reduce d to puppe ts by having to qualify for office on the
same basis as all other public jobhol ders. Their salary,
payme nt for lodgin g, and for the educat ion of their children in the case of the non-C atholic s, all were pll't on the
level of State employ ees. The admin istrati on was to approve all appoin tments to office and be free to refuse a
candid ate on "politi cal" ground . Such appoin ltment s are not
valid accord ing to church law but it is relativ ely easy for
the Red regime to fool a simple pavish ioner into bel'ieving
that they are.
In order to functio n as priest or preacih er, in church or
other religio us society , the person in questi on must take an
oath which reads : "I will suppo rt the govern ment with
every means in my power ." Since the bishop s realize d that
a segme nt of the priests would be accept ing govern ment
pay they consen ted, approv ing the oath with the follow ing
provis o: Insofa r as it would not conflic t with God's rights
and Churc h rights. The bishop s themse lves decline d to accept State pay.
How about religio us instruc tion in Czedh o-Slov akia?
As such, it is not forbid den. It may on~y be given to those
childre n, howev er, whose father s have submi tted a writte n
reques t for it to the school princip al. Again the scare tactic is used, since fhe author ities know thaJt many a parent
will refrain from submi tting such a petitio n lest pressu re
be exert ed on him by P rty functio naries , threat ening loss
of job or the like. A second type of scare tactic is tlhe fact
that often the very person s selecte d to give tlhe religio us
instruc tion are in reality loyal Comm unists. With the State
reser~ ing the right to say who can or cannol t be priests and
minist ers of the gospel , it will natura Hy choose for instruc tion in religio us doctrin e such clergy men who are willing
to compr omise. Anoth er facet of the intimi dation tactic is
the placin g in t'he path of those wlho remain loyal to tlheir
religio us upbrin ging obstac les to their higher educat ion.
The family attitud e itself is impor tant in mould ing the attitude of the child, and strong religio us familie s are natura lly
consid ered a block to the spread ing of Comm unist ideas.
�22
SLOVAKIA
Once the Reds succeeded in liquidating the "unteachables," those who refused to follow the Party line, the remaining mmisters and priests had three paths to choose
f.rom: (1) They could become ideological and practical collaborators with Communism, the road traveled by Jan
Plojhar, a Catholic priest who, it is said, never wanted to be
a priest in the first place, or Josef Hromadka, a Lutheran
minister and Vice-President of the World Council of Reformed Churches (2). Like Archbishop Beran, having
learned that compromise cannot work, this growp have become members of a resistance movement, (3) are those
who have fallen in line with tfhe masses and when in Rome,
do as the Romans do.
Down through history persecutions have led to a
deepening of religious life. In Czecho-Slovakia the government has had little success with its efforts to promote a
substitute for religious activity in the form of youth initiation ceremonies, name-giving and the like. Perhaps an
old Czech adage is again proving to be right: "When the
spirit is drunk, God is forgotten. Only when trouble comes
do we really learn to know Him."
•
•
•
NEW STRICTURES ON BENES
Karl Kem
Even outside Sudeten German circles Edward Benes'
political genius is gradually being recognized for tfhe mere
legend that it was. Czech hisltorians, too, are beginning to
contribute to the truth. Josef Korbel's report "The Communist Subversion of Czechoslovakia 1938-1945" is additional
proof to that effect. The book has received much publicity.
MaJlmo's leading Swedish newspa,per Arbetet has published
a lengthy review of it. 'l'lhe Neue Zurcher Zeitung takes
ponderous stock of some of the mistakes made by Benes,
"that shrewd diplomat," at a time when judicious people
clearly foresaw "where friendship with Moscow would lead
him and his country."
The review in Arbetet was written by the young Fm.n
Jorn Donner. The author who spent some weeks in Prague
�
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
18
SLOVAKIA
CHURCHES IN A VISE
Frances McPoyne
It hias often been said that Czecho-Slovakia is Moscow's
most obedient satellite. What is there a'b out this little nation that has earned for it such an uncomplimentary name 'i
Is it by plan or mere accident that a Christian Westernoriented country should become such a loyal servant of :the
Kremlin?
To know and understand another people one must at
least have an idea as to that people's language, history,
music and its religious development. A little volume entitled Kirchen in der Zange (Churches in a Vise), published
by the Munich University Press and Publishing House, Dr.
C. Wolf and Son, one of a series on Central European
Sources and Documents, d ~ exclusively with Czecho Slovakia and describes the plight of the churches in that
country today.
Czecho..Slovakia is territorially about as large as the
State of New York. At its birth in 1919 it did not consist
of one et!hnic people, the "Czechoslovaks," for there exists
no such people. It contained Czechs, Slovaks, Germans, and
others. The census of 1930 gives the following breakdown:
7.2 million Czechs, 2.3 million Slovaks, 3.3 million Sudeten
Germans (they were native to Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia
and did ndt enter with Hitler in 1939), 550,000 Ukrainians,
700,000 Magyars, 190,000 Jews, 130,000 Poles and others.
According to the same statistics the religious breakdown
was 73.5 % Roman Caltholic, 7.6 % Evengelican Lutheran,
5.3 % Czech National Church (in Slovakia 0.4 % ), 2.4%
Israelite, 5.4% ofiller and 5.8 % non-affil'iated. The Catholics
in the present-day "People's Democratic" OSSR are estimated at 75 % of the population, the Evengeiicals at 8 % .
For obvious reasons it is impossible to obtain a more exact tabulation.
To rightly comprehend the situation, let it be said that
feelings were generally drawn along nationality lines rather
than on religious ones, even prior to the Communist putsch
in Czecho-Slovakia. Such an attitude made it possible, for
SLOVAKIA
19
example, for the Slovak Catholic priest Andreas IIlinlm.
. to win support not only among his co-religious fellowSlovaks but from the Sl ovak Protestants too. By the same
token the Ca'tholic Slovaks never merged witJh tlhe Catholic
Czechs to form a People's Party in the Prague Parliament.
The 92 % Roman Catholic Sudeten population, to cite a
second example, repeatedly voted for Lutheran Pastor
Gottfrid Wehrenfennig as the president of their Volksverein. It is important, therefore, to bear these nationaHty
differences and tensions in mind when tracing the trend
of politiool events in Czecho-Slovakia.
•
Due to the bitter feeling between Czechs and Germans
at the close of World War II and due perhaps to certain
pro-Slav leanings of the Czedh people, it was possi1ble for
Czedh collaboration with the Communists to make a bolo
public hand-shake in the form of a pastoral letter which
welcomed the Czec'h two-year plan as "a road to happiness
and prosperity for the fatherland" and urged the faithful
to support it.
A special event that shows how smoothly tJhe near
Church-Communist betrothal was working out, was the
consecration on December 8, 1946, of Joseph Beran, Archbishop of Prague and primate of Bohemia. No less a rrominent Communist than Premier Klement Gottwald not
only attended the church ceremonies but followed the various steps in the consecration with prayerbook in hand
and congratulated the archbishop in the name of the entire
government.
So convinced at the time was the archbishop of the
chances for good Church-Communist relations that he made
no attempt to counteract the decrees of Dr. EdvaTd Benes
calling for the brutal expulsion from the land of all native
Sudeten German inhabitants. The driving out of the 92 %
Roman Catholic Sudeten Germans was even acceded to by
Primate Beran as "imperative." Not until tJhe draft of a new
law seeking to nationalize the nation's schools did Archbishop
Beran realize he had hitc'hed his wagon to the wrong star.
His reaction was to try to effect a coalition of all the
country's churches. When tihe government then confiscated
all Church property and decided to give the clergy the sta1
20
::,LOVAKIA
tus of any other governm ent employee, Beran issued a
stateme nt - made on the heels of governm ent efforts to
win the clergy for Commu nist Party member ship - in
which he declared : "No Christia n and above all no priest
dare align himself with an ideology that question s the existence of a soul or immorta lity."
On May 10, 1948, a "uniform list" of candida tes for
the revived Popular Front was drawn up, aimed to convince other countrie s that the Czech people had always
been eager to embrace Commun ism. Gottwal d's cabinet
did its utmost to win church support for that election campaign. 'Dhe head of the Orthodo x Church in the CSSR vehemenrtly stated that the casting of a white (inval'id) vote
was tantamo unt to cowardl y flight from responsi bility for
the future of the State. The Israelite Council called on its
member s to vote for the Gottwa!ld Commu nist governm ent,
believin g that it meant "a chance for quiet develop ment of
the Jewish commun ity." The Central Council of the "Czechoslova k Church" declared : "It is the civil duty of every
church member to vote so as to manifes t national unity."
The election banner of the Evangel ical Bruderk irche was
much more ,c onserva tive: "Let us strive for true unity in
truth and justice." The Catholic Chul"ch refused to be misled by a tempora ry let-up in persecut ion of churchm en and
refraine d from promisin g the regime its confidence. It simply declined to adopt any election slogan whatsoe ver.
By Novemb er 1949, Archbis hop Beran had signed his
last pastoral letter. On March 11, 1951, t'he Czeclh State
police had taken him prisoner and silenced him perfuaps for
all time. Parallel ing Beran's disappea rance came Sovietstyle "scare" tactics aimed at the clergy in general, with
arrests and sentence s to prison. Not eager to create martyrs for either Luthera nism or Rome, the Communis'ts promised freedom to those it had interned provided they
would march with the regime. In the meantim e properti es
and building s of both Catholic and otJher denomin ations
had been confisca ted, their building s turned into museum s
or Commu nist headqua rters. In addition to the expropr iation of the clergy - a move thaJt not only meant materia l
gains for the governm ent - an added blow had been
SLOVA KIA
21
struck design ed to make all men of the oloth mere tools of
the State. Robbe d of their indepe ndence , they were to be
reduce d to puppe ts by having to qualify for office on the
same basis as all other public jobhol ders. Their salary,
payme nt for lodgin g, and for the educat ion of their children in the case of the non-C atholic s, all were pll't on the
level of State employ ees. The admin istrati on was to approve all appoin tments to office and be free to refuse a
candid ate on "politi cal" ground . Such appoin ltment s are not
valid accord ing to church law but it is relativ ely easy for
the Red regime to fool a simple pavish ioner into bel'ieving
that they are.
In order to functio n as priest or preacih er, in church or
other religio us society , the person in questi on must take an
oath which reads : "I will suppo rt the govern ment with
every means in my power ." Since the bishop s realize d that
a segme nt of the priests would be accept ing govern ment
pay they consen ted, approv ing the oath with the follow ing
provis o: Insofa r as it would not conflic t with God's rights
and Churc h rights. The bishop s themse lves decline d to accept State pay.
How about religio us instruc tion in Czedh o-Slov akia?
As such, it is not forbid den. It may on~y be given to those
childre n, howev er, whose father s have submi tted a writte n
reques t for it to the school princip al. Again the scare tactic is used, since fhe author ities know thaJt many a parent
will refrain from submi tting such a petitio n lest pressu re
be exert ed on him by P rty functio naries , threat ening loss
of job or the like. A second type of scare tactic is tlhe fact
that often the very person s selecte d to give tlhe religio us
instruc tion are in reality loyal Comm unists. With the State
reser~ ing the right to say who can or cannol t be priests and
minist ers of the gospel , it will natura Hy choose for instruc tion in religio us doctrin e such clergy men who are willing
to compr omise. Anoth er facet of the intimi dation tactic is
the placin g in t'he path of those wlho remain loyal to tlheir
religio us upbrin ging obstac les to their higher educat ion.
The family attitud e itself is impor tant in mould ing the attitude of the child, and strong religio us familie s are natura lly
consid ered a block to the spread ing of Comm unist ideas.
22
SLOVAKIA
Once the Reds succeeded in liquidating the "unteachables," those who refused to follow the Party line, the remaining mmisters and priests had three paths to choose
f.rom: (1) They could become ideological and practical collaborators with Communism, the road traveled by Jan
Plojhar, a Catholic priest who, it is said, never wanted to be
a priest in the first place, or Josef Hromadka, a Lutheran
minister and Vice-President of the World Council of Reformed Churches (2). Like Archbishop Beran, having
learned that compromise cannot work, this growp have become members of a resistance movement, (3) are those
who have fallen in line with tfhe masses and when in Rome,
do as the Romans do.
Down through history persecutions have led to a
deepening of religious life. In Czecho-Slovakia the government has had little success with its efforts to promote a
substitute for religious activity in the form of youth initiation ceremonies, name-giving and the like. Perhaps an
old Czech adage is again proving to be right: "When the
spirit is drunk, God is forgotten. Only when trouble comes
do we really learn to know Him."
•
•
•
NEW STRICTURES ON BENES
Karl Kem
Even outside Sudeten German circles Edward Benes'
political genius is gradually being recognized for tfhe mere
legend that it was. Czech hisltorians, too, are beginning to
contribute to the truth. Josef Korbel's report "The Communist Subversion of Czechoslovakia 1938-1945" is additional
proof to that effect. The book has received much publicity.
MaJlmo's leading Swedish newspa,per Arbetet has published
a lengthy review of it. 'l'lhe Neue Zurcher Zeitung takes
ponderous stock of some of the mistakes made by Benes,
"that shrewd diplomat," at a time when judicious people
clearly foresaw "where friendship with Moscow would lead
him and his country."
The review in Arbetet was written by the young Fm.n
Jorn Donner. The author who spent some weeks in Prague
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
Churches in a Vise
Description
An account of the resource
Frances McPoyne
Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 7 (32), September-December 1960
pp. 18-22
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
McPoyne, Frances
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1960
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d0717493be238a53b22dc7f7aadb9f1e.pdf
3cfaf5353813059bf95df6f02af62153
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
43
COMMUNIST ILLUSION AND DEMOCRATIC REALITY
By J. Edgar Hoover,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
(tAd•a pted from article preipared for memibers of the
National Strategy S•eminar)
A five-year study of the conduct of American prisoners of war during the Korean conflict was made by the
United States Army. This study disclosed that there was,
in the morale of American prisoners of war, a breakdown
which reached disturbing proportions. Almost one out of
every three American prisoners of war collaborated to
some degree with the communists. This colla'boration included broadcasting anti-American propaganda, writing
articles praising life under communism, "con.fessing" to
the use of germ warfare, an\d signing peace appeals and
other communist petitions. Our soldiers informed on one
andther and fraternized with the enemy. The death of
some American prisoners could have been prevented if
they had not been completely neglected by their fellow
captives. Not one American prisoner of war succeeded in
escaping. Some even chose to remain in Communist China
rather than return to the United States. That American
military personnel collaborated alt aH is difficult to understand. Even more disturbing are the extent of the collaboration and the casual attitude of those who were guilty.
As a result of the study, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in August, 1955, promulgalteld for members of the
Armed Forces a Code of Conduct specifying the duties and
obligations of our fighting men. The report of the special
committee which had recommended the adoption of tih!s
.code pointedly noted:
"The uninformed P.0.W.'s were up against it. They
couldn't answer arguments in favor of communism with
arguments in favor of Americanism because they knew
very little a<bout their America ... "
The report concluded that our Armed Forces had not
adequately prepared their men for the rigors of commu •
nist indoctrination. It lookeld behind this failure, however,
and stressed that our homes, schools, churches, and pa-
�44
SLOVAKIA
triotic organizations must also assume greater responsibility in educating Americans in the principles which un,
derlie our way of life. The importance of such an affirr;.a.tive long-range educational program is borne out by the
special committee's finding that, in many cases, our fighting men were at a disadvantage because they knew less
about the ideals and traditions of their own country, than
did their communist interrogators.
The behavior of these prisoners of war was less an
individual failure than it was an indictment of our entire
society which had not prepared them adequately for their
head-on collision with communist indoctrination. All Americans must share some responsibility for the conduct of
these prisoners of war. More important, we must not ignore this forceful example of the impact of communist
psychological pressures. Our continued survival may well
depend upon the action we take now to insure that all
citizens, not only military personnel, are fortified against
the continuous communist ideological assault.
We can defeat communist ideology and - at the same
time - reinforce the structure of our own form of government by the combined process of exposure and education.
The illusions of communism cannot withstand the
penetrating light of truth. For a number of years, congressional and state investigations of communism, essential for the consideration of legislation, have focused the
pitiless glare of publicity on many phases of communis t
activity. The reports of these investigative bodies are readily availaJble and include detailed information regarding
the activities of the Communist Party, USA, throughout
the country .
The Committee on Un-American Activi·ties United
States House of Representatives, has issued a conveniern~
"Guide to Sulbversive Organizations and Publications."
This is a listing of the various organizations cited by the
Attorney General of the United Sta:tes, as well as other
organiza:tions and publications found by congressional or
state investigative committees to be communist dominated.
The introduction to this publication consists of a brief historical review of communist front group activity, an ex-
�SLOVAKIA
45
1Planation of the methods by which communist front groups
are established, and a set of cniteria to assist in detecting
them.
Some measures of the effectiveness of these investigative committees in exposing the aims, principles, and
methods of communism is indicated by the bitterness and
the intensity of communist attacks upon them, as well as
by the continuous communist campaigns to abolish them.
Former communisbs are a:lso victims of communist
vituperation because of the important role they play in
exposing the true nature of communism. Many of these
persons, after renouncing communism, have testified before courts, administrativ e hearings, and investigative
committees. Through books, articles, and lectures based
on their firsthand knowledge, they have helped to alert
the public. In addition, their testimony has provided valuable evidence which has enabled the Government to prosecute communists who violate our laws. By these actions,
many former communists have not only rehabilitated themselves but have, in the process, made a substantial contribution to the security of all Americans.
Every exposure of communism's false premises, inherent contradictions , deceitful tactics, and empty promises
he'lps to shatter its ideologiical appeal and to fortify aga:inst
its psychological pressures. But, in this struggle for men's
minds, exposure alone is not enough. Exposure must be
complemented by a long-range educational program with
a dual purpose. This program must encompass, not only
a penetrating study of communism, but also a thorough
grounding in ,the basic prindples of our individual freedom under law. This educational program must be designed
to train people to think and to distinguish between truth
and error.
Each year, more colleges are offering courses which
present a critical ana:lysis of tJhe theory and practice of
communism. In at least one college, a course of this type
is compulsory. Books contrasting communism with our
form of government are now being published for our use
in our high schools. This academic instruction can be supplemented by individual study of the wealth of anti-com-
�46
SLOVAKIA
munist material available as well as by participation in
group discussions and public forums. This program of education in communism must not, of course, constitute or be
confused with the advocacy of communist doctrine. It can
and should be limited to a critical study of communist
strategy and tactics and the materialistic philosophy underlying them.
Knowing what communism really is and how it operates will also help us to avoid tJhe danger of confusing
;Communism with legitimate dissent on controversial issues.
Communism feeds on social ferment. On both the local and
national levels, the Communist Parity, USA, is continually
-e ~ploiting social, economic, and political grievances for its
own tadical purposes. For this reason, the "Party line"
will frequently coincide with the views of many non-communists on speci£ic issues. We must not, therefore, indiscriminately la:bel as communists those whose opinions on a
particular question may, on occasion, parallel the official
Party position. We must also guard against the tendency
to characterize as communists those who merely disagree
with us or who advocate unorthodox or unpopular beliefs.
When anyone is erroneously branded a communist,
it not only constitutes an injustice to the individual, but
also helps communism by diffusing the strength of anti-communist forces. In combatting communism, we must be
aware of vigilante action. The responsibilities of citizens
are to be certain of the facts and to report these facts to
the proper authorities.
Knowledge of communism is only the first phase of the
battle. This knowledge must be augmented by a continuous revitalization of our own inherently superior strength
through the prac tical, daily exercise and development of
our American principles. Too frequently, emphasis is
placed on acquiring an understanding only of the me~haniical functions of our Government, such as elections, the
enactment of legislation, or judicial review. ':Dhis knowledge, important as it is, becomes a mere collection of sterile
•facts without a deep appreciation and a continuing awareness of the reason for the very existence of our form of
Government - the freedom of the individual under law.
�47
SLOVAKIA
------------- - -
Without the realization of this f.undamental phJlosophy of
freedom, such basic individual rights as freedom of s,peech,
the press, anld religion are taken for granted. Forgoitten is
man's bitter fight through the centuries to wrest these
freedoms from tyranny.
The exel'cise of these individual freedoms, which we
often take for granted, is largely responsi'ble for our Nation's reputation for getting things done. Many of us have
seen, or have even participated in, programs for community improvement promoted by private organizations and
civic groups. Recognizing a specific problem which required cooperative action, and sparkled by individual initiative, whole communities have organized, for example, to
attract new industry, to eradicate blighted slum areas, to
eliminate racial tensions, or to improve educational opportunities. Public officials, religious leaders, and representatives of business, labor, and the professions, realizing a
common interest, have fused their energies and in many
cases, have literally transformed their commuruties. Signif,i cantly, however, while many of tJhe problems these communities faced were similar, there was no set pattern in
the solutions which were devised.
Just as specific local problems and resources have determined the nature of the response, so too any organized
program to immunize a community against communist penetration must be tailored to prevailing local conditions.
All that is required is imagination, resourcefulness, and
some personal sacrifice coupled with the wi'll to inspire
positive action to combat communism and to strengthen
democracy at the community level.
In the State of Florida, for example, the Bar Association developed a lecture program on the theme of the
advantages of our system over communism. These lectures
are ,g iven to high school students throug,hout the state by
specially trained practicing attorneys. The speakers explain how our Government operates, what must be done to
keep it functioning effectively, and why it is superior to
the Soviet system. All of the lectures given under this program stress the duty of each citizen to interest himself
actively in publi-c affairs. The American Bar Association,
1
�48
SLOVAKIA
in cooperation with the American Heritage Foundation, annually observes Law Day with ceremonies which contrast
the Rule of Law in our country with the rule of fear in
communist nations.
To offset the Communist Party's celebration of May
Day, the Veterans of Foreign Wars sponsor an annual
Loyalty Day parade in New York City. At its Indianapolis headquarters, The American Legion maintains an
Americanism Commission, which provides information
about communism to the public.
Individual religious faiths have held training classes
for members of trade-unions who are actively opposing
communist attempts to infiltrate the labor movement. The
interdenominational Foundation for Religious Action in
the Social and Civil Order, of Washington, D. C., has been
organized to stress the importance of religious truth in
the preservation and development of our way of life. Its
goal is to unite all who believe in God in the struggle
against atheistic communism.
'Dhe Assembly of Captive European Nations prepaired
a large photographic exhibit featuring scenes of communist domestic terror and Soviet imperialism. Sponsored
by various organizations, this dramatic exhibition was
sown in a number of our large cities, as well as in cities
abroad. The Freedom Train, which toured the United States
with such documents as the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, gave many of our citizens, who would
not ordinarily have had the opportunity, a chance to view
these hallowed symbo'1s of American freedom.
As a public service, many individuals and private organizations prepare, or reprint, and distribute anti-communist literature. In Pennsylvania, the Department of Public Instruction had the Library of Congress prepare a selected annotated bibliography on communism for use by
teachers and students.
Local activity can have far-reaching effects. A group
and undergraduate students decided to capigraduate
of
communist-inspired Seventh World You!th
the
on
talize
in Vienna in 1959. For a year prior to
held
be
to
Festival
college campuses searching for
visited
they
festival,
the
�SLOVAKIA
49
students who could effectively represent the United States
and who were wining to atJtend. They di,s tri'buted pamphlets outlining the communist background of this and previous festivals, as weH as booklets of facts and figures on
issues which communist propaganda has been exploiting.
·This group also conducted briefing sessions for the anticommunists who planned to attend. News accounts of the
festival highlighted how the anti-communist American delegates stole the communists' thunder as a result of their
ability to correct the misconceptions and distortions of
American society which have always characterized these
festivals.
Americans, both military and civilian, who are working in or visiting foreign na,tions can play a,n important
role in the struggle against communism. Every citizen
abroad is, in a very real sense, a full-time "ambassador"
not only of our Nation but also of t:he American way of
life. An understanding of and a respect for the rights of
others are fundamental to our concept of individual freedom. This also applies in our dealings with citirens of other
nations regardless of their educational attainments, social
status, or economic level. By exercising his individual freedom in a responsible manner without violating ,the rights
of others, every American traveling abroad can serve as a
forceful example of how our system of government works.
The American aJbroad, by his conduct, can sow positive and
constructive ideas which one day may help to produce a
harvest on which the Free World can grow stronger.
Individual initiative and originality, geared to local action, are the wellsprings by which our system of government is continuously nourished. These examples illustrate
how the moral strength of our Nation is constantly replenished. Programs such as these, infused with a renewed sense
of dedication, should be expanded, coordinated, and continued on a long-range basis.
The importance of local communiities cannot be overemphasized. It is there that social understanding and
growth take root. It is there that education, business, labor, and reHgion take on form and substance to influence,
nourish, vitalize, and give direction to our national life. Lt
�50
SLOVAKIA
is in our local communities that cogent, penetrative thinking should be done now to re-evaluate the position of this
Nation in the present worM crisis. From this constructive
effort can come a decisive contribution to formulating and
carrying out a coordinated, comprehensive, affirmative
global strategy which will insure the supremacy of freedom over a'll types of totalitarianism.
Communism has hurled us a moral challenge. Our response, and the response of free men everywhere, will de-·
.termine whether or not freedom itself survives. It is no
longer suf.ficient for us to adopt the negative approach of
merely reacting defensively to every shift in communist
tactics. We must place greater emphasis on the positive
role which our American way of life can perform in this
struggle.
A CREMATORY is being planned in Braitislava, SloV'akia, according to the d'aily PRAOA. ]t should be ready by the end of 1,963;
the cost: 9 million Crowns; and location: near Vhe present Bratislava cemetery. 11he Reds are happy that finally consideraition has beer:
given "to this modern and scienitific way of burying tihe dead ."
e
•
•
urgent assignments of the oow FiveYear Pla.n 01961,1005) of the Czec'h Communist Party's Cenitral Committee is t!he coimpletion of the huge ]r.ornworks in Kosice, Slovakia.
Blueprints for this "second steel heart" as it is termed by
Praue Reds - was drawn up in the USSR It will be the largest
four.,dry in all Europe and one ·of the ten, largesit works of tts kind
in the world. Et will cost an estimated 10.5 billions Crown,s. Soviet
experts are in charge of construction and operation.
ONIE
OF
THIE
MOST
RECOMMENDED BOOKS:
"CZECHOSWVAKISM VERSUS AMERICANISM"
an expose of the pro-Soviet "National Fronters" in the socalled Council af Free Czechoslovakia - is a 48 page booklet published by the Slovaik League of America, which
should be read by every one seeking the answer to the
question of how "Czecho-Slovak democracy" converted to a
"people's democracy." Send 25 cents (coin or stamps) to
the SLOVAKIA for your copy today.
�
SLOVAKIA
43
COMMUNIST ILLUSION AND DEMOCRATIC REALITY
By J. Edgar Hoover,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
(tAd•a pted from article preipared for memibers of the
National Strategy S•eminar)
A five-year study of the conduct of American prisoners of war during the Korean conflict was made by the
United States Army. This study disclosed that there was,
in the morale of American prisoners of war, a breakdown
which reached disturbing proportions. Almost one out of
every three American prisoners of war collaborated to
some degree with the communists. This colla'boration included broadcasting anti-American propaganda, writing
articles praising life under communism, "con.fessing" to
the use of germ warfare, an\d signing peace appeals and
other communist petitions. Our soldiers informed on one
andther and fraternized with the enemy. The death of
some American prisoners could have been prevented if
they had not been completely neglected by their fellow
captives. Not one American prisoner of war succeeded in
escaping. Some even chose to remain in Communist China
rather than return to the United States. That American
military personnel collaborated alt aH is difficult to understand. Even more disturbing are the extent of the collaboration and the casual attitude of those who were guilty.
As a result of the study, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in August, 1955, promulgalteld for members of the
Armed Forces a Code of Conduct specifying the duties and
obligations of our fighting men. The report of the special
committee which had recommended the adoption of tih!s
.code pointedly noted:
"The uninformed P.0.W.'s were up against it. They
couldn't answer arguments in favor of communism with
arguments in favor of Americanism because they knew
very little a<bout their America ... "
The report concluded that our Armed Forces had not
adequately prepared their men for the rigors of commu •
nist indoctrination. It lookeld behind this failure, however,
and stressed that our homes, schools, churches, and pa-
�44
SLOVAKIA
triotic organizations must also assume greater responsibility in educating Americans in the principles which un,
derlie our way of life. The importance of such an affirr;.a.tive long-range educational program is borne out by the
special committee's finding that, in many cases, our fighting men were at a disadvantage because they knew less
about the ideals and traditions of their own country, than
did their communist interrogators.
The behavior of these prisoners of war was less an
individual failure than it was an indictment of our entire
society which had not prepared them adequately for their
head-on collision with communist indoctrination. All Americans must share some responsibility for the conduct of
these prisoners of war. More important, we must not ignore this forceful example of the impact of communist
psychological pressures. Our continued survival may well
depend upon the action we take now to insure that all
citizens, not only military personnel, are fortified against
the continuous communist ideological assault.
We can defeat communist ideology and - at the same
time - reinforce the structure of our own form of government by the combined process of exposure and education.
The illusions of communism cannot withstand the
penetrating light of truth. For a number of years, congressional and state investigations of communism, essential for the consideration of legislation, have focused the
pitiless glare of publicity on many phases of communis t
activity. The reports of these investigative bodies are readily availaJble and include detailed information regarding
the activities of the Communist Party, USA, throughout
the country .
The Committee on Un-American Activi·ties United
States House of Representatives, has issued a conveniern~
"Guide to Sulbversive Organizations and Publications."
This is a listing of the various organizations cited by the
Attorney General of the United Sta:tes, as well as other
organiza:tions and publications found by congressional or
state investigative committees to be communist dominated.
The introduction to this publication consists of a brief historical review of communist front group activity, an ex-
�SLOVAKIA
45
1Planation of the methods by which communist front groups
are established, and a set of cniteria to assist in detecting
them.
Some measures of the effectiveness of these investigative committees in exposing the aims, principles, and
methods of communism is indicated by the bitterness and
the intensity of communist attacks upon them, as well as
by the continuous communist campaigns to abolish them.
Former communisbs are a:lso victims of communist
vituperation because of the important role they play in
exposing the true nature of communism. Many of these
persons, after renouncing communism, have testified before courts, administrativ e hearings, and investigative
committees. Through books, articles, and lectures based
on their firsthand knowledge, they have helped to alert
the public. In addition, their testimony has provided valuable evidence which has enabled the Government to prosecute communists who violate our laws. By these actions,
many former communists have not only rehabilitated themselves but have, in the process, made a substantial contribution to the security of all Americans.
Every exposure of communism's false premises, inherent contradictions , deceitful tactics, and empty promises
he'lps to shatter its ideologiical appeal and to fortify aga:inst
its psychological pressures. But, in this struggle for men's
minds, exposure alone is not enough. Exposure must be
complemented by a long-range educational program with
a dual purpose. This program must encompass, not only
a penetrating study of communism, but also a thorough
grounding in ,the basic prindples of our individual freedom under law. This educational program must be designed
to train people to think and to distinguish between truth
and error.
Each year, more colleges are offering courses which
present a critical ana:lysis of tJhe theory and practice of
communism. In at least one college, a course of this type
is compulsory. Books contrasting communism with our
form of government are now being published for our use
in our high schools. This academic instruction can be supplemented by individual study of the wealth of anti-com-
�46
SLOVAKIA
munist material available as well as by participation in
group discussions and public forums. This program of education in communism must not, of course, constitute or be
confused with the advocacy of communist doctrine. It can
and should be limited to a critical study of communist
strategy and tactics and the materialistic philosophy underlying them.
Knowing what communism really is and how it operates will also help us to avoid tJhe danger of confusing
;Communism with legitimate dissent on controversial issues.
Communism feeds on social ferment. On both the local and
national levels, the Communist Parity, USA, is continually
-e ~ploiting social, economic, and political grievances for its
own tadical purposes. For this reason, the "Party line"
will frequently coincide with the views of many non-communists on speci£ic issues. We must not, therefore, indiscriminately la:bel as communists those whose opinions on a
particular question may, on occasion, parallel the official
Party position. We must also guard against the tendency
to characterize as communists those who merely disagree
with us or who advocate unorthodox or unpopular beliefs.
When anyone is erroneously branded a communist,
it not only constitutes an injustice to the individual, but
also helps communism by diffusing the strength of anti-communist forces. In combatting communism, we must be
aware of vigilante action. The responsibilities of citizens
are to be certain of the facts and to report these facts to
the proper authorities.
Knowledge of communism is only the first phase of the
battle. This knowledge must be augmented by a continuous revitalization of our own inherently superior strength
through the prac tical, daily exercise and development of
our American principles. Too frequently, emphasis is
placed on acquiring an understanding only of the me~haniical functions of our Government, such as elections, the
enactment of legislation, or judicial review. ':Dhis knowledge, important as it is, becomes a mere collection of sterile
•facts without a deep appreciation and a continuing awareness of the reason for the very existence of our form of
Government - the freedom of the individual under law.
�47
SLOVAKIA
------------- - -
Without the realization of this f.undamental phJlosophy of
freedom, such basic individual rights as freedom of s,peech,
the press, anld religion are taken for granted. Forgoitten is
man's bitter fight through the centuries to wrest these
freedoms from tyranny.
The exel'cise of these individual freedoms, which we
often take for granted, is largely responsi'ble for our Nation's reputation for getting things done. Many of us have
seen, or have even participated in, programs for community improvement promoted by private organizations and
civic groups. Recognizing a specific problem which required cooperative action, and sparkled by individual initiative, whole communities have organized, for example, to
attract new industry, to eradicate blighted slum areas, to
eliminate racial tensions, or to improve educational opportunities. Public officials, religious leaders, and representatives of business, labor, and the professions, realizing a
common interest, have fused their energies and in many
cases, have literally transformed their commuruties. Signif,i cantly, however, while many of tJhe problems these communities faced were similar, there was no set pattern in
the solutions which were devised.
Just as specific local problems and resources have determined the nature of the response, so too any organized
program to immunize a community against communist penetration must be tailored to prevailing local conditions.
All that is required is imagination, resourcefulness, and
some personal sacrifice coupled with the wi'll to inspire
positive action to combat communism and to strengthen
democracy at the community level.
In the State of Florida, for example, the Bar Association developed a lecture program on the theme of the
advantages of our system over communism. These lectures
are ,g iven to high school students throug,hout the state by
specially trained practicing attorneys. The speakers explain how our Government operates, what must be done to
keep it functioning effectively, and why it is superior to
the Soviet system. All of the lectures given under this program stress the duty of each citizen to interest himself
actively in publi-c affairs. The American Bar Association,
1
�48
SLOVAKIA
in cooperation with the American Heritage Foundation, annually observes Law Day with ceremonies which contrast
the Rule of Law in our country with the rule of fear in
communist nations.
To offset the Communist Party's celebration of May
Day, the Veterans of Foreign Wars sponsor an annual
Loyalty Day parade in New York City. At its Indianapolis headquarters, The American Legion maintains an
Americanism Commission, which provides information
about communism to the public.
Individual religious faiths have held training classes
for members of trade-unions who are actively opposing
communist attempts to infiltrate the labor movement. The
interdenominational Foundation for Religious Action in
the Social and Civil Order, of Washington, D. C., has been
organized to stress the importance of religious truth in
the preservation and development of our way of life. Its
goal is to unite all who believe in God in the struggle
against atheistic communism.
'Dhe Assembly of Captive European Nations prepaired
a large photographic exhibit featuring scenes of communist domestic terror and Soviet imperialism. Sponsored
by various organizations, this dramatic exhibition was
sown in a number of our large cities, as well as in cities
abroad. The Freedom Train, which toured the United States
with such documents as the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, gave many of our citizens, who would
not ordinarily have had the opportunity, a chance to view
these hallowed symbo'1s of American freedom.
As a public service, many individuals and private organizations prepare, or reprint, and distribute anti-communist literature. In Pennsylvania, the Department of Public Instruction had the Library of Congress prepare a selected annotated bibliography on communism for use by
teachers and students.
Local activity can have far-reaching effects. A group
and undergraduate students decided to capigraduate
of
communist-inspired Seventh World You!th
the
on
talize
in Vienna in 1959. For a year prior to
held
be
to
Festival
college campuses searching for
visited
they
festival,
the
�SLOVAKIA
49
students who could effectively represent the United States
and who were wining to atJtend. They di,s tri'buted pamphlets outlining the communist background of this and previous festivals, as weH as booklets of facts and figures on
issues which communist propaganda has been exploiting.
·This group also conducted briefing sessions for the anticommunists who planned to attend. News accounts of the
festival highlighted how the anti-communist American delegates stole the communists' thunder as a result of their
ability to correct the misconceptions and distortions of
American society which have always characterized these
festivals.
Americans, both military and civilian, who are working in or visiting foreign na,tions can play a,n important
role in the struggle against communism. Every citizen
abroad is, in a very real sense, a full-time "ambassador"
not only of our Nation but also of t:he American way of
life. An understanding of and a respect for the rights of
others are fundamental to our concept of individual freedom. This also applies in our dealings with citirens of other
nations regardless of their educational attainments, social
status, or economic level. By exercising his individual freedom in a responsible manner without violating ,the rights
of others, every American traveling abroad can serve as a
forceful example of how our system of government works.
The American aJbroad, by his conduct, can sow positive and
constructive ideas which one day may help to produce a
harvest on which the Free World can grow stronger.
Individual initiative and originality, geared to local action, are the wellsprings by which our system of government is continuously nourished. These examples illustrate
how the moral strength of our Nation is constantly replenished. Programs such as these, infused with a renewed sense
of dedication, should be expanded, coordinated, and continued on a long-range basis.
The importance of local communiities cannot be overemphasized. It is there that social understanding and
growth take root. It is there that education, business, labor, and reHgion take on form and substance to influence,
nourish, vitalize, and give direction to our national life. Lt
�50
SLOVAKIA
is in our local communities that cogent, penetrative thinking should be done now to re-evaluate the position of this
Nation in the present worM crisis. From this constructive
effort can come a decisive contribution to formulating and
carrying out a coordinated, comprehensive, affirmative
global strategy which will insure the supremacy of freedom over a'll types of totalitarianism.
Communism has hurled us a moral challenge. Our response, and the response of free men everywhere, will de-·
.termine whether or not freedom itself survives. It is no
longer suf.ficient for us to adopt the negative approach of
merely reacting defensively to every shift in communist
tactics. We must place greater emphasis on the positive
role which our American way of life can perform in this
struggle.
A CREMATORY is being planned in Braitislava, SloV'akia, according to the d'aily PRAOA. ]t should be ready by the end of 1,963;
the cost: 9 million Crowns; and location: near Vhe present Bratislava cemetery. 11he Reds are happy that finally consideraition has beer:
given "to this modern and scienitific way of burying tihe dead ."
e
•
•
urgent assignments of the oow FiveYear Pla.n 01961,1005) of the Czec'h Communist Party's Cenitral Committee is t!he coimpletion of the huge ]r.ornworks in Kosice, Slovakia.
Blueprints for this "second steel heart" as it is termed by
Praue Reds - was drawn up in the USSR It will be the largest
four.,dry in all Europe and one ·of the ten, largesit works of tts kind
in the world. Et will cost an estimated 10.5 billions Crown,s. Soviet
experts are in charge of construction and operation.
ONIE
OF
THIE
MOST
RECOMMENDED BOOKS:
"CZECHOSWVAKISM VERSUS AMERICANISM"
an expose of the pro-Soviet "National Fronters" in the socalled Council af Free Czechoslovakia - is a 48 page booklet published by the Slovaik League of America, which
should be read by every one seeking the answer to the
question of how "Czecho-Slovak democracy" converted to a
"people's democracy." Send 25 cents (coin or stamps) to
the SLOVAKIA for your copy today.
�
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
43
COMMUNIST ILLUSION AND DEMOCRATIC REALITY
By J. Edgar Hoover,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
(tAd•a pted from article preipared for memibers of the
National Strategy S•eminar)
A five-year study of the conduct of American prisoners of war during the Korean conflict was made by the
United States Army. This study disclosed that there was,
in the morale of American prisoners of war, a breakdown
which reached disturbing proportions. Almost one out of
every three American prisoners of war collaborated to
some degree with the communists. This colla'boration included broadcasting anti-American propaganda, writing
articles praising life under communism, "con.fessing" to
the use of germ warfare, an\d signing peace appeals and
other communist petitions. Our soldiers informed on one
andther and fraternized with the enemy. The death of
some American prisoners could have been prevented if
they had not been completely neglected by their fellow
captives. Not one American prisoner of war succeeded in
escaping. Some even chose to remain in Communist China
rather than return to the United States. That American
military personnel collaborated alt aH is difficult to understand. Even more disturbing are the extent of the collaboration and the casual attitude of those who were guilty.
As a result of the study, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in August, 1955, promulgalteld for members of the
Armed Forces a Code of Conduct specifying the duties and
obligations of our fighting men. The report of the special
committee which had recommended the adoption of tih!s
.code pointedly noted:
"The uninformed P.0.W.'s were up against it. They
couldn't answer arguments in favor of communism with
arguments in favor of Americanism because they knew
very little a<bout their America ... "
The report concluded that our Armed Forces had not
adequately prepared their men for the rigors of commu •
nist indoctrination. It lookeld behind this failure, however,
and stressed that our homes, schools, churches, and pa-
44
SLOVAKIA
triotic organizations must also assume greater responsibility in educating Americans in the principles which un,
derlie our way of life. The importance of such an affirr;.a.tive long-range educational program is borne out by the
special committee's finding that, in many cases, our fighting men were at a disadvantage because they knew less
about the ideals and traditions of their own country, than
did their communist interrogators.
The behavior of these prisoners of war was less an
individual failure than it was an indictment of our entire
society which had not prepared them adequately for their
head-on collision with communist indoctrination. All Americans must share some responsibility for the conduct of
these prisoners of war. More important, we must not ignore this forceful example of the impact of communist
psychological pressures. Our continued survival may well
depend upon the action we take now to insure that all
citizens, not only military personnel, are fortified against
the continuous communist ideological assault.
We can defeat communist ideology and - at the same
time - reinforce the structure of our own form of government by the combined process of exposure and education.
The illusions of communism cannot withstand the
penetrating light of truth. For a number of years, congressional and state investigations of communism, essential for the consideration of legislation, have focused the
pitiless glare of publicity on many phases of communis t
activity. The reports of these investigative bodies are readily availaJble and include detailed information regarding
the activities of the Communist Party, USA, throughout
the country .
The Committee on Un-American Activi·ties United
States House of Representatives, has issued a conveniern~
"Guide to Sulbversive Organizations and Publications."
This is a listing of the various organizations cited by the
Attorney General of the United Sta:tes, as well as other
organiza:tions and publications found by congressional or
state investigative committees to be communist dominated.
The introduction to this publication consists of a brief historical review of communist front group activity, an ex-
SLOVAKIA
45
1Planation of the methods by which communist front groups
are established, and a set of cniteria to assist in detecting
them.
Some measures of the effectiveness of these investigative committees in exposing the aims, principles, and
methods of communism is indicated by the bitterness and
the intensity of communist attacks upon them, as well as
by the continuous communist campaigns to abolish them.
Former communisbs are a:lso victims of communist
vituperation because of the important role they play in
exposing the true nature of communism. Many of these
persons, after renouncing communism, have testified before courts, administrativ e hearings, and investigative
committees. Through books, articles, and lectures based
on their firsthand knowledge, they have helped to alert
the public. In addition, their testimony has provided valuable evidence which has enabled the Government to prosecute communists who violate our laws. By these actions,
many former communists have not only rehabilitated themselves but have, in the process, made a substantial contribution to the security of all Americans.
Every exposure of communism's false premises, inherent contradictions , deceitful tactics, and empty promises
he'lps to shatter its ideologiical appeal and to fortify aga:inst
its psychological pressures. But, in this struggle for men's
minds, exposure alone is not enough. Exposure must be
complemented by a long-range educational program with
a dual purpose. This program must encompass, not only
a penetrating study of communism, but also a thorough
grounding in ,the basic prindples of our individual freedom under law. This educational program must be designed
to train people to think and to distinguish between truth
and error.
Each year, more colleges are offering courses which
present a critical ana:lysis of tJhe theory and practice of
communism. In at least one college, a course of this type
is compulsory. Books contrasting communism with our
form of government are now being published for our use
in our high schools. This academic instruction can be supplemented by individual study of the wealth of anti-com-
46
SLOVAKIA
munist material available as well as by participation in
group discussions and public forums. This program of education in communism must not, of course, constitute or be
confused with the advocacy of communist doctrine. It can
and should be limited to a critical study of communist
strategy and tactics and the materialistic philosophy underlying them.
Knowing what communism really is and how it operates will also help us to avoid tJhe danger of confusing
;Communism with legitimate dissent on controversial issues.
Communism feeds on social ferment. On both the local and
national levels, the Communist Parity, USA, is continually
-e ~ploiting social, economic, and political grievances for its
own tadical purposes. For this reason, the "Party line"
will frequently coincide with the views of many non-communists on speci£ic issues. We must not, therefore, indiscriminately la:bel as communists those whose opinions on a
particular question may, on occasion, parallel the official
Party position. We must also guard against the tendency
to characterize as communists those who merely disagree
with us or who advocate unorthodox or unpopular beliefs.
When anyone is erroneously branded a communist,
it not only constitutes an injustice to the individual, but
also helps communism by diffusing the strength of anti-communist forces. In combatting communism, we must be
aware of vigilante action. The responsibilities of citizens
are to be certain of the facts and to report these facts to
the proper authorities.
Knowledge of communism is only the first phase of the
battle. This knowledge must be augmented by a continuous revitalization of our own inherently superior strength
through the prac tical, daily exercise and development of
our American principles. Too frequently, emphasis is
placed on acquiring an understanding only of the me~haniical functions of our Government, such as elections, the
enactment of legislation, or judicial review. ':Dhis knowledge, important as it is, becomes a mere collection of sterile
•facts without a deep appreciation and a continuing awareness of the reason for the very existence of our form of
Government - the freedom of the individual under law.
47
SLOVAKIA
------------- - -
Without the realization of this f.undamental phJlosophy of
freedom, such basic individual rights as freedom of s,peech,
the press, anld religion are taken for granted. Forgoitten is
man's bitter fight through the centuries to wrest these
freedoms from tyranny.
The exel'cise of these individual freedoms, which we
often take for granted, is largely responsi'ble for our Nation's reputation for getting things done. Many of us have
seen, or have even participated in, programs for community improvement promoted by private organizations and
civic groups. Recognizing a specific problem which required cooperative action, and sparkled by individual initiative, whole communities have organized, for example, to
attract new industry, to eradicate blighted slum areas, to
eliminate racial tensions, or to improve educational opportunities. Public officials, religious leaders, and representatives of business, labor, and the professions, realizing a
common interest, have fused their energies and in many
cases, have literally transformed their commuruties. Signif,i cantly, however, while many of tJhe problems these communities faced were similar, there was no set pattern in
the solutions which were devised.
Just as specific local problems and resources have determined the nature of the response, so too any organized
program to immunize a community against communist penetration must be tailored to prevailing local conditions.
All that is required is imagination, resourcefulness, and
some personal sacrifice coupled with the wi'll to inspire
positive action to combat communism and to strengthen
democracy at the community level.
In the State of Florida, for example, the Bar Association developed a lecture program on the theme of the
advantages of our system over communism. These lectures
are ,g iven to high school students throug,hout the state by
specially trained practicing attorneys. The speakers explain how our Government operates, what must be done to
keep it functioning effectively, and why it is superior to
the Soviet system. All of the lectures given under this program stress the duty of each citizen to interest himself
actively in publi-c affairs. The American Bar Association,
1
48
SLOVAKIA
in cooperation with the American Heritage Foundation, annually observes Law Day with ceremonies which contrast
the Rule of Law in our country with the rule of fear in
communist nations.
To offset the Communist Party's celebration of May
Day, the Veterans of Foreign Wars sponsor an annual
Loyalty Day parade in New York City. At its Indianapolis headquarters, The American Legion maintains an
Americanism Commission, which provides information
about communism to the public.
Individual religious faiths have held training classes
for members of trade-unions who are actively opposing
communist attempts to infiltrate the labor movement. The
interdenominational Foundation for Religious Action in
the Social and Civil Order, of Washington, D. C., has been
organized to stress the importance of religious truth in
the preservation and development of our way of life. Its
goal is to unite all who believe in God in the struggle
against atheistic communism.
'Dhe Assembly of Captive European Nations prepaired
a large photographic exhibit featuring scenes of communist domestic terror and Soviet imperialism. Sponsored
by various organizations, this dramatic exhibition was
sown in a number of our large cities, as well as in cities
abroad. The Freedom Train, which toured the United States
with such documents as the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, gave many of our citizens, who would
not ordinarily have had the opportunity, a chance to view
these hallowed symbo'1s of American freedom.
As a public service, many individuals and private organizations prepare, or reprint, and distribute anti-communist literature. In Pennsylvania, the Department of Public Instruction had the Library of Congress prepare a selected annotated bibliography on communism for use by
teachers and students.
Local activity can have far-reaching effects. A group
and undergraduate students decided to capigraduate
of
communist-inspired Seventh World You!th
the
on
talize
in Vienna in 1959. For a year prior to
held
be
to
Festival
college campuses searching for
visited
they
festival,
the
SLOVAKIA
49
students who could effectively represent the United States
and who were wining to atJtend. They di,s tri'buted pamphlets outlining the communist background of this and previous festivals, as weH as booklets of facts and figures on
issues which communist propaganda has been exploiting.
·This group also conducted briefing sessions for the anticommunists who planned to attend. News accounts of the
festival highlighted how the anti-communist American delegates stole the communists' thunder as a result of their
ability to correct the misconceptions and distortions of
American society which have always characterized these
festivals.
Americans, both military and civilian, who are working in or visiting foreign na,tions can play a,n important
role in the struggle against communism. Every citizen
abroad is, in a very real sense, a full-time "ambassador"
not only of our Nation but also of t:he American way of
life. An understanding of and a respect for the rights of
others are fundamental to our concept of individual freedom. This also applies in our dealings with citirens of other
nations regardless of their educational attainments, social
status, or economic level. By exercising his individual freedom in a responsible manner without violating ,the rights
of others, every American traveling abroad can serve as a
forceful example of how our system of government works.
The American aJbroad, by his conduct, can sow positive and
constructive ideas which one day may help to produce a
harvest on which the Free World can grow stronger.
Individual initiative and originality, geared to local action, are the wellsprings by which our system of government is continuously nourished. These examples illustrate
how the moral strength of our Nation is constantly replenished. Programs such as these, infused with a renewed sense
of dedication, should be expanded, coordinated, and continued on a long-range basis.
The importance of local communiities cannot be overemphasized. It is there that social understanding and
growth take root. It is there that education, business, labor, and reHgion take on form and substance to influence,
nourish, vitalize, and give direction to our national life. Lt
50
SLOVAKIA
is in our local communities that cogent, penetrative thinking should be done now to re-evaluate the position of this
Nation in the present worM crisis. From this constructive
effort can come a decisive contribution to formulating and
carrying out a coordinated, comprehensive, affirmative
global strategy which will insure the supremacy of freedom over a'll types of totalitarianism.
Communism has hurled us a moral challenge. Our response, and the response of free men everywhere, will de-·
.termine whether or not freedom itself survives. It is no
longer suf.ficient for us to adopt the negative approach of
merely reacting defensively to every shift in communist
tactics. We must place greater emphasis on the positive
role which our American way of life can perform in this
struggle.
A CREMATORY is being planned in Braitislava, SloV'akia, according to the d'aily PRAOA. ]t should be ready by the end of 1,963;
the cost: 9 million Crowns; and location: near Vhe present Bratislava cemetery. 11he Reds are happy that finally consideraition has beer:
given "to this modern and scienitific way of burying tihe dead ."
e
•
•
urgent assignments of the oow FiveYear Pla.n 01961,1005) of the Czec'h Communist Party's Cenitral Committee is t!he coimpletion of the huge ]r.ornworks in Kosice, Slovakia.
Blueprints for this "second steel heart" as it is termed by
Praue Reds - was drawn up in the USSR It will be the largest
four.,dry in all Europe and one ·of the ten, largesit works of tts kind
in the world. Et will cost an estimated 10.5 billions Crown,s. Soviet
experts are in charge of construction and operation.
ONIE
OF
THIE
MOST
RECOMMENDED BOOKS:
"CZECHOSWVAKISM VERSUS AMERICANISM"
an expose of the pro-Soviet "National Fronters" in the socalled Council af Free Czechoslovakia - is a 48 page booklet published by the Slovaik League of America, which
should be read by every one seeking the answer to the
question of how "Czecho-Slovak democracy" converted to a
"people's democracy." Send 25 cents (coin or stamps) to
the SLOVAKIA for your copy today.
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
Communist Illusion and Democratic Reality
Description
An account of the resource
J. Edgar Hoover
Slovakia, Vol. 11, No. 1 (33), March-June 1961
pp. 43-50
Adapted from article prepared for members of the National Strategy Seminar
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March-June 1961
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ce5fa98de66319d31fd8aaa1f6549131.pdf
26df22af09220c5330e97a6ac9b22f8d
PDF Text
Text
48
SLOVAKIA
COMMUNIST TACTICAL "FLEXIBILITY"
Dr. Fraiio Tiso
Die-hard coexistentialists in the western world repeatedly call for "Flexibility" in political negotiations with
Moscow. Among their number are those who in their
naivete sincerely believe it possible, by applying a flexible
method of negotiation, to bring about a relaxation of tension between East and West. Among them are also masked
Communists who, by the aid of "flexibility," seek to effeot
a more rapid capitulation of the West. Oddly enough not
one of the two .types of coexistentialists has so far given a
concrete example as to just how the West should practice
this flexibility wilth respect to the East. Hence it may be
interesting to demonstrate "flexibility" as the Communists
practice it.
Communist tactics operate primarily 1by "mental reservation." I experienced the first typical case of such :tactics in Moscow. During the early summer of 1940, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Comrade Molotov,
presented Rumanian Consul Davidescu an ultimatum in
which Rumania was asked to evacuate and immediately
turn over Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. After delivering the ultimatum Comrade Molotov consoled the
painfully perplexed consul with the following words:
"And wihen you have ca,,rried out our demand, the Soviet
Union will no longeT interfere in Rumania's domestic affairs."
This generous promise was an easy one for Molotov
to make. It was not even necessary for the Soviet Union
to interfere directly in Rumanian domestic affairs since
the Rumanian Oommunist Party - on order of Moscow
- could do so anyway whenever it liked.
Stalin, for example, was frequently asked in writing,
mostly by American journalists, such questions as: "Do
you believe that the two divergent political, economic and
social systems can satisfactorily live side by side?" Stalin's answer was always: "I believe it." At no time, however, has the question been asked: "How long will you
continue to believe it?"
During the Magyar popular revolt in 1956, an agree-
�SLOVAKIA
49
ment was made between Premier Nagy and the Commander-in-Chief of Soviet troops, according to which Soviet
forces would move out of Hungary at a certain border
point. Premier Nagy, himself a Communist and Communist-educated, failed to have it included in the agreement
that other Sovii.et troops would not enter Hungary via a
different border point. Wihen, then, the units of the Soviet Army left Budapest only to call a halt some kilometers away, and when in consternation, Nagy inquired as to
the cause for this halt, he was told the troops were merely
being regrouped. The unhappy premier had forgotten to
ask fur what purpose this regrouping was being made.
Comrade Khrushchev declared in Peking, immediately
after his visit to the United States, that it was wrong to
want to force a people. into the Communist camp against
its will. That it was wrong "to test ilie stability of the capitalist system by force, since the peoples would never understand and back ilie person who mentally pursues such
a tactic." Did Comrade Khrushchev, however, worry about
being understood when he was brutally forcing peoples
into the Communist sphere? Did he worry about the understanding of the Magyar people? Did he ever solicit the
support of the enslaved peoples, among these ihis own
Russian people?
"Flexibility''. of tactics; tactic of "flexibility" ! The
Czech Communists behaved nobly indeed toward the autonomous movement of the Slovaks during the years from
1918 to 1938: they repeatedly emphasized in their news
organs that the Slovaks, too, have a right to self-determination and they allowed for this to the day when the
Slovaks were separated from Czecho-Slovakia.
In April, 1945, they forced Benes to relinquish the
national identilty of Slovaks and Czechs, which he had so
tenaciously insisted on up to that time, to proclaim the
popular independence of the Slovaks and to guarantee to
Slovakia the rights of a federal state (the Kosice agreement" of April 1945). As part of :bhe election propaganda
of 1946, they presented to the Slovak voters a program
which favored the restoration of Slovak independence.
When, however, the elections were won not by the Com-
�50
SLOVAKIA
munists but by the middle class, the Communists began
to steer an opposite course. In the new constitution of
Czecho-4Slovakia, presented to and accepted by the parliament upon the complete Communist seizure of power in
February 1948, they permitted the Slovak provincial government to remain, but with severely curtailed authority.
Czedh Communists took over its important administrative
dep-artments and the leadership of the Slovak Communist
Party. Slovak party leaders were either executed or sentenced to lengthy terms in the penitentiary. Others took !their
lives. Key positions in the party press were given to Czechs.
Czechs also took over leading jobs in Slovak industry.
Inasmuch as these and sim'ilar dispositions on the
part of Prague merely served to humble old Slovak Communists and reinforce their opposition to Prague, Comrade
Antonin Novotny, first secretary of the Czech Communist
Party and the country's president, caused a widespread
centralization of the over-all state economic life and the
drafting of a new "socialist" constitution. Centraliza!tiion
of the economy meant additional sU'bo:ridination of Slovak
industry to Czech management. The new basic law, however, was to do away with the provincial or territorial
government of Slovakia, which had become almost insignificant. This was .truly a "flexibility" tihat led to the exact opposite of what was demanded so impressively thirty
years ago.
Flexibility in the tactics of the West? Moscow was
able to apply the flexibility, cited above in several examples, not only by dint of Communist morality which
says .that that is moral which serves the Party, but also
for the reason that Communism has so far been on the offensive. The West, however, is still on the defensive. But
a defensive stand, does not offer much of a chance or
method of application, for to be "flexible" the West must
also convert to a counter-offensive. To advise the vanguard country on the East-West front, the West German
Federal Repu·blic, to be fle~ible, while those who do the
advising sit and play caros in bunkers that are not even
expertly and reliably built, such is not the great art of
war, and certainly it is not a form of protection.
�
48
SLOVAKIA
COMMUNIST TACTICAL "FLEXIBILITY"
Dr. Fraiio Tiso
Die-hard coexistentialists in the western world repeatedly call for "Flexibility" in political negotiations with
Moscow. Among their number are those who in their
naivete sincerely believe it possible, by applying a flexible
method of negotiation, to bring about a relaxation of tension between East and West. Among them are also masked
Communists who, by the aid of "flexibility," seek to effeot
a more rapid capitulation of the West. Oddly enough not
one of the two .types of coexistentialists has so far given a
concrete example as to just how the West should practice
this flexibility wilth respect to the East. Hence it may be
interesting to demonstrate "flexibility" as the Communists
practice it.
Communist tactics operate primarily 1by "mental reservation." I experienced the first typical case of such :tactics in Moscow. During the early summer of 1940, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Comrade Molotov,
presented Rumanian Consul Davidescu an ultimatum in
which Rumania was asked to evacuate and immediately
turn over Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. After delivering the ultimatum Comrade Molotov consoled the
painfully perplexed consul with the following words:
"And wihen you have ca,,rried out our demand, the Soviet
Union will no longeT interfere in Rumania's domestic affairs."
This generous promise was an easy one for Molotov
to make. It was not even necessary for the Soviet Union
to interfere directly in Rumanian domestic affairs since
the Rumanian Oommunist Party - on order of Moscow
- could do so anyway whenever it liked.
Stalin, for example, was frequently asked in writing,
mostly by American journalists, such questions as: "Do
you believe that the two divergent political, economic and
social systems can satisfactorily live side by side?" Stalin's answer was always: "I believe it." At no time, however, has the question been asked: "How long will you
continue to believe it?"
During the Magyar popular revolt in 1956, an agree-
�SLOVAKIA
49
ment was made between Premier Nagy and the Commander-in-Chief of Soviet troops, according to which Soviet
forces would move out of Hungary at a certain border
point. Premier Nagy, himself a Communist and Communist-educated, failed to have it included in the agreement
that other Sovii.et troops would not enter Hungary via a
different border point. Wihen, then, the units of the Soviet Army left Budapest only to call a halt some kilometers away, and when in consternation, Nagy inquired as to
the cause for this halt, he was told the troops were merely
being regrouped. The unhappy premier had forgotten to
ask fur what purpose this regrouping was being made.
Comrade Khrushchev declared in Peking, immediately
after his visit to the United States, that it was wrong to
want to force a people. into the Communist camp against
its will. That it was wrong "to test ilie stability of the capitalist system by force, since the peoples would never understand and back ilie person who mentally pursues such
a tactic." Did Comrade Khrushchev, however, worry about
being understood when he was brutally forcing peoples
into the Communist sphere? Did he worry about the understanding of the Magyar people? Did he ever solicit the
support of the enslaved peoples, among these ihis own
Russian people?
"Flexibility''. of tactics; tactic of "flexibility" ! The
Czech Communists behaved nobly indeed toward the autonomous movement of the Slovaks during the years from
1918 to 1938: they repeatedly emphasized in their news
organs that the Slovaks, too, have a right to self-determination and they allowed for this to the day when the
Slovaks were separated from Czecho-Slovakia.
In April, 1945, they forced Benes to relinquish the
national identilty of Slovaks and Czechs, which he had so
tenaciously insisted on up to that time, to proclaim the
popular independence of the Slovaks and to guarantee to
Slovakia the rights of a federal state (the Kosice agreement" of April 1945). As part of :bhe election propaganda
of 1946, they presented to the Slovak voters a program
which favored the restoration of Slovak independence.
When, however, the elections were won not by the Com-
�50
SLOVAKIA
munists but by the middle class, the Communists began
to steer an opposite course. In the new constitution of
Czecho-4Slovakia, presented to and accepted by the parliament upon the complete Communist seizure of power in
February 1948, they permitted the Slovak provincial government to remain, but with severely curtailed authority.
Czedh Communists took over its important administrative
dep-artments and the leadership of the Slovak Communist
Party. Slovak party leaders were either executed or sentenced to lengthy terms in the penitentiary. Others took !their
lives. Key positions in the party press were given to Czechs.
Czechs also took over leading jobs in Slovak industry.
Inasmuch as these and sim'ilar dispositions on the
part of Prague merely served to humble old Slovak Communists and reinforce their opposition to Prague, Comrade
Antonin Novotny, first secretary of the Czech Communist
Party and the country's president, caused a widespread
centralization of the over-all state economic life and the
drafting of a new "socialist" constitution. Centraliza!tiion
of the economy meant additional sU'bo:ridination of Slovak
industry to Czech management. The new basic law, however, was to do away with the provincial or territorial
government of Slovakia, which had become almost insignificant. This was .truly a "flexibility" tihat led to the exact opposite of what was demanded so impressively thirty
years ago.
Flexibility in the tactics of the West? Moscow was
able to apply the flexibility, cited above in several examples, not only by dint of Communist morality which
says .that that is moral which serves the Party, but also
for the reason that Communism has so far been on the offensive. The West, however, is still on the defensive. But
a defensive stand, does not offer much of a chance or
method of application, for to be "flexible" the West must
also convert to a counter-offensive. To advise the vanguard country on the East-West front, the West German
Federal Repu·blic, to be fle~ible, while those who do the
advising sit and play caros in bunkers that are not even
expertly and reliably built, such is not the great art of
war, and certainly it is not a form of protection.
�
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
48
SLOVAKIA
COMMUNIST TACTICAL "FLEXIBILITY"
Dr. Fraiio Tiso
Die-hard coexistentialists in the western world repeatedly call for "Flexibility" in political negotiations with
Moscow. Among their number are those who in their
naivete sincerely believe it possible, by applying a flexible
method of negotiation, to bring about a relaxation of tension between East and West. Among them are also masked
Communists who, by the aid of "flexibility," seek to effeot
a more rapid capitulation of the West. Oddly enough not
one of the two .types of coexistentialists has so far given a
concrete example as to just how the West should practice
this flexibility wilth respect to the East. Hence it may be
interesting to demonstrate "flexibility" as the Communists
practice it.
Communist tactics operate primarily 1by "mental reservation." I experienced the first typical case of such :tactics in Moscow. During the early summer of 1940, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Comrade Molotov,
presented Rumanian Consul Davidescu an ultimatum in
which Rumania was asked to evacuate and immediately
turn over Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. After delivering the ultimatum Comrade Molotov consoled the
painfully perplexed consul with the following words:
"And wihen you have ca,,rried out our demand, the Soviet
Union will no longeT interfere in Rumania's domestic affairs."
This generous promise was an easy one for Molotov
to make. It was not even necessary for the Soviet Union
to interfere directly in Rumanian domestic affairs since
the Rumanian Oommunist Party - on order of Moscow
- could do so anyway whenever it liked.
Stalin, for example, was frequently asked in writing,
mostly by American journalists, such questions as: "Do
you believe that the two divergent political, economic and
social systems can satisfactorily live side by side?" Stalin's answer was always: "I believe it." At no time, however, has the question been asked: "How long will you
continue to believe it?"
During the Magyar popular revolt in 1956, an agree-
SLOVAKIA
49
ment was made between Premier Nagy and the Commander-in-Chief of Soviet troops, according to which Soviet
forces would move out of Hungary at a certain border
point. Premier Nagy, himself a Communist and Communist-educated, failed to have it included in the agreement
that other Sovii.et troops would not enter Hungary via a
different border point. Wihen, then, the units of the Soviet Army left Budapest only to call a halt some kilometers away, and when in consternation, Nagy inquired as to
the cause for this halt, he was told the troops were merely
being regrouped. The unhappy premier had forgotten to
ask fur what purpose this regrouping was being made.
Comrade Khrushchev declared in Peking, immediately
after his visit to the United States, that it was wrong to
want to force a people. into the Communist camp against
its will. That it was wrong "to test ilie stability of the capitalist system by force, since the peoples would never understand and back ilie person who mentally pursues such
a tactic." Did Comrade Khrushchev, however, worry about
being understood when he was brutally forcing peoples
into the Communist sphere? Did he worry about the understanding of the Magyar people? Did he ever solicit the
support of the enslaved peoples, among these ihis own
Russian people?
"Flexibility''. of tactics; tactic of "flexibility" ! The
Czech Communists behaved nobly indeed toward the autonomous movement of the Slovaks during the years from
1918 to 1938: they repeatedly emphasized in their news
organs that the Slovaks, too, have a right to self-determination and they allowed for this to the day when the
Slovaks were separated from Czecho-Slovakia.
In April, 1945, they forced Benes to relinquish the
national identilty of Slovaks and Czechs, which he had so
tenaciously insisted on up to that time, to proclaim the
popular independence of the Slovaks and to guarantee to
Slovakia the rights of a federal state (the Kosice agreement" of April 1945). As part of :bhe election propaganda
of 1946, they presented to the Slovak voters a program
which favored the restoration of Slovak independence.
When, however, the elections were won not by the Com-
50
SLOVAKIA
munists but by the middle class, the Communists began
to steer an opposite course. In the new constitution of
Czecho-4Slovakia, presented to and accepted by the parliament upon the complete Communist seizure of power in
February 1948, they permitted the Slovak provincial government to remain, but with severely curtailed authority.
Czedh Communists took over its important administrative
dep-artments and the leadership of the Slovak Communist
Party. Slovak party leaders were either executed or sentenced to lengthy terms in the penitentiary. Others took !their
lives. Key positions in the party press were given to Czechs.
Czechs also took over leading jobs in Slovak industry.
Inasmuch as these and sim'ilar dispositions on the
part of Prague merely served to humble old Slovak Communists and reinforce their opposition to Prague, Comrade
Antonin Novotny, first secretary of the Czech Communist
Party and the country's president, caused a widespread
centralization of the over-all state economic life and the
drafting of a new "socialist" constitution. Centraliza!tiion
of the economy meant additional sU'bo:ridination of Slovak
industry to Czech management. The new basic law, however, was to do away with the provincial or territorial
government of Slovakia, which had become almost insignificant. This was .truly a "flexibility" tihat led to the exact opposite of what was demanded so impressively thirty
years ago.
Flexibility in the tactics of the West? Moscow was
able to apply the flexibility, cited above in several examples, not only by dint of Communist morality which
says .that that is moral which serves the Party, but also
for the reason that Communism has so far been on the offensive. The West, however, is still on the defensive. But
a defensive stand, does not offer much of a chance or
method of application, for to be "flexible" the West must
also convert to a counter-offensive. To advise the vanguard country on the East-West front, the West German
Federal Repu·blic, to be fle~ible, while those who do the
advising sit and play caros in bunkers that are not even
expertly and reliably built, such is not the great art of
war, and certainly it is not a form of protection.
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
Communist Tactical "Flexibility"
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Fraňo Tiso
Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 7 (32), September-December 1960
pp. 48-50
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Tiso, Fraňo
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1960
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1ba25e3ce77f4d4ae303482c4a7ed928.pdf
181d533e68fea0a8254ec172501f436b
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
83
CONSTANTINE CULEN
( 1904-1964)
, writing and public speaking
led him in his early school
years to journalism and later
to writings on the political and
cultural subjects pertaining to
the national struggles of the
Slovak people. His first book,
The Years of Slovak Hopes
and Disappointments appear-
//
( ~ c.
r,
•
/
./
~~~~
~
ed in 1932, when Culen was
28 years of age, and won him
acclaim and a literary prize.
Even though he remained
, an employee in the civil ser~ Jih ! vice of the Ministry of Transf port, he published nearly
- 1'<\.-'
11
! every year a book on histori...., ~ <'t~t
8::Jn~~-
=
j ~:!t/o~:~~~e~~~r,lit~~ar~~~~~
An outstanding newspaperman, writer on cultural and
political history and a courageous fighter f o r his
people's freedom and independence, Constantine Culen
was born February 26, 1904
in Brodske in Slovakia.
He received his primary
education at a time when Slovakia was still a part of Austria-Hungary, and secondary
education in Czecho-Slovakia,
at a high school in Skalica and
at an engineering school in
Bratislava, capital city of Slovakia.
His strong inclination to
and several manuscripts, besides a great number of articles and short studies, were
written a n d published by
Culen between the year 1932
and 1964. Some books and studies appeared also in foreign
languages, namely English
and German.
During his lifetime, Culen
was closely linked with the
United States, where he died
on April 7th, 1964 at the University Hospital in New York.
He came to the U.S.A. first as
a child, later, in 1935, as a
member of a delegation of
Matica Slovenska, Slovakia's
Academy of History, Arts and
�84
SLOVAKIA
Science. In 1938 he came
again as a cultural attache at
the Legation of Czecho-Slovakia in Washington, but before
the end of 1939 he returned
to Slovakia, where he achieved great popularity as a member of Parliament, journalist
and public speaker. Soon,
however, he came into conflict with Germans, and, being a staunch adversary of
Communism, he left Slovakia
at the end of the Second
World War. For several years
he lived in Canada as editorin-chief of a Slovak newspaper
Kanadsky Slovak, and since
1953 he was a resident of the
United States.
From 1938, when his book
on the Pittsburgh Agreement
appeared in Slovakia, Culen
wrote a score of books and
studies and thousands of arti cles pertaining to the history,
cultural and social activities
of American Slovaks, including History of Ameri can Slo-
~~--......
vaks, in two volumes. His Hist ory of the Slovaks in New
Yor k as published in instal-
ments even after his death.
In his literary works as well
as in his journalistic writings,
Culen never ceased to wage a
staunch defence of Slovakia's
right to self-determination
and was a merciless critic of
the oppressors of Slovakia. He
was a member of all Slovak
literary institutions and recipient of several literary prizes, and of two high honor
awards from the Slovak republic. In exile, he was vicepresident of the Slovak National Council Abroad, member
of the Slovak Institute of
Cleveland, and contributor to
nearly all Slovak newspapers
and periodicals in the fnie
world. The Communist regime
condemned him in absentia to
20 years. His untimely death
is regretted by thousands of
Slovaks over the world.
,..,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,..,,.,,.,,,.,..,,,.,,.,~~-
JMK
.................. ,_
"What the Slovaks brought from America th ey sough t to valid ate
at home. The American way of life encouraged and d ire cted their
plans in Slovakia. Slovak liife waxed strong ev·oo during th e har dest
times, because it was no urished materially and ideologically by a current of material and spiritua l weal,th f rom America.
"In the rec-e,nt paE,t, American Slovaks formed the crnost nationalistic group of the Slovak nation. W.hat th e Slovak at home coul d n ot
say, the Slovak in Amer ica express·ed for him. J.t is undoub tedly an
intere sting reality that the wide Slovak masses became ard•en,t nationalists in America. And th e fact that Slovak newspaper s becam e
a,n indis,pensruble necessity of the Slovak people, that, too, must ·b e
credited to America." - CONSTANTINE CUL EN
�
SLOVAKIA
83
CONSTANTINE CULEN
( 1904-1964)
, writing and public speaking
led him in his early school
years to journalism and later
to writings on the political and
cultural subjects pertaining to
the national struggles of the
Slovak people. His first book,
The Years of Slovak Hopes
and Disappointments appear-
//
( ~ c.
r,
•
/
./
~~~~
~
ed in 1932, when Culen was
28 years of age, and won him
acclaim and a literary prize.
Even though he remained
, an employee in the civil ser~ Jih ! vice of the Ministry of Transf port, he published nearly
- 1'<\.-'
11
! every year a book on histori...., ~ <'t~t
8::Jn~~-
=
j ~:!t/o~:~~~e~~~r,lit~~ar~~~~~
An outstanding newspaperman, writer on cultural and
political history and a courageous fighter f o r his
people's freedom and independence, Constantine Culen
was born February 26, 1904
in Brodske in Slovakia.
He received his primary
education at a time when Slovakia was still a part of Austria-Hungary, and secondary
education in Czecho-Slovakia,
at a high school in Skalica and
at an engineering school in
Bratislava, capital city of Slovakia.
His strong inclination to
and several manuscripts, besides a great number of articles and short studies, were
written a n d published by
Culen between the year 1932
and 1964. Some books and studies appeared also in foreign
languages, namely English
and German.
During his lifetime, Culen
was closely linked with the
United States, where he died
on April 7th, 1964 at the University Hospital in New York.
He came to the U.S.A. first as
a child, later, in 1935, as a
member of a delegation of
Matica Slovenska, Slovakia's
Academy of History, Arts and
�84
SLOVAKIA
Science. In 1938 he came
again as a cultural attache at
the Legation of Czecho-Slovakia in Washington, but before
the end of 1939 he returned
to Slovakia, where he achieved great popularity as a member of Parliament, journalist
and public speaker. Soon,
however, he came into conflict with Germans, and, being a staunch adversary of
Communism, he left Slovakia
at the end of the Second
World War. For several years
he lived in Canada as editorin-chief of a Slovak newspaper
Kanadsky Slovak, and since
1953 he was a resident of the
United States.
From 1938, when his book
on the Pittsburgh Agreement
appeared in Slovakia, Culen
wrote a score of books and
studies and thousands of arti cles pertaining to the history,
cultural and social activities
of American Slovaks, including History of Ameri can Slo-
~~--......
vaks, in two volumes. His Hist ory of the Slovaks in New
Yor k as published in instal-
ments even after his death.
In his literary works as well
as in his journalistic writings,
Culen never ceased to wage a
staunch defence of Slovakia's
right to self-determination
and was a merciless critic of
the oppressors of Slovakia. He
was a member of all Slovak
literary institutions and recipient of several literary prizes, and of two high honor
awards from the Slovak republic. In exile, he was vicepresident of the Slovak National Council Abroad, member
of the Slovak Institute of
Cleveland, and contributor to
nearly all Slovak newspapers
and periodicals in the fnie
world. The Communist regime
condemned him in absentia to
20 years. His untimely death
is regretted by thousands of
Slovaks over the world.
,..,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,..,,.,,.,,,.,..,,,.,,.,~~-
JMK
.................. ,_
"What the Slovaks brought from America th ey sough t to valid ate
at home. The American way of life encouraged and d ire cted their
plans in Slovakia. Slovak liife waxed strong ev·oo during th e har dest
times, because it was no urished materially and ideologically by a current of material and spiritua l weal,th f rom America.
"In the rec-e,nt paE,t, American Slovaks formed the crnost nationalistic group of the Slovak nation. W.hat th e Slovak at home coul d n ot
say, the Slovak in Amer ica express·ed for him. J.t is undoub tedly an
intere sting reality that the wide Slovak masses became ard•en,t nationalists in America. And th e fact that Slovak newspaper s becam e
a,n indis,pensruble necessity of the Slovak people, that, too, must ·b e
credited to America." - CONSTANTINE CUL EN
�
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
1964, Vol. 14
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 14 (No. 37), 1964.
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
1964
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
CONSTANTINE CULEN
( 1904-1964)
, writing and public speaking
led him in his early school
years to journalism and later
to writings on the political and
cultural subjects pertaining to
the national struggles of the
Slovak people. His first book,
The Years of Slovak Hopes
and Disappointments appear-
//
( ~ c.
r,
•
/
./
~~~~
~
ed in 1932, when Culen was
28 years of age, and won him
acclaim and a literary prize.
Even though he remained
, an employee in the civil ser~ Jih ! vice of the Ministry of Transf port, he published nearly
- 1'<\.-'
11
! every year a book on histori...., ~ <'t~t
8::Jn~~-
=
j ~:!t/o~:~~~e~~~r,lit~~ar~~~~~
An outstanding newspaperman, writer on cultural and
political history and a courageous fighter f o r his
people's freedom and independence, Constantine Culen
was born February 26, 1904
in Brodske in Slovakia.
He received his primary
education at a time when Slovakia was still a part of Austria-Hungary, and secondary
education in Czecho-Slovakia,
at a high school in Skalica and
at an engineering school in
Bratislava, capital city of Slovakia.
His strong inclination to
and several manuscripts, besides a great number of articles and short studies, were
written a n d published by
Culen between the year 1932
and 1964. Some books and studies appeared also in foreign
languages, namely English
and German.
During his lifetime, Culen
was closely linked with the
United States, where he died
on April 7th, 1964 at the University Hospital in New York.
He came to the U.S.A. first as
a child, later, in 1935, as a
member of a delegation of
Matica Slovenska, Slovakia's
Academy of History, Arts and
84
SLOVAKIA
Science. In 1938 he came
again as a cultural attache at
the Legation of Czecho-Slovakia in Washington, but before
the end of 1939 he returned
to Slovakia, where he achieved great popularity as a member of Parliament, journalist
and public speaker. Soon,
however, he came into conflict with Germans, and, being a staunch adversary of
Communism, he left Slovakia
at the end of the Second
World War. For several years
he lived in Canada as editorin-chief of a Slovak newspaper
Kanadsky Slovak, and since
1953 he was a resident of the
United States.
From 1938, when his book
on the Pittsburgh Agreement
appeared in Slovakia, Culen
wrote a score of books and
studies and thousands of arti cles pertaining to the history,
cultural and social activities
of American Slovaks, including History of Ameri can Slo-
~~--......
vaks, in two volumes. His Hist ory of the Slovaks in New
Yor k as published in instal-
ments even after his death.
In his literary works as well
as in his journalistic writings,
Culen never ceased to wage a
staunch defence of Slovakia's
right to self-determination
and was a merciless critic of
the oppressors of Slovakia. He
was a member of all Slovak
literary institutions and recipient of several literary prizes, and of two high honor
awards from the Slovak republic. In exile, he was vicepresident of the Slovak National Council Abroad, member
of the Slovak Institute of
Cleveland, and contributor to
nearly all Slovak newspapers
and periodicals in the fnie
world. The Communist regime
condemned him in absentia to
20 years. His untimely death
is regretted by thousands of
Slovaks over the world.
,..,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,..,,.,,.,,,.,..,,,.,,.,~~-
JMK
.................. ,_
"What the Slovaks brought from America th ey sough t to valid ate
at home. The American way of life encouraged and d ire cted their
plans in Slovakia. Slovak liife waxed strong ev·oo during th e har dest
times, because it was no urished materially and ideologically by a current of material and spiritua l weal,th f rom America.
"In the rec-e,nt paE,t, American Slovaks formed the crnost nationalistic group of the Slovak nation. W.hat th e Slovak at home coul d n ot
say, the Slovak in Amer ica express·ed for him. J.t is undoub tedly an
intere sting reality that the wide Slovak masses became ard•en,t nationalists in America. And th e fact that Slovak newspaper s becam e
a,n indis,pensruble necessity of the Slovak people, that, too, must ·b e
credited to America." - CONSTANTINE CUL EN
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
Constantine Čulen (1904-1964)
Description
An account of the resource
jmk
Slovakia, Vol. 14 (No. 37), 1964
pp. 83-84
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1964
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/886167ef1a1fc77e9d8743d1aaad0299.pdf
c029e6819c860e30343fced3a673dbfa
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
2."i
CONTEMPORARY TENDENCIES IN
SLOVAK PHILOLOGY
Joseph M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
A reprint from SLAVIC AND E1AST EUROPEAN STUDIES
Vol. IV, Part 3-4, Published by the University of Montreal,
Department of Slavic Studies.
A bibliographic review of Slovak linguistics and philology show that, in the la-st twenty years, philology in Slovakia has experienced an all round development and progress
and is developing, both quantitatively and qualitatitvely,
comparatively undisturbed, even since the inclusion of Slovakia into the Soviet cultural and political sphere of influence.
A complete picture of the contemporary state of Slovak phildlogy would require, of course, thorough research
not only into the development of philology in Slovakia,
which is exposed to Russian and Czech cultural influences,
but also into that of the countries of the free world, where
a comparatively large number of cultural and scientific
workers use the Slovak language. For both ringuist and
philologist such a research project would be interesting not
only because in scores of Slovak periodicals and books,
which are published in the free world, there are traces of
the inrfluence of tihe Romance and the Anglo-Saxon languages, particularly in the syntax, but a research would be
of interest also because in the free world, there were published several philological studies in which two tendencies
are quite evident. The first tendency rejeets orthographic
changes in the Slovak language; the second, representing
the majority of cultural workers, at the recommendation of
the leading Slovak philologist, Professor Henry Bartek, accepted in principle the orfuographic changes which were
instituted by the philologists in Slovakia from the time of
the Czecho-Russian occupation.
However, the framework of this study is limited to research into the Soviet orbit and, therefore, we forego at this
time, a research into the development of Slovak philology
in the countries of the free world, even though some works
of H. Bartek, Philip Hrobak, Joseph Konus, and others,
�26
SLOVAKIA
warrant the attention of a wider circle of Slavists. The following outline of the contemporary state of Slovak philology concerns itself only with the development in Slovakia.
Sovietophil Tendencies and Their Extent
As with literature and science, in general, philology,
too, has been exposed, since the inclusion of Slovakia into
the Soviet sphere of influence, to political pressure by the
Communist Party and is, therefore, gradually developing
with considerable dependence on Soviet philology. This occurs particularly through the influence of some cultural
workers who were elevated by the present regime to positions of importance in Slovak cultural life because of :their
partisan adherence rather than their past scientific performances or professional qualifications. These "cultural
commissioner s" from the very beginning tried to adapt to
Slovak philology "the theoretical directives which were
given Marxist philology by J. V. Stalin in his genial works
Marxism and Problems of Linguistics and Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S. S. R.(1). However, a considerable number of true philologists ad!hered, in the first
place, to scientific principles.
The barefaced efforts to align Slovak philology with
"the Marxist directives" and subjugate it to the contemvorary political regime come to light particularly in the introduction to the new Rules of Slovak Orthography (Pravidla. slovenskeho pravopisu), published in 1953. The editor-in-Chief, Dr. Stefan Peciar, and the majority of the
members of the commission which prepared fue Rules, received their education and matured scientifically either
in the bourgeois Czedho-Slovak Republic or between 19391945 in the Slovak Republic, but in the introduction to
their work, which otherwise "in substance did not change
the present orthography and its basic principle," according
to their own admission, they deemed it necessary to pay
homage to Stalin and to attack fue philologists who prepared the Rules of orthography in 1940.
It would certainly be quite superfluous to try to prove
bhat Marxism belongs to the sphere of political and social
sciences, and that serious scholars know as yet neither "the
�SLOVAKIA
27
Marxist philology ," nor the Marxist scientific method or
principle in linguistic s and philology , but only the political
and unscientif ic interferen ce by the regimes which subscribe to the Marx-Eng els' or Lenin's political and economic theories. In the same manner, philology does not recognize fascist principles in philology and linguistic s, which
principles some of the contempo rary linguists in Slovakia
are attemptin g to discover in the works of their predecessors or contempo raries living in the countries of the free
world. Needless to say thaJt they are attemptin g to discover
such "fascist" principles not on the basis of scholarly researoh, but in an effort to perform a service for the present political regime.
There are, therefore , no serious suppositi ons in Slovakia that some "Marxist point of view" even if such a
thing existed, could already have asserted itself in Slovak
philology. The review of names of the scholarly active philologists shows that they are the ones with whom we have
been familiar, particula rly during the period of the Slovak
Republic. The bibliogra phy of philology in Slovakia of the
years 1939-47 (2) serves as evidence that Dr. Peciar, as
well as Dr. Pauliny, Jona, Horecky, Ruzicka, and others,
grew intellectu ally and created mainly during the existence of the Slovak Republic; and, that while some of them
could have been reproach ed during the Second World War
for trying to bring into Slovak philology the Czech philological theories (see the polemic Peciar-U hlar in the pereoldical "Slovensk a rec" (Slovak Languag e), there was no
ndticeabl e attempt at transferr ing the Russian philologic al
theories. The generatio n educated under the present regime is sUll too young to make any serious contribut ion to
scholarsh ip or science, as the attainme nt of a universit y
degree does not signify scientific qualificat ion, but rather
the confirma tion of the ability to undertak e scientific or
scholarly work.
Therefore , we find predomin ating even in the Bibliography of Slovak Philology for the Years 1948-1952 , compiled by Dr. Ladislav Dvonc, the names which became
known during the previous period. Dvonc's bibliogra phy is
a sequel to Elana.r's bibliogra phy, and in its 1500 entries
�28
SLOVAKIA
it deals with: 1. all linguistic contributions published in
Slovakia; 2. contributions by Slovak philologists and linguists in non-Slovak periodicals; and 3. contributions of
non-Slovak au1Jhors on Slovak language or their pholological works published in Slovakia.
Results of a favorable development of Slovak philology
are visible in Dvonc's bibliography not only in the number
of entries (1500 within four years), but also in the number
of fields covered. Slovak philology is no more restricted to
reseavch into and perfection of the Slovak language alone.
There is also a comparatively large number of works, studies, and articles on general linguistics, Indo-European languages, general Slavonic philology and linguistics, on artificial languages and on the organization of scholarly work
in the field of philology and linguistics.
Soviet pressure or impact of Soviet philology appears
particularly in the group "General philology" which contains 79 entries, mostly translations from Russian or works
of Slovak lesser linguists on Soviet and Marxist philology
and Stalin's theories. Only three of the known Slovak philologists (Peciar, Horecky and Jona) take part in the Soviet attempt to impose "Marxist and Stalinist linguistic
theories" upon Slovak philology. The most aggressive propagator of "Marxist philology," Alexander Isacenko, was
broug,ht up in Slovakia as a son of White Russian emigres.
He pays his debts now to Slovakia, which saved him and
even gave him a university chair during the war, by serving Soviet aims as their most docile and obedient tool. (See
his "Geniail contributions to t'he theory of Marx-Leninism"
- For a Marxist Philology" - "An important discussion
on philology in the Soviet Union," etc.).
As for the Slovanic philology, it was dealt with in Slovakia, during the four years in question, in 229 entries.
Slovak, and in translations foreign and other Slav scholars (Lehr-Splawinski, E. Knisza, Weingart, Dvozdec, Vinogradov, Pankevyc, Barchudarov) covered the field of
Old Church Slovanic, Russian, Polish, Czech, and other
Slovanic languages. Among Slovak philologists, the mos:t
prolific and scholarly, according to the western standards,
�SLOVAKIA
29
appears to be prof. Jan Stanislav (Polish and SouthernSlav philology) .
Scholarly research into the Slovak language is, of
course, still the principal field of interest. The number of
works, studies and articles, referring to the Slovak language, its history and development, is close to 700, many
of them written by highly qualified philologists and linguists either of Slovak or foreign origin (J. Stanislav, L.
Novak, E. Pauliny, V. Uhlar, A. Janosik, S. Peciar, J. Horecky, V. Blanar, E. Jona, Kniesza, Vazny, Kuraly, Stieber,
etc.). They cover the history of literary languages in Slovakia, historical grammar and historical dialectology, etymology, phonology, orthography, vocabulary, grammar, etc.
Attack on Purism and Advocation of Slovanic Orientation
The fact that Marxist methods are not considered
seriously, even by the linguists who advocate them, is shown
in the review of philological works published several years
ago, as well as by the predominant condemnation of only
those philologists who prepared the Rules of Slovak Orthography, in 1940. The older linguists, from Anthony Bernolak to Samuel Czambel, are highly esteemed; in fact, in
certain instances, they are esteemed more highly than they
were by the now proscribed philologists and literary historians of the period of the existence of the Slovak Republic (3). For example, in the introduction to the new Rules,
we read the following:
"A significant role in the perfection of the Slovak
language was played by our national awakeners. They discovered the internal criteria of tJhe Slovak language, formulated then and laid strong foundations for our literary language and our lingual culture. Anton Bernolak took the
first steps towards the stabilization of the Slovak literary
language, its ovthography, morphology, and vocabulary.
For stabilizing the Slovak literary language in its present
form, and particularly its morphology and orthography,
Martin Hattala and Samo Czambel and others are mainly
responsible." ( 4).
Among the classicists of Slovak literature, who "enriched, developed, and strengthened" the Slovak language,
the "Marxist" commission also includes Jan Holly who,
�30
SLOVAKIA
with Berndlak and Hatta-la, was also a Catholic priest and
who (together with the above-ment ioned) is credited with
what even today is often reproachfu lly called "Slovak linguistic separatism " in English and French books, particuiarly if such books were inspired by Czech politicians or
scholars.
The attack on the philologists who compiled the Rules
of 1940 is obviously p<Yliticaily motivaJted. The servants of
the present communist regime in Slovakia condemn the
compiler•s of the previous Rules, first, because they were
supposedly "the servants of Eudak (Populist) separatism
and went out of their way to mee't the demands of the
treacherou s politicians, " and only in the second place, because "they strived to remove literary Sfovak as far as
possible from Czech and to isolate it also from other Slovanic languages. " In other words, they were "puristicall y
oriented" and marked the Rules with "a puristical tendency."
However, the changes which have been made in Slovak
orthograph y, and the review of the ph!ilological studies of
the past few years, do not testify to the fact that the present "Marxist" philologists have very substantial ly removed themselves from "the purists" or that they have
approached closer to Czech or other Slovanic languages,
with the exception of the Russian language. The entire evolutionary line of Slovak philology - the founders of which
were the national awakeners of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who had to defend the Slovak language
against Hungarian assimilator y tendencies and the nationalistica lly oriented linguists and philologists of the last
decades of this century, for whom it was necessary to defend the Slovak language against no less dangerous Czech
tendencies - has not yet been too remarkably dented by
contempor ary philologists in Slovakia. The thesis that the
Slovak language tended to develop as a separate Slovanic
language after the disappeara nce of the Old Slovanic language - and that the attempts to make it one of the dialects of the Czech language must only be considered as unscientific and political tendencies and aspirations - is practically proved by the scholarly works of the contempor ary
�SLOVAKIA
31
philologists with alil the weight and consistency of methods
which cannot be la:beled unscientific.
In harmony with the general cultural growth of the
Slovak nation, Slovak philology develops in scope and
depth. During 1939-1945 alone over a thousand works,
treatises, articles, and studies in the field of philology were
published. The linguists and philologists did not concern
themselves merely with research into and the stabilization
of the Slovak language, but also with the wider problems
of linguistics and ph'ilology, Slovanic and non-Slovanic IndoEuropean languages, and with tihe general philology (5) .
During the war, there already was evident a promising development which was made in the formaition of Slovak scientific and technical terminology, particularly in the scientific disciplines and in the technical-economic sphere of
Slovak life(6). The contemporary philologists continue diligently in this "purism," and Slovak scientific and technical terminology has, in the past few years, been considerably enriched by the newly-coined or adapted terms
of other Slovanic languages, particularly Russian.
Objectivity warrants the admission that the works
of Slovak philologists are comparatively extensive; that
the number of published books, studies and treatises in
periodicals is considerable; and that the fields of scientific
research are numerous. In the interest of truth, however,
it is also necessary to add that this growth of scholarly
works has no relation to, and is not to be credited to the
contemporary political regime. Regardless of what regime
might exist today in Slovakia, there would inevitably be
more achievement in science, culture and arts than ever
before. The explanation is to be found in the general development of Slovakia in the last forty years and particularly in the fact that, in the last years of the so-called
bourgeois Czecho-Slovak Republic and especially during the
period of the existence of the Slovak Republic, a large number of young S'lovaks studied in universities at home and
abroad, not only the traditional disciplines - theology,
law, and medicine - but the entire field of science. The inclusion of Slovakia i.nlto the Soviet orbit befell them in the
years of their scientific productivity or in their years of
�32
SLOVAKIA
university studies. If, today, in Slovakia, more is produced
and published in philology or in other scientific fields, it is
because the Slovak nation reached that stage of development at which there are found entire cadres of scientific
and culutral workers. These cadres are so large that, even
after the departure of thousands into exile, it is possible
today to publish in Slovakia more books than ever before
in all fields of science. The communist regime, in certain
respects, by the limitation of freedom alone, holds back scientific work, and supports development only of those
fields in which the political aims of the Communist Party
can be pursued. Philology is, for the communist regime, a
neutral rather than a privileged field.
As far as the linguistic side of the Slovak language is
concerned, in :the Rules as in other works, there appears a
trend towards a more consistent use of the principles of
phonetic orthogr&phy and towards the simplification of
writing Slovak and foreign expressions. In philological
production alone there are represented dialectology, lexicology, comparative philology, morphology, phonology, orthoepy, phonetics, etc. Several works deal with questions of
the Cyrilo--Methodian period, the development of philology
in other Slovanic nations (Russia, Bulgaria) and the history of the Slovak language. A scholarly level has been attained, first of all, by the works of older linguists and
philologists, but the possession of the qualifications and
preparation for the professional philological work is evident in a large number of younger intellectuals, particularly
in their criticism, polemics and commentaries on the new
editions of older literary or philological works (for instance,
in the introductions to the new editions of the works of
Bernolak, Holly, Stur, etc.).
End of the Controversy Regarding Literary Slovak and
the Origin of the Slovak Language
From the published works of philologists and literary
historians it is also obvious t'hat the Czech theses on the
Slovak language, on the history of the Slovak literary language, and on the function of some foreign languages
(Czech, Czechoslovak) in Slovak literature, which theses
�SLOVAKIA
were intended to support the political theses of a single
Czechoslovak nation, have been definitely buried. In this
respect, even some contemporary works of Czech philologists helped to support the scientific conclusions which
have long been defended by Slovak philologists. Particularly noteworthy, on the Czech side is the work of Professor A. Dostal (7), and on the Slovak side, Pauliny's "Dejiny spisovnej slovenciny" History of Literary Slovak,
Bratislava, 1948 (8) , and Mraz's "Dejiny slovenskej literatiiry" - History of Slovak Literature, Bra'tislava, 1948(9) ,
as well as the papers read at the Moscow Fourth International Congress of Slavists in 1958. In this respect, particularly, the paper of Professor E. Pauliny on "Bilingualism in the History of the Slovak Literary Language," de-serves special at'tention. Papliny tries to explain the function of the Czech language in S'lovakfa in the 15th and
following centuries on the basis of social and economic
phenomena and changes. He has arrived, nevertheless, at
the same conclusions as the philologists who did not apply
"Marxist criteria" in philology, i.e., that the Czech language was a foreign language in Slovakia and could not
stand compe'tition with the Slovak vernacular when the Slovak ethnicum evolved in its national consciousness: though
the Protestant minority, predominantly of Czech origin,
tried to maintain it even in the 19th century when the Slovak literary language was established by the Catholic majorit y a whole century before that time. The relation between the Czech and Slovak is therefore, even according
to Pauliny, that of bilingualism (p. 43).
A century-long controversy, as to whether Slovak is
but a dialect of the Czech language, or a dis'tinct Slovanic
tongue, has thus been "officially" closed by the recognition on both the Czech and Slovak sides that, from its earliest beginnings, the Slovak language has always manifested a distinct identity as a Slavonic tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia. By a careful analysis of the fundamenital roots of both languages, Czech and Slovak, as well
as through a comparative study of their later developments, contemporary scholars trained in philology have revealed the true basis of the Slovak language and have clas-
�34
SLOVAKIA
sified it properly as one of distinct Slavonic languages
which developed after the disappearance of the Old Slovanic language.
The controversy was occasioned by two facts. On the
one hand, some literary historians made no distinction between the language spoken by the Slovaks as their native
tongue and 'their literary medium. The latter for some time
wa:s (besides Latin) the old Czech liturgical language.
On the other hand, most of the philo'logists and literary
historians, predominantly of Czech origin, in formulating
purely scientific views as to the proper relationship between
the Czech and Slovak languages, were influenced by political aspira!tions. Recent studies based on scientific principles of philology, phonology, etymology lexicography, and
grammar now show that the original Slovak terminology,
wJth rare exceptions, goes back to the original roots of a
native Slovak language essentially distinct from every
other Slovanic tongue.
The confusion created by the failure to draw a proper
distinction between the native language of the Slovaks and
their written or literary language was, however, only partly responsible for the erroneous view that Slovak was
merely a dialect of the Czech language or that there was
something like a "Czechoslovak language" (10). Theories
on the existence of a "Czechoslovak language" were creat ed even after one hundred years of the existence of the Slovak literary language which was accepted by both Slovak
Catholics and Lutherans in 1844, and after two hundred
years' use by the Catholics of their own vernacular as the
literary medium around the University of Trnava, founded in 1635. Consequently, the main reason for the confusion was of a political nature, even if presented in "scientific" form. Professor F. Travnicek, for instance, used
geography as his main argument for his theory of the
"Czechoslovak language." The fact that the Czechs and
Slovaks inhabited the present area from the sixth century
was used by him as an argumen1t that they had a common
,l anguage. In his "ffistoricka mluvnice ceskoslovenska" (Historic Czechoslovak Grammar) he stated: "The ancient
Czechoslovak language lasted from the time of its inde-
�SLOVAKIA
35
pendent establishment as a full-fledged language, from the
siJd:h to the end of the tenth century, and is similar to the
prehistoric tongue. The chief condition of this independent
development was that our ancestors were separated geographically from the rest of the Slavs" (11).
Geographical factors can hardly take precedence over
linguistic data, and even if we accept this theory, another
factor, the separation of Czechs and Siovaks from the ninth
century, would be in favor of an independent development
of the Slovak spoken tongue. Slovak philologists and linguists Czambel, Skultety, Bartek, Sttanislav, Novak,
etc. (12) rejected, therefore the Czech theories and
looked for linguistic criteria to determine the origin and the
main characteristics of the Slovak language. They reviewed
the historic form,s of the Slovak tongue and, by linguistic
methods of phonology as we11 as by a comparative study,
they arrived at new conclusions as to the origin and development of the S'lovak language. These conclusions were
ultimately accepted by contemporary Czech as well as other
Slovanic philologists and linguists (13).
As a result of this development the relation between
the two literary languages of today's Czecho-Slovakia is
now officially accepted as a refation between two Slavic
but distinct languages. Czech poetry and prose are translated into the Slovak, and vice versa, as the Polish or Russian have always been. Life and historical facts prevailed
over artificial tendencies and theories a long ~ime ago, and
finally they have prevailed even over the reluctance of some
politicians and phi'lologists to recognize the irrefutable.
REFERENCES
(1) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, Brat islava, Slov,e nska akadeania vied, 1953, p. 7.
(2) IDr. Vincent Blanar: Bibliografia jazykovedy na Slovensku v
rokoch 1939-1947, Bratislava, Slovensika a1~ademia vied a umeni,
195'0, p. 210. This work ,contaiins 11,17 titles, Olf which aipprox.ilmatel,y
1000 were pulblished dudrug the existen-ce Olf the Slovak R~bl!i.'c .
.Altogether Blanar presents an almost complete picture of Ling,ud,stic
and philological w<ll'ks, pwblished in boo!k form or in periodicals,
in the fiields olf ,g eneral philiodog,y, comparative linguistiics Olf lndoEuirQPean languages, Sl'O'Vanic philology and! the stu~ Olf the Slova!k
lairugua,ge. See al!so Dr. L. Dvonc:1Bibliografia slovenskej jazykovedy
za roky 1948-1952, Matica Slovenska, 1957.
�36
SLOVAKIA
(3) See, for examI?:le, the eval,uartion o.f U. Stur as a philo1o,gist
in the book "l!udovit Stur, Slovencina" nasa," which was prepared
and annotated by Dr. J. Ambms and has been evaliwa1ted lirug,uirstdlcailily
by Dr. V. Blanar. According to Blanar, Stur kept pa,ce with the European philologic:d schools o.f that time and its foremosrt ip·h enomena, a,n d
his studies at Hal!le predestined him to beco,me, in Slovanic and Slovaik cir,cwmstances, one of the frrst representatives of the newest
methods on theories in phi'lology.
(4) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, p. 6. Anton Bemo'1ak
01762--1813) codified the Slovak literary lang,ua,ge as used by the
Slovak Catholics from tJhe time of the co-uniter-Reformation and esipeoi,a,1ly since .16315, the year Olf the fo.u,ndatJion of the second university
in Slovakia. at Trnaiva. Bernolak gaive a solid fowndati-on to the Slovak literary .l!anguag,e, based on the Western Sllovaik dialecrt, in hiis
works: Disserta,t io philologico-critica de litteris Slavorum : Linguae
slavonicae per Regnum Hungariae usitatae compendiosa simul at
facilis o,rthographia" (Bra1tislava, 1'7'3171); "Grammatica slavica" (1790),
and in his huge pentalingual dictionary, pu1blished after his deatih,
in 1825.
Marbin Hattala (1821-1903'), who later became a professor at the
University of Praigue, codid'ied the reform in'1:rod1uced by U. Stur,
which was a,o cepted in, 1844 by both Slovak Oatholiics and Protestants.
His "Kratka mluvnica slovenska" CShor.t Slovak Gr•aimlillar), p,wblished
in 1852, gaive a scientific bas-is and for:m to Stur's reform.
Saimuel Czaimbel (1856-1 909), one o.f the greatest Slovak philologists, enniiched Sl,o vak phi,lol1ogy by seveml scholarly wo·r'ks regardiillg
dialectology, monphology, and lexicol-o,gy. His main woriks are "Slovensky pravopis" (Slovak Orithogra-phy, 1890) and "Rukovat' spisovnej
reci slovenskej " QManual of the Slovalk Liternry Larug-uage, 1-902).
For detai:ls concernirug Bernolak, Haittaila, and Czaimbel, see Prof. E.
Pauliny: "Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny."
(5) Colillipare V. Blanar: Biblografia.
(6) Pioneer and valuable worik iin, this d'i rection was done partLcularliy by Professor Dr. Jul iius Led enyi-La1d ziansky in the termino:lo.gy o.f medical science.
(7) Prof. Dr. A. Dostal: Nastin dejin ceskeho a slovenskeho
jazyka, Prague, Statni pedagogicke naildiadatelstvi, 1:954.
(8) (Prof. Dr. Eugen Pa,Ulliny: Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny,
Bratisl-aiva, S1ovenska akadem!iia, vied a umeni, 19418. In the introduction to his book, Pa-wliny understands the history o.f the 1-angu,age as
the history Olf the oriigin, disaippear ance and cha,n,ges Olf its i,ndi'Vidua1l
styles. Ho:wever, in the book i ts-elf, he d'ivide:d the his-tor-y of the
Slovak 1iitera['y laruguage accord!i,u,g to the languages which wer e used
,by the Slov,aiks as literary la~ua,ges in addition to the sipoken vern,a,culiar from the time of the Gr eater Moravia•. On page 5, he writes:
"Al,thouglh, in this case, the p er,iod of the actual Sll,ovaik litera['y
laillguaige ca,n. begin only with Bernolak, or with t he p eriod shortly
befor e Bemolak, nevertheless it is not poss,iJble to begin the history
of t he literary languages of the Slovaks either with Bernolak or
Stur, but it is ,n,ecessa,r,y t,o go deep into 1Jhe pa st, aH the way to the
ver y begin nings o.f the histor iical p er iod o.f our na-ti-on in the Gr eater
Moravian epoch, na,y, in ceritain matters, it is ,necessary to go even
1
1
1
1
�SLOVAKIA
37
further, into the pre-histork period, when our ancestors were not
yet baptized and did not particiiPate im, the European cul<ture whiich
was introduced to us by Chrisit-iani:ty."
(9) Prof. A. Mraz: Dej iny slovenskej literatury, Braitisfava,
Slovenska akademia vied a UJ!l1eni, 1948.
(lJl) F . Travnicek: Historicka mluvnice ceskoslovenska, Brno,
1935, p. 21-23.
(10) This thesis wa,s propa•g ated by Dr. Ed'Uard Benes throurg h
his pUJblication Detruisez I' Autriche, Paris, 11916, and, with the helip
of Czech philologists, it penetrated also inito many western university oiTcles and was reoeated by the Slavists on this continent
a·s well.
(13) Besides aiuthors of Slovak origin, (Hrobak, Konus, Potocek,
and others), the correct attitude towards the Slovak lang;uage, in the
Englislh lan!guage works, was taken particUilarly by Professor Alfred
Senn in the syunrposi,um A Handbook of Slavic Studies, edited by
L. I. Strakhovsky, Camlbridlge, Massachu,s etts, Harvard UnLversity
Press, 1949.
(12) Profiessor Bartek pub1'ished, boith in Slovakia and in exiile,
a numlber of prul. 0Iogica1! wo,r ks, S'Ome Off w,h ich were piulblished i,n,
French and Eng-lish. Elana.r"s "Bibliografia" cites thirteen titles
of his works. 'Ilhe best known philologists, besides B'artek, are S-tanislav and Novak. StaniS'lav is known parti<cUilarliy for his research
i,n,to the OyriJoJMethodian period and for his works in toponyimy.
Novak was siJenced by the cOJin1Inunist regime; Sitanislav is still
actiive. Bartek performed a very meritorious service, pa-r ticular,l'Y by
foundilllg the peri10dical "Slovenska rec" (Slovak Langua,ge), and
by his uncOJinpramising stand in the so-called "ma1ticne" (Slovak [nstitu1:e) strwggles for the purity of the S1ov,a k language and its
separate development since Vhe d isaippearance of the Old Slovanic
laruguaige.
1
1
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his
latest statemen!ts rulways stressed, tihait OUT pact of •a lliance
with Soviet Russia and our friendshiJp with other Slav na,..
tions must not encroach on our friendly and cordial re1ations with other democratic states. This is the natural desire, shared by an enormous majority of our people, and
nothing prevents us from keeping the confidence of the
democratic states and strengthening and deepening our
friendship with our great western Allies. Moscow, too,
wa.Illts to fol4ow this line of poliicy. rt will, however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to·
the Soviet Union, which are still existing, to be swept
away." - Premier Fierlinger of Czecho-Slovakia, O'WI Bulletin, June 1, 1945.
�
SLOVAKIA
2."i
CONTEMPORARY TENDENCIES IN
SLOVAK PHILOLOGY
Joseph M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
A reprint from SLAVIC AND E1AST EUROPEAN STUDIES
Vol. IV, Part 3-4, Published by the University of Montreal,
Department of Slavic Studies.
A bibliographic review of Slovak linguistics and philology show that, in the la-st twenty years, philology in Slovakia has experienced an all round development and progress
and is developing, both quantitatively and qualitatitvely,
comparatively undisturbed, even since the inclusion of Slovakia into the Soviet cultural and political sphere of influence.
A complete picture of the contemporary state of Slovak phildlogy would require, of course, thorough research
not only into the development of philology in Slovakia,
which is exposed to Russian and Czech cultural influences,
but also into that of the countries of the free world, where
a comparatively large number of cultural and scientific
workers use the Slovak language. For both ringuist and
philologist such a research project would be interesting not
only because in scores of Slovak periodicals and books,
which are published in the free world, there are traces of
the inrfluence of tihe Romance and the Anglo-Saxon languages, particularly in the syntax, but a research would be
of interest also because in the free world, there were published several philological studies in which two tendencies
are quite evident. The first tendency rejeets orthographic
changes in the Slovak language; the second, representing
the majority of cultural workers, at the recommendation of
the leading Slovak philologist, Professor Henry Bartek, accepted in principle the orfuographic changes which were
instituted by the philologists in Slovakia from the time of
the Czecho-Russian occupation.
However, the framework of this study is limited to research into the Soviet orbit and, therefore, we forego at this
time, a research into the development of Slovak philology
in the countries of the free world, even though some works
of H. Bartek, Philip Hrobak, Joseph Konus, and others,
�26
SLOVAKIA
warrant the attention of a wider circle of Slavists. The following outline of the contemporary state of Slovak philology concerns itself only with the development in Slovakia.
Sovietophil Tendencies and Their Extent
As with literature and science, in general, philology,
too, has been exposed, since the inclusion of Slovakia into
the Soviet sphere of influence, to political pressure by the
Communist Party and is, therefore, gradually developing
with considerable dependence on Soviet philology. This occurs particularly through the influence of some cultural
workers who were elevated by the present regime to positions of importance in Slovak cultural life because of :their
partisan adherence rather than their past scientific performances or professional qualifications. These "cultural
commissioner s" from the very beginning tried to adapt to
Slovak philology "the theoretical directives which were
given Marxist philology by J. V. Stalin in his genial works
Marxism and Problems of Linguistics and Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S. S. R.(1). However, a considerable number of true philologists ad!hered, in the first
place, to scientific principles.
The barefaced efforts to align Slovak philology with
"the Marxist directives" and subjugate it to the contemvorary political regime come to light particularly in the introduction to the new Rules of Slovak Orthography (Pravidla. slovenskeho pravopisu), published in 1953. The editor-in-Chief, Dr. Stefan Peciar, and the majority of the
members of the commission which prepared fue Rules, received their education and matured scientifically either
in the bourgeois Czedho-Slovak Republic or between 19391945 in the Slovak Republic, but in the introduction to
their work, which otherwise "in substance did not change
the present orthography and its basic principle," according
to their own admission, they deemed it necessary to pay
homage to Stalin and to attack fue philologists who prepared the Rules of orthography in 1940.
It would certainly be quite superfluous to try to prove
bhat Marxism belongs to the sphere of political and social
sciences, and that serious scholars know as yet neither "the
�SLOVAKIA
27
Marxist philology ," nor the Marxist scientific method or
principle in linguistic s and philology , but only the political
and unscientif ic interferen ce by the regimes which subscribe to the Marx-Eng els' or Lenin's political and economic theories. In the same manner, philology does not recognize fascist principles in philology and linguistic s, which
principles some of the contempo rary linguists in Slovakia
are attemptin g to discover in the works of their predecessors or contempo raries living in the countries of the free
world. Needless to say thaJt they are attemptin g to discover
such "fascist" principles not on the basis of scholarly researoh, but in an effort to perform a service for the present political regime.
There are, therefore , no serious suppositi ons in Slovakia that some "Marxist point of view" even if such a
thing existed, could already have asserted itself in Slovak
philology. The review of names of the scholarly active philologists shows that they are the ones with whom we have
been familiar, particula rly during the period of the Slovak
Republic. The bibliogra phy of philology in Slovakia of the
years 1939-47 (2) serves as evidence that Dr. Peciar, as
well as Dr. Pauliny, Jona, Horecky, Ruzicka, and others,
grew intellectu ally and created mainly during the existence of the Slovak Republic; and, that while some of them
could have been reproach ed during the Second World War
for trying to bring into Slovak philology the Czech philological theories (see the polemic Peciar-U hlar in the pereoldical "Slovensk a rec" (Slovak Languag e), there was no
ndticeabl e attempt at transferr ing the Russian philologic al
theories. The generatio n educated under the present regime is sUll too young to make any serious contribut ion to
scholarsh ip or science, as the attainme nt of a universit y
degree does not signify scientific qualificat ion, but rather
the confirma tion of the ability to undertak e scientific or
scholarly work.
Therefore , we find predomin ating even in the Bibliography of Slovak Philology for the Years 1948-1952 , compiled by Dr. Ladislav Dvonc, the names which became
known during the previous period. Dvonc's bibliogra phy is
a sequel to Elana.r's bibliogra phy, and in its 1500 entries
�28
SLOVAKIA
it deals with: 1. all linguistic contributions published in
Slovakia; 2. contributions by Slovak philologists and linguists in non-Slovak periodicals; and 3. contributions of
non-Slovak au1Jhors on Slovak language or their pholological works published in Slovakia.
Results of a favorable development of Slovak philology
are visible in Dvonc's bibliography not only in the number
of entries (1500 within four years), but also in the number
of fields covered. Slovak philology is no more restricted to
reseavch into and perfection of the Slovak language alone.
There is also a comparatively large number of works, studies, and articles on general linguistics, Indo-European languages, general Slavonic philology and linguistics, on artificial languages and on the organization of scholarly work
in the field of philology and linguistics.
Soviet pressure or impact of Soviet philology appears
particularly in the group "General philology" which contains 79 entries, mostly translations from Russian or works
of Slovak lesser linguists on Soviet and Marxist philology
and Stalin's theories. Only three of the known Slovak philologists (Peciar, Horecky and Jona) take part in the Soviet attempt to impose "Marxist and Stalinist linguistic
theories" upon Slovak philology. The most aggressive propagator of "Marxist philology," Alexander Isacenko, was
broug,ht up in Slovakia as a son of White Russian emigres.
He pays his debts now to Slovakia, which saved him and
even gave him a university chair during the war, by serving Soviet aims as their most docile and obedient tool. (See
his "Geniail contributions to t'he theory of Marx-Leninism"
- For a Marxist Philology" - "An important discussion
on philology in the Soviet Union," etc.).
As for the Slovanic philology, it was dealt with in Slovakia, during the four years in question, in 229 entries.
Slovak, and in translations foreign and other Slav scholars (Lehr-Splawinski, E. Knisza, Weingart, Dvozdec, Vinogradov, Pankevyc, Barchudarov) covered the field of
Old Church Slovanic, Russian, Polish, Czech, and other
Slovanic languages. Among Slovak philologists, the mos:t
prolific and scholarly, according to the western standards,
�SLOVAKIA
29
appears to be prof. Jan Stanislav (Polish and SouthernSlav philology) .
Scholarly research into the Slovak language is, of
course, still the principal field of interest. The number of
works, studies and articles, referring to the Slovak language, its history and development, is close to 700, many
of them written by highly qualified philologists and linguists either of Slovak or foreign origin (J. Stanislav, L.
Novak, E. Pauliny, V. Uhlar, A. Janosik, S. Peciar, J. Horecky, V. Blanar, E. Jona, Kniesza, Vazny, Kuraly, Stieber,
etc.). They cover the history of literary languages in Slovakia, historical grammar and historical dialectology, etymology, phonology, orthography, vocabulary, grammar, etc.
Attack on Purism and Advocation of Slovanic Orientation
The fact that Marxist methods are not considered
seriously, even by the linguists who advocate them, is shown
in the review of philological works published several years
ago, as well as by the predominant condemnation of only
those philologists who prepared the Rules of Slovak Orthography, in 1940. The older linguists, from Anthony Bernolak to Samuel Czambel, are highly esteemed; in fact, in
certain instances, they are esteemed more highly than they
were by the now proscribed philologists and literary historians of the period of the existence of the Slovak Republic (3). For example, in the introduction to the new Rules,
we read the following:
"A significant role in the perfection of the Slovak
language was played by our national awakeners. They discovered the internal criteria of tJhe Slovak language, formulated then and laid strong foundations for our literary language and our lingual culture. Anton Bernolak took the
first steps towards the stabilization of the Slovak literary
language, its ovthography, morphology, and vocabulary.
For stabilizing the Slovak literary language in its present
form, and particularly its morphology and orthography,
Martin Hattala and Samo Czambel and others are mainly
responsible." ( 4).
Among the classicists of Slovak literature, who "enriched, developed, and strengthened" the Slovak language,
the "Marxist" commission also includes Jan Holly who,
�30
SLOVAKIA
with Berndlak and Hatta-la, was also a Catholic priest and
who (together with the above-ment ioned) is credited with
what even today is often reproachfu lly called "Slovak linguistic separatism " in English and French books, particuiarly if such books were inspired by Czech politicians or
scholars.
The attack on the philologists who compiled the Rules
of 1940 is obviously p<Yliticaily motivaJted. The servants of
the present communist regime in Slovakia condemn the
compiler•s of the previous Rules, first, because they were
supposedly "the servants of Eudak (Populist) separatism
and went out of their way to mee't the demands of the
treacherou s politicians, " and only in the second place, because "they strived to remove literary Sfovak as far as
possible from Czech and to isolate it also from other Slovanic languages. " In other words, they were "puristicall y
oriented" and marked the Rules with "a puristical tendency."
However, the changes which have been made in Slovak
orthograph y, and the review of the ph!ilological studies of
the past few years, do not testify to the fact that the present "Marxist" philologists have very substantial ly removed themselves from "the purists" or that they have
approached closer to Czech or other Slovanic languages,
with the exception of the Russian language. The entire evolutionary line of Slovak philology - the founders of which
were the national awakeners of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who had to defend the Slovak language
against Hungarian assimilator y tendencies and the nationalistica lly oriented linguists and philologists of the last
decades of this century, for whom it was necessary to defend the Slovak language against no less dangerous Czech
tendencies - has not yet been too remarkably dented by
contempor ary philologists in Slovakia. The thesis that the
Slovak language tended to develop as a separate Slovanic
language after the disappeara nce of the Old Slovanic language - and that the attempts to make it one of the dialects of the Czech language must only be considered as unscientific and political tendencies and aspirations - is practically proved by the scholarly works of the contempor ary
�SLOVAKIA
31
philologists with alil the weight and consistency of methods
which cannot be la:beled unscientific.
In harmony with the general cultural growth of the
Slovak nation, Slovak philology develops in scope and
depth. During 1939-1945 alone over a thousand works,
treatises, articles, and studies in the field of philology were
published. The linguists and philologists did not concern
themselves merely with research into and the stabilization
of the Slovak language, but also with the wider problems
of linguistics and ph'ilology, Slovanic and non-Slovanic IndoEuropean languages, and with tihe general philology (5) .
During the war, there already was evident a promising development which was made in the formaition of Slovak scientific and technical terminology, particularly in the scientific disciplines and in the technical-economic sphere of
Slovak life(6). The contemporary philologists continue diligently in this "purism," and Slovak scientific and technical terminology has, in the past few years, been considerably enriched by the newly-coined or adapted terms
of other Slovanic languages, particularly Russian.
Objectivity warrants the admission that the works
of Slovak philologists are comparatively extensive; that
the number of published books, studies and treatises in
periodicals is considerable; and that the fields of scientific
research are numerous. In the interest of truth, however,
it is also necessary to add that this growth of scholarly
works has no relation to, and is not to be credited to the
contemporary political regime. Regardless of what regime
might exist today in Slovakia, there would inevitably be
more achievement in science, culture and arts than ever
before. The explanation is to be found in the general development of Slovakia in the last forty years and particularly in the fact that, in the last years of the so-called
bourgeois Czecho-Slovak Republic and especially during the
period of the existence of the Slovak Republic, a large number of young S'lovaks studied in universities at home and
abroad, not only the traditional disciplines - theology,
law, and medicine - but the entire field of science. The inclusion of Slovakia i.nlto the Soviet orbit befell them in the
years of their scientific productivity or in their years of
�32
SLOVAKIA
university studies. If, today, in Slovakia, more is produced
and published in philology or in other scientific fields, it is
because the Slovak nation reached that stage of development at which there are found entire cadres of scientific
and culutral workers. These cadres are so large that, even
after the departure of thousands into exile, it is possible
today to publish in Slovakia more books than ever before
in all fields of science. The communist regime, in certain
respects, by the limitation of freedom alone, holds back scientific work, and supports development only of those
fields in which the political aims of the Communist Party
can be pursued. Philology is, for the communist regime, a
neutral rather than a privileged field.
As far as the linguistic side of the Slovak language is
concerned, in :the Rules as in other works, there appears a
trend towards a more consistent use of the principles of
phonetic orthogr&phy and towards the simplification of
writing Slovak and foreign expressions. In philological
production alone there are represented dialectology, lexicology, comparative philology, morphology, phonology, orthoepy, phonetics, etc. Several works deal with questions of
the Cyrilo--Methodian period, the development of philology
in other Slovanic nations (Russia, Bulgaria) and the history of the Slovak language. A scholarly level has been attained, first of all, by the works of older linguists and
philologists, but the possession of the qualifications and
preparation for the professional philological work is evident in a large number of younger intellectuals, particularly
in their criticism, polemics and commentaries on the new
editions of older literary or philological works (for instance,
in the introductions to the new editions of the works of
Bernolak, Holly, Stur, etc.).
End of the Controversy Regarding Literary Slovak and
the Origin of the Slovak Language
From the published works of philologists and literary
historians it is also obvious t'hat the Czech theses on the
Slovak language, on the history of the Slovak literary language, and on the function of some foreign languages
(Czech, Czechoslovak) in Slovak literature, which theses
�SLOVAKIA
were intended to support the political theses of a single
Czechoslovak nation, have been definitely buried. In this
respect, even some contemporary works of Czech philologists helped to support the scientific conclusions which
have long been defended by Slovak philologists. Particularly noteworthy, on the Czech side is the work of Professor A. Dostal (7), and on the Slovak side, Pauliny's "Dejiny spisovnej slovenciny" History of Literary Slovak,
Bratislava, 1948 (8) , and Mraz's "Dejiny slovenskej literatiiry" - History of Slovak Literature, Bra'tislava, 1948(9) ,
as well as the papers read at the Moscow Fourth International Congress of Slavists in 1958. In this respect, particularly, the paper of Professor E. Pauliny on "Bilingualism in the History of the Slovak Literary Language," de-serves special at'tention. Papliny tries to explain the function of the Czech language in S'lovakfa in the 15th and
following centuries on the basis of social and economic
phenomena and changes. He has arrived, nevertheless, at
the same conclusions as the philologists who did not apply
"Marxist criteria" in philology, i.e., that the Czech language was a foreign language in Slovakia and could not
stand compe'tition with the Slovak vernacular when the Slovak ethnicum evolved in its national consciousness: though
the Protestant minority, predominantly of Czech origin,
tried to maintain it even in the 19th century when the Slovak literary language was established by the Catholic majorit y a whole century before that time. The relation between the Czech and Slovak is therefore, even according
to Pauliny, that of bilingualism (p. 43).
A century-long controversy, as to whether Slovak is
but a dialect of the Czech language, or a dis'tinct Slovanic
tongue, has thus been "officially" closed by the recognition on both the Czech and Slovak sides that, from its earliest beginnings, the Slovak language has always manifested a distinct identity as a Slavonic tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia. By a careful analysis of the fundamenital roots of both languages, Czech and Slovak, as well
as through a comparative study of their later developments, contemporary scholars trained in philology have revealed the true basis of the Slovak language and have clas-
�34
SLOVAKIA
sified it properly as one of distinct Slavonic languages
which developed after the disappearance of the Old Slovanic language.
The controversy was occasioned by two facts. On the
one hand, some literary historians made no distinction between the language spoken by the Slovaks as their native
tongue and 'their literary medium. The latter for some time
wa:s (besides Latin) the old Czech liturgical language.
On the other hand, most of the philo'logists and literary
historians, predominantly of Czech origin, in formulating
purely scientific views as to the proper relationship between
the Czech and Slovak languages, were influenced by political aspira!tions. Recent studies based on scientific principles of philology, phonology, etymology lexicography, and
grammar now show that the original Slovak terminology,
wJth rare exceptions, goes back to the original roots of a
native Slovak language essentially distinct from every
other Slovanic tongue.
The confusion created by the failure to draw a proper
distinction between the native language of the Slovaks and
their written or literary language was, however, only partly responsible for the erroneous view that Slovak was
merely a dialect of the Czech language or that there was
something like a "Czechoslovak language" (10). Theories
on the existence of a "Czechoslovak language" were creat ed even after one hundred years of the existence of the Slovak literary language which was accepted by both Slovak
Catholics and Lutherans in 1844, and after two hundred
years' use by the Catholics of their own vernacular as the
literary medium around the University of Trnava, founded in 1635. Consequently, the main reason for the confusion was of a political nature, even if presented in "scientific" form. Professor F. Travnicek, for instance, used
geography as his main argument for his theory of the
"Czechoslovak language." The fact that the Czechs and
Slovaks inhabited the present area from the sixth century
was used by him as an argumen1t that they had a common
,l anguage. In his "ffistoricka mluvnice ceskoslovenska" (Historic Czechoslovak Grammar) he stated: "The ancient
Czechoslovak language lasted from the time of its inde-
�SLOVAKIA
35
pendent establishment as a full-fledged language, from the
siJd:h to the end of the tenth century, and is similar to the
prehistoric tongue. The chief condition of this independent
development was that our ancestors were separated geographically from the rest of the Slavs" (11).
Geographical factors can hardly take precedence over
linguistic data, and even if we accept this theory, another
factor, the separation of Czechs and Siovaks from the ninth
century, would be in favor of an independent development
of the Slovak spoken tongue. Slovak philologists and linguists Czambel, Skultety, Bartek, Sttanislav, Novak,
etc. (12) rejected, therefore the Czech theories and
looked for linguistic criteria to determine the origin and the
main characteristics of the Slovak language. They reviewed
the historic form,s of the Slovak tongue and, by linguistic
methods of phonology as we11 as by a comparative study,
they arrived at new conclusions as to the origin and development of the S'lovak language. These conclusions were
ultimately accepted by contemporary Czech as well as other
Slovanic philologists and linguists (13).
As a result of this development the relation between
the two literary languages of today's Czecho-Slovakia is
now officially accepted as a refation between two Slavic
but distinct languages. Czech poetry and prose are translated into the Slovak, and vice versa, as the Polish or Russian have always been. Life and historical facts prevailed
over artificial tendencies and theories a long ~ime ago, and
finally they have prevailed even over the reluctance of some
politicians and phi'lologists to recognize the irrefutable.
REFERENCES
(1) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, Brat islava, Slov,e nska akadeania vied, 1953, p. 7.
(2) IDr. Vincent Blanar: Bibliografia jazykovedy na Slovensku v
rokoch 1939-1947, Bratislava, Slovensika a1~ademia vied a umeni,
195'0, p. 210. This work ,contaiins 11,17 titles, Olf which aipprox.ilmatel,y
1000 were pulblished dudrug the existen-ce Olf the Slovak R~bl!i.'c .
.Altogether Blanar presents an almost complete picture of Ling,ud,stic
and philological w<ll'ks, pwblished in boo!k form or in periodicals,
in the fiields olf ,g eneral philiodog,y, comparative linguistiics Olf lndoEuirQPean languages, Sl'O'Vanic philology and! the stu~ Olf the Slova!k
lairugua,ge. See al!so Dr. L. Dvonc:1Bibliografia slovenskej jazykovedy
za roky 1948-1952, Matica Slovenska, 1957.
�36
SLOVAKIA
(3) See, for examI?:le, the eval,uartion o.f U. Stur as a philo1o,gist
in the book "l!udovit Stur, Slovencina" nasa," which was prepared
and annotated by Dr. J. Ambms and has been evaliwa1ted lirug,uirstdlcailily
by Dr. V. Blanar. According to Blanar, Stur kept pa,ce with the European philologic:d schools o.f that time and its foremosrt ip·h enomena, a,n d
his studies at Hal!le predestined him to beco,me, in Slovanic and Slovaik cir,cwmstances, one of the frrst representatives of the newest
methods on theories in phi'lology.
(4) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, p. 6. Anton Bemo'1ak
01762--1813) codified the Slovak literary lang,ua,ge as used by the
Slovak Catholics from tJhe time of the co-uniter-Reformation and esipeoi,a,1ly since .16315, the year Olf the fo.u,ndatJion of the second university
in Slovakia. at Trnaiva. Bernolak gaive a solid fowndati-on to the Slovak literary .l!anguag,e, based on the Western Sllovaik dialecrt, in hiis
works: Disserta,t io philologico-critica de litteris Slavorum : Linguae
slavonicae per Regnum Hungariae usitatae compendiosa simul at
facilis o,rthographia" (Bra1tislava, 1'7'3171); "Grammatica slavica" (1790),
and in his huge pentalingual dictionary, pu1blished after his deatih,
in 1825.
Marbin Hattala (1821-1903'), who later became a professor at the
University of Praigue, codid'ied the reform in'1:rod1uced by U. Stur,
which was a,o cepted in, 1844 by both Slovak Oatholiics and Protestants.
His "Kratka mluvnica slovenska" CShor.t Slovak Gr•aimlillar), p,wblished
in 1852, gaive a scientific bas-is and for:m to Stur's reform.
Saimuel Czaimbel (1856-1 909), one o.f the greatest Slovak philologists, enniiched Sl,o vak phi,lol1ogy by seveml scholarly wo·r'ks regardiillg
dialectology, monphology, and lexicol-o,gy. His main woriks are "Slovensky pravopis" (Slovak Orithogra-phy, 1890) and "Rukovat' spisovnej
reci slovenskej " QManual of the Slovalk Liternry Larug-uage, 1-902).
For detai:ls concernirug Bernolak, Haittaila, and Czaimbel, see Prof. E.
Pauliny: "Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny."
(5) Colillipare V. Blanar: Biblografia.
(6) Pioneer and valuable worik iin, this d'i rection was done partLcularliy by Professor Dr. Jul iius Led enyi-La1d ziansky in the termino:lo.gy o.f medical science.
(7) Prof. Dr. A. Dostal: Nastin dejin ceskeho a slovenskeho
jazyka, Prague, Statni pedagogicke naildiadatelstvi, 1:954.
(8) (Prof. Dr. Eugen Pa,Ulliny: Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny,
Bratisl-aiva, S1ovenska akadem!iia, vied a umeni, 19418. In the introduction to his book, Pa-wliny understands the history o.f the 1-angu,age as
the history Olf the oriigin, disaippear ance and cha,n,ges Olf its i,ndi'Vidua1l
styles. Ho:wever, in the book i ts-elf, he d'ivide:d the his-tor-y of the
Slovak 1iitera['y laruguage accord!i,u,g to the languages which wer e used
,by the Slov,aiks as literary la~ua,ges in addition to the sipoken vern,a,culiar from the time of the Gr eater Moravia•. On page 5, he writes:
"Al,thouglh, in this case, the p er,iod of the actual Sll,ovaik litera['y
laillguaige ca,n. begin only with Bernolak, or with t he p eriod shortly
befor e Bemolak, nevertheless it is not poss,iJble to begin the history
of t he literary languages of the Slovaks either with Bernolak or
Stur, but it is ,n,ecessa,r,y t,o go deep into 1Jhe pa st, aH the way to the
ver y begin nings o.f the histor iical p er iod o.f our na-ti-on in the Gr eater
Moravian epoch, na,y, in ceritain matters, it is ,necessary to go even
1
1
1
1
�SLOVAKIA
37
further, into the pre-histork period, when our ancestors were not
yet baptized and did not particiiPate im, the European cul<ture whiich
was introduced to us by Chrisit-iani:ty."
(9) Prof. A. Mraz: Dej iny slovenskej literatury, Braitisfava,
Slovenska akademia vied a UJ!l1eni, 1948.
(lJl) F . Travnicek: Historicka mluvnice ceskoslovenska, Brno,
1935, p. 21-23.
(10) This thesis wa,s propa•g ated by Dr. Ed'Uard Benes throurg h
his pUJblication Detruisez I' Autriche, Paris, 11916, and, with the helip
of Czech philologists, it penetrated also inito many western university oiTcles and was reoeated by the Slavists on this continent
a·s well.
(13) Besides aiuthors of Slovak origin, (Hrobak, Konus, Potocek,
and others), the correct attitude towards the Slovak lang;uage, in the
Englislh lan!guage works, was taken particUilarly by Professor Alfred
Senn in the syunrposi,um A Handbook of Slavic Studies, edited by
L. I. Strakhovsky, Camlbridlge, Massachu,s etts, Harvard UnLversity
Press, 1949.
(12) Profiessor Bartek pub1'ished, boith in Slovakia and in exiile,
a numlber of prul. 0Iogica1! wo,r ks, S'Ome Off w,h ich were piulblished i,n,
French and Eng-lish. Elana.r"s "Bibliografia" cites thirteen titles
of his works. 'Ilhe best known philologists, besides B'artek, are S-tanislav and Novak. StaniS'lav is known parti<cUilarliy for his research
i,n,to the OyriJoJMethodian period and for his works in toponyimy.
Novak was siJenced by the cOJin1Inunist regime; Sitanislav is still
actiive. Bartek performed a very meritorious service, pa-r ticular,l'Y by
foundilllg the peri10dical "Slovenska rec" (Slovak Langua,ge), and
by his uncOJinpramising stand in the so-called "ma1ticne" (Slovak [nstitu1:e) strwggles for the purity of the S1ov,a k language and its
separate development since Vhe d isaippearance of the Old Slovanic
laruguaige.
1
1
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his
latest statemen!ts rulways stressed, tihait OUT pact of •a lliance
with Soviet Russia and our friendshiJp with other Slav na,..
tions must not encroach on our friendly and cordial re1ations with other democratic states. This is the natural desire, shared by an enormous majority of our people, and
nothing prevents us from keeping the confidence of the
democratic states and strengthening and deepening our
friendship with our great western Allies. Moscow, too,
wa.Illts to fol4ow this line of poliicy. rt will, however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to·
the Soviet Union, which are still existing, to be swept
away." - Premier Fierlinger of Czecho-Slovakia, O'WI Bulletin, June 1, 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
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
2."i
CONTEMPORARY TENDENCIES IN
SLOVAK PHILOLOGY
Joseph M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
A reprint from SLAVIC AND E1AST EUROPEAN STUDIES
Vol. IV, Part 3-4, Published by the University of Montreal,
Department of Slavic Studies.
A bibliographic review of Slovak linguistics and philology show that, in the la-st twenty years, philology in Slovakia has experienced an all round development and progress
and is developing, both quantitatively and qualitatitvely,
comparatively undisturbed, even since the inclusion of Slovakia into the Soviet cultural and political sphere of influence.
A complete picture of the contemporary state of Slovak phildlogy would require, of course, thorough research
not only into the development of philology in Slovakia,
which is exposed to Russian and Czech cultural influences,
but also into that of the countries of the free world, where
a comparatively large number of cultural and scientific
workers use the Slovak language. For both ringuist and
philologist such a research project would be interesting not
only because in scores of Slovak periodicals and books,
which are published in the free world, there are traces of
the inrfluence of tihe Romance and the Anglo-Saxon languages, particularly in the syntax, but a research would be
of interest also because in the free world, there were published several philological studies in which two tendencies
are quite evident. The first tendency rejeets orthographic
changes in the Slovak language; the second, representing
the majority of cultural workers, at the recommendation of
the leading Slovak philologist, Professor Henry Bartek, accepted in principle the orfuographic changes which were
instituted by the philologists in Slovakia from the time of
the Czecho-Russian occupation.
However, the framework of this study is limited to research into the Soviet orbit and, therefore, we forego at this
time, a research into the development of Slovak philology
in the countries of the free world, even though some works
of H. Bartek, Philip Hrobak, Joseph Konus, and others,
26
SLOVAKIA
warrant the attention of a wider circle of Slavists. The following outline of the contemporary state of Slovak philology concerns itself only with the development in Slovakia.
Sovietophil Tendencies and Their Extent
As with literature and science, in general, philology,
too, has been exposed, since the inclusion of Slovakia into
the Soviet sphere of influence, to political pressure by the
Communist Party and is, therefore, gradually developing
with considerable dependence on Soviet philology. This occurs particularly through the influence of some cultural
workers who were elevated by the present regime to positions of importance in Slovak cultural life because of :their
partisan adherence rather than their past scientific performances or professional qualifications. These "cultural
commissioner s" from the very beginning tried to adapt to
Slovak philology "the theoretical directives which were
given Marxist philology by J. V. Stalin in his genial works
Marxism and Problems of Linguistics and Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S. S. R.(1). However, a considerable number of true philologists ad!hered, in the first
place, to scientific principles.
The barefaced efforts to align Slovak philology with
"the Marxist directives" and subjugate it to the contemvorary political regime come to light particularly in the introduction to the new Rules of Slovak Orthography (Pravidla. slovenskeho pravopisu), published in 1953. The editor-in-Chief, Dr. Stefan Peciar, and the majority of the
members of the commission which prepared fue Rules, received their education and matured scientifically either
in the bourgeois Czedho-Slovak Republic or between 19391945 in the Slovak Republic, but in the introduction to
their work, which otherwise "in substance did not change
the present orthography and its basic principle," according
to their own admission, they deemed it necessary to pay
homage to Stalin and to attack fue philologists who prepared the Rules of orthography in 1940.
It would certainly be quite superfluous to try to prove
bhat Marxism belongs to the sphere of political and social
sciences, and that serious scholars know as yet neither "the
SLOVAKIA
27
Marxist philology ," nor the Marxist scientific method or
principle in linguistic s and philology , but only the political
and unscientif ic interferen ce by the regimes which subscribe to the Marx-Eng els' or Lenin's political and economic theories. In the same manner, philology does not recognize fascist principles in philology and linguistic s, which
principles some of the contempo rary linguists in Slovakia
are attemptin g to discover in the works of their predecessors or contempo raries living in the countries of the free
world. Needless to say thaJt they are attemptin g to discover
such "fascist" principles not on the basis of scholarly researoh, but in an effort to perform a service for the present political regime.
There are, therefore , no serious suppositi ons in Slovakia that some "Marxist point of view" even if such a
thing existed, could already have asserted itself in Slovak
philology. The review of names of the scholarly active philologists shows that they are the ones with whom we have
been familiar, particula rly during the period of the Slovak
Republic. The bibliogra phy of philology in Slovakia of the
years 1939-47 (2) serves as evidence that Dr. Peciar, as
well as Dr. Pauliny, Jona, Horecky, Ruzicka, and others,
grew intellectu ally and created mainly during the existence of the Slovak Republic; and, that while some of them
could have been reproach ed during the Second World War
for trying to bring into Slovak philology the Czech philological theories (see the polemic Peciar-U hlar in the pereoldical "Slovensk a rec" (Slovak Languag e), there was no
ndticeabl e attempt at transferr ing the Russian philologic al
theories. The generatio n educated under the present regime is sUll too young to make any serious contribut ion to
scholarsh ip or science, as the attainme nt of a universit y
degree does not signify scientific qualificat ion, but rather
the confirma tion of the ability to undertak e scientific or
scholarly work.
Therefore , we find predomin ating even in the Bibliography of Slovak Philology for the Years 1948-1952 , compiled by Dr. Ladislav Dvonc, the names which became
known during the previous period. Dvonc's bibliogra phy is
a sequel to Elana.r's bibliogra phy, and in its 1500 entries
28
SLOVAKIA
it deals with: 1. all linguistic contributions published in
Slovakia; 2. contributions by Slovak philologists and linguists in non-Slovak periodicals; and 3. contributions of
non-Slovak au1Jhors on Slovak language or their pholological works published in Slovakia.
Results of a favorable development of Slovak philology
are visible in Dvonc's bibliography not only in the number
of entries (1500 within four years), but also in the number
of fields covered. Slovak philology is no more restricted to
reseavch into and perfection of the Slovak language alone.
There is also a comparatively large number of works, studies, and articles on general linguistics, Indo-European languages, general Slavonic philology and linguistics, on artificial languages and on the organization of scholarly work
in the field of philology and linguistics.
Soviet pressure or impact of Soviet philology appears
particularly in the group "General philology" which contains 79 entries, mostly translations from Russian or works
of Slovak lesser linguists on Soviet and Marxist philology
and Stalin's theories. Only three of the known Slovak philologists (Peciar, Horecky and Jona) take part in the Soviet attempt to impose "Marxist and Stalinist linguistic
theories" upon Slovak philology. The most aggressive propagator of "Marxist philology," Alexander Isacenko, was
broug,ht up in Slovakia as a son of White Russian emigres.
He pays his debts now to Slovakia, which saved him and
even gave him a university chair during the war, by serving Soviet aims as their most docile and obedient tool. (See
his "Geniail contributions to t'he theory of Marx-Leninism"
- For a Marxist Philology" - "An important discussion
on philology in the Soviet Union," etc.).
As for the Slovanic philology, it was dealt with in Slovakia, during the four years in question, in 229 entries.
Slovak, and in translations foreign and other Slav scholars (Lehr-Splawinski, E. Knisza, Weingart, Dvozdec, Vinogradov, Pankevyc, Barchudarov) covered the field of
Old Church Slovanic, Russian, Polish, Czech, and other
Slovanic languages. Among Slovak philologists, the mos:t
prolific and scholarly, according to the western standards,
SLOVAKIA
29
appears to be prof. Jan Stanislav (Polish and SouthernSlav philology) .
Scholarly research into the Slovak language is, of
course, still the principal field of interest. The number of
works, studies and articles, referring to the Slovak language, its history and development, is close to 700, many
of them written by highly qualified philologists and linguists either of Slovak or foreign origin (J. Stanislav, L.
Novak, E. Pauliny, V. Uhlar, A. Janosik, S. Peciar, J. Horecky, V. Blanar, E. Jona, Kniesza, Vazny, Kuraly, Stieber,
etc.). They cover the history of literary languages in Slovakia, historical grammar and historical dialectology, etymology, phonology, orthography, vocabulary, grammar, etc.
Attack on Purism and Advocation of Slovanic Orientation
The fact that Marxist methods are not considered
seriously, even by the linguists who advocate them, is shown
in the review of philological works published several years
ago, as well as by the predominant condemnation of only
those philologists who prepared the Rules of Slovak Orthography, in 1940. The older linguists, from Anthony Bernolak to Samuel Czambel, are highly esteemed; in fact, in
certain instances, they are esteemed more highly than they
were by the now proscribed philologists and literary historians of the period of the existence of the Slovak Republic (3). For example, in the introduction to the new Rules,
we read the following:
"A significant role in the perfection of the Slovak
language was played by our national awakeners. They discovered the internal criteria of tJhe Slovak language, formulated then and laid strong foundations for our literary language and our lingual culture. Anton Bernolak took the
first steps towards the stabilization of the Slovak literary
language, its ovthography, morphology, and vocabulary.
For stabilizing the Slovak literary language in its present
form, and particularly its morphology and orthography,
Martin Hattala and Samo Czambel and others are mainly
responsible." ( 4).
Among the classicists of Slovak literature, who "enriched, developed, and strengthened" the Slovak language,
the "Marxist" commission also includes Jan Holly who,
30
SLOVAKIA
with Berndlak and Hatta-la, was also a Catholic priest and
who (together with the above-ment ioned) is credited with
what even today is often reproachfu lly called "Slovak linguistic separatism " in English and French books, particuiarly if such books were inspired by Czech politicians or
scholars.
The attack on the philologists who compiled the Rules
of 1940 is obviously p<Yliticaily motivaJted. The servants of
the present communist regime in Slovakia condemn the
compiler•s of the previous Rules, first, because they were
supposedly "the servants of Eudak (Populist) separatism
and went out of their way to mee't the demands of the
treacherou s politicians, " and only in the second place, because "they strived to remove literary Sfovak as far as
possible from Czech and to isolate it also from other Slovanic languages. " In other words, they were "puristicall y
oriented" and marked the Rules with "a puristical tendency."
However, the changes which have been made in Slovak
orthograph y, and the review of the ph!ilological studies of
the past few years, do not testify to the fact that the present "Marxist" philologists have very substantial ly removed themselves from "the purists" or that they have
approached closer to Czech or other Slovanic languages,
with the exception of the Russian language. The entire evolutionary line of Slovak philology - the founders of which
were the national awakeners of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who had to defend the Slovak language
against Hungarian assimilator y tendencies and the nationalistica lly oriented linguists and philologists of the last
decades of this century, for whom it was necessary to defend the Slovak language against no less dangerous Czech
tendencies - has not yet been too remarkably dented by
contempor ary philologists in Slovakia. The thesis that the
Slovak language tended to develop as a separate Slovanic
language after the disappeara nce of the Old Slovanic language - and that the attempts to make it one of the dialects of the Czech language must only be considered as unscientific and political tendencies and aspirations - is practically proved by the scholarly works of the contempor ary
SLOVAKIA
31
philologists with alil the weight and consistency of methods
which cannot be la:beled unscientific.
In harmony with the general cultural growth of the
Slovak nation, Slovak philology develops in scope and
depth. During 1939-1945 alone over a thousand works,
treatises, articles, and studies in the field of philology were
published. The linguists and philologists did not concern
themselves merely with research into and the stabilization
of the Slovak language, but also with the wider problems
of linguistics and ph'ilology, Slovanic and non-Slovanic IndoEuropean languages, and with tihe general philology (5) .
During the war, there already was evident a promising development which was made in the formaition of Slovak scientific and technical terminology, particularly in the scientific disciplines and in the technical-economic sphere of
Slovak life(6). The contemporary philologists continue diligently in this "purism," and Slovak scientific and technical terminology has, in the past few years, been considerably enriched by the newly-coined or adapted terms
of other Slovanic languages, particularly Russian.
Objectivity warrants the admission that the works
of Slovak philologists are comparatively extensive; that
the number of published books, studies and treatises in
periodicals is considerable; and that the fields of scientific
research are numerous. In the interest of truth, however,
it is also necessary to add that this growth of scholarly
works has no relation to, and is not to be credited to the
contemporary political regime. Regardless of what regime
might exist today in Slovakia, there would inevitably be
more achievement in science, culture and arts than ever
before. The explanation is to be found in the general development of Slovakia in the last forty years and particularly in the fact that, in the last years of the so-called
bourgeois Czecho-Slovak Republic and especially during the
period of the existence of the Slovak Republic, a large number of young S'lovaks studied in universities at home and
abroad, not only the traditional disciplines - theology,
law, and medicine - but the entire field of science. The inclusion of Slovakia i.nlto the Soviet orbit befell them in the
years of their scientific productivity or in their years of
32
SLOVAKIA
university studies. If, today, in Slovakia, more is produced
and published in philology or in other scientific fields, it is
because the Slovak nation reached that stage of development at which there are found entire cadres of scientific
and culutral workers. These cadres are so large that, even
after the departure of thousands into exile, it is possible
today to publish in Slovakia more books than ever before
in all fields of science. The communist regime, in certain
respects, by the limitation of freedom alone, holds back scientific work, and supports development only of those
fields in which the political aims of the Communist Party
can be pursued. Philology is, for the communist regime, a
neutral rather than a privileged field.
As far as the linguistic side of the Slovak language is
concerned, in :the Rules as in other works, there appears a
trend towards a more consistent use of the principles of
phonetic orthogr&phy and towards the simplification of
writing Slovak and foreign expressions. In philological
production alone there are represented dialectology, lexicology, comparative philology, morphology, phonology, orthoepy, phonetics, etc. Several works deal with questions of
the Cyrilo--Methodian period, the development of philology
in other Slovanic nations (Russia, Bulgaria) and the history of the Slovak language. A scholarly level has been attained, first of all, by the works of older linguists and
philologists, but the possession of the qualifications and
preparation for the professional philological work is evident in a large number of younger intellectuals, particularly
in their criticism, polemics and commentaries on the new
editions of older literary or philological works (for instance,
in the introductions to the new editions of the works of
Bernolak, Holly, Stur, etc.).
End of the Controversy Regarding Literary Slovak and
the Origin of the Slovak Language
From the published works of philologists and literary
historians it is also obvious t'hat the Czech theses on the
Slovak language, on the history of the Slovak literary language, and on the function of some foreign languages
(Czech, Czechoslovak) in Slovak literature, which theses
SLOVAKIA
were intended to support the political theses of a single
Czechoslovak nation, have been definitely buried. In this
respect, even some contemporary works of Czech philologists helped to support the scientific conclusions which
have long been defended by Slovak philologists. Particularly noteworthy, on the Czech side is the work of Professor A. Dostal (7), and on the Slovak side, Pauliny's "Dejiny spisovnej slovenciny" History of Literary Slovak,
Bratislava, 1948 (8) , and Mraz's "Dejiny slovenskej literatiiry" - History of Slovak Literature, Bra'tislava, 1948(9) ,
as well as the papers read at the Moscow Fourth International Congress of Slavists in 1958. In this respect, particularly, the paper of Professor E. Pauliny on "Bilingualism in the History of the Slovak Literary Language," de-serves special at'tention. Papliny tries to explain the function of the Czech language in S'lovakfa in the 15th and
following centuries on the basis of social and economic
phenomena and changes. He has arrived, nevertheless, at
the same conclusions as the philologists who did not apply
"Marxist criteria" in philology, i.e., that the Czech language was a foreign language in Slovakia and could not
stand compe'tition with the Slovak vernacular when the Slovak ethnicum evolved in its national consciousness: though
the Protestant minority, predominantly of Czech origin,
tried to maintain it even in the 19th century when the Slovak literary language was established by the Catholic majorit y a whole century before that time. The relation between the Czech and Slovak is therefore, even according
to Pauliny, that of bilingualism (p. 43).
A century-long controversy, as to whether Slovak is
but a dialect of the Czech language, or a dis'tinct Slovanic
tongue, has thus been "officially" closed by the recognition on both the Czech and Slovak sides that, from its earliest beginnings, the Slovak language has always manifested a distinct identity as a Slavonic tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia. By a careful analysis of the fundamenital roots of both languages, Czech and Slovak, as well
as through a comparative study of their later developments, contemporary scholars trained in philology have revealed the true basis of the Slovak language and have clas-
34
SLOVAKIA
sified it properly as one of distinct Slavonic languages
which developed after the disappearance of the Old Slovanic language.
The controversy was occasioned by two facts. On the
one hand, some literary historians made no distinction between the language spoken by the Slovaks as their native
tongue and 'their literary medium. The latter for some time
wa:s (besides Latin) the old Czech liturgical language.
On the other hand, most of the philo'logists and literary
historians, predominantly of Czech origin, in formulating
purely scientific views as to the proper relationship between
the Czech and Slovak languages, were influenced by political aspira!tions. Recent studies based on scientific principles of philology, phonology, etymology lexicography, and
grammar now show that the original Slovak terminology,
wJth rare exceptions, goes back to the original roots of a
native Slovak language essentially distinct from every
other Slovanic tongue.
The confusion created by the failure to draw a proper
distinction between the native language of the Slovaks and
their written or literary language was, however, only partly responsible for the erroneous view that Slovak was
merely a dialect of the Czech language or that there was
something like a "Czechoslovak language" (10). Theories
on the existence of a "Czechoslovak language" were creat ed even after one hundred years of the existence of the Slovak literary language which was accepted by both Slovak
Catholics and Lutherans in 1844, and after two hundred
years' use by the Catholics of their own vernacular as the
literary medium around the University of Trnava, founded in 1635. Consequently, the main reason for the confusion was of a political nature, even if presented in "scientific" form. Professor F. Travnicek, for instance, used
geography as his main argument for his theory of the
"Czechoslovak language." The fact that the Czechs and
Slovaks inhabited the present area from the sixth century
was used by him as an argumen1t that they had a common
,l anguage. In his "ffistoricka mluvnice ceskoslovenska" (Historic Czechoslovak Grammar) he stated: "The ancient
Czechoslovak language lasted from the time of its inde-
SLOVAKIA
35
pendent establishment as a full-fledged language, from the
siJd:h to the end of the tenth century, and is similar to the
prehistoric tongue. The chief condition of this independent
development was that our ancestors were separated geographically from the rest of the Slavs" (11).
Geographical factors can hardly take precedence over
linguistic data, and even if we accept this theory, another
factor, the separation of Czechs and Siovaks from the ninth
century, would be in favor of an independent development
of the Slovak spoken tongue. Slovak philologists and linguists Czambel, Skultety, Bartek, Sttanislav, Novak,
etc. (12) rejected, therefore the Czech theories and
looked for linguistic criteria to determine the origin and the
main characteristics of the Slovak language. They reviewed
the historic form,s of the Slovak tongue and, by linguistic
methods of phonology as we11 as by a comparative study,
they arrived at new conclusions as to the origin and development of the S'lovak language. These conclusions were
ultimately accepted by contemporary Czech as well as other
Slovanic philologists and linguists (13).
As a result of this development the relation between
the two literary languages of today's Czecho-Slovakia is
now officially accepted as a refation between two Slavic
but distinct languages. Czech poetry and prose are translated into the Slovak, and vice versa, as the Polish or Russian have always been. Life and historical facts prevailed
over artificial tendencies and theories a long ~ime ago, and
finally they have prevailed even over the reluctance of some
politicians and phi'lologists to recognize the irrefutable.
REFERENCES
(1) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, Brat islava, Slov,e nska akadeania vied, 1953, p. 7.
(2) IDr. Vincent Blanar: Bibliografia jazykovedy na Slovensku v
rokoch 1939-1947, Bratislava, Slovensika a1~ademia vied a umeni,
195'0, p. 210. This work ,contaiins 11,17 titles, Olf which aipprox.ilmatel,y
1000 were pulblished dudrug the existen-ce Olf the Slovak R~bl!i.'c .
.Altogether Blanar presents an almost complete picture of Ling,ud,stic
and philological w<ll'ks, pwblished in boo!k form or in periodicals,
in the fiields olf ,g eneral philiodog,y, comparative linguistiics Olf lndoEuirQPean languages, Sl'O'Vanic philology and! the stu~ Olf the Slova!k
lairugua,ge. See al!so Dr. L. Dvonc:1Bibliografia slovenskej jazykovedy
za roky 1948-1952, Matica Slovenska, 1957.
36
SLOVAKIA
(3) See, for examI?:le, the eval,uartion o.f U. Stur as a philo1o,gist
in the book "l!udovit Stur, Slovencina" nasa," which was prepared
and annotated by Dr. J. Ambms and has been evaliwa1ted lirug,uirstdlcailily
by Dr. V. Blanar. According to Blanar, Stur kept pa,ce with the European philologic:d schools o.f that time and its foremosrt ip·h enomena, a,n d
his studies at Hal!le predestined him to beco,me, in Slovanic and Slovaik cir,cwmstances, one of the frrst representatives of the newest
methods on theories in phi'lology.
(4) Pravidla slovenskeho pravopisu, p. 6. Anton Bemo'1ak
01762--1813) codified the Slovak literary lang,ua,ge as used by the
Slovak Catholics from tJhe time of the co-uniter-Reformation and esipeoi,a,1ly since .16315, the year Olf the fo.u,ndatJion of the second university
in Slovakia. at Trnaiva. Bernolak gaive a solid fowndati-on to the Slovak literary .l!anguag,e, based on the Western Sllovaik dialecrt, in hiis
works: Disserta,t io philologico-critica de litteris Slavorum : Linguae
slavonicae per Regnum Hungariae usitatae compendiosa simul at
facilis o,rthographia" (Bra1tislava, 1'7'3171); "Grammatica slavica" (1790),
and in his huge pentalingual dictionary, pu1blished after his deatih,
in 1825.
Marbin Hattala (1821-1903'), who later became a professor at the
University of Praigue, codid'ied the reform in'1:rod1uced by U. Stur,
which was a,o cepted in, 1844 by both Slovak Oatholiics and Protestants.
His "Kratka mluvnica slovenska" CShor.t Slovak Gr•aimlillar), p,wblished
in 1852, gaive a scientific bas-is and for:m to Stur's reform.
Saimuel Czaimbel (1856-1 909), one o.f the greatest Slovak philologists, enniiched Sl,o vak phi,lol1ogy by seveml scholarly wo·r'ks regardiillg
dialectology, monphology, and lexicol-o,gy. His main woriks are "Slovensky pravopis" (Slovak Orithogra-phy, 1890) and "Rukovat' spisovnej
reci slovenskej " QManual of the Slovalk Liternry Larug-uage, 1-902).
For detai:ls concernirug Bernolak, Haittaila, and Czaimbel, see Prof. E.
Pauliny: "Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny."
(5) Colillipare V. Blanar: Biblografia.
(6) Pioneer and valuable worik iin, this d'i rection was done partLcularliy by Professor Dr. Jul iius Led enyi-La1d ziansky in the termino:lo.gy o.f medical science.
(7) Prof. Dr. A. Dostal: Nastin dejin ceskeho a slovenskeho
jazyka, Prague, Statni pedagogicke naildiadatelstvi, 1:954.
(8) (Prof. Dr. Eugen Pa,Ulliny: Dej iny spisovnej slovenciny,
Bratisl-aiva, S1ovenska akadem!iia, vied a umeni, 19418. In the introduction to his book, Pa-wliny understands the history o.f the 1-angu,age as
the history Olf the oriigin, disaippear ance and cha,n,ges Olf its i,ndi'Vidua1l
styles. Ho:wever, in the book i ts-elf, he d'ivide:d the his-tor-y of the
Slovak 1iitera['y laruguage accord!i,u,g to the languages which wer e used
,by the Slov,aiks as literary la~ua,ges in addition to the sipoken vern,a,culiar from the time of the Gr eater Moravia•. On page 5, he writes:
"Al,thouglh, in this case, the p er,iod of the actual Sll,ovaik litera['y
laillguaige ca,n. begin only with Bernolak, or with t he p eriod shortly
befor e Bemolak, nevertheless it is not poss,iJble to begin the history
of t he literary languages of the Slovaks either with Bernolak or
Stur, but it is ,n,ecessa,r,y t,o go deep into 1Jhe pa st, aH the way to the
ver y begin nings o.f the histor iical p er iod o.f our na-ti-on in the Gr eater
Moravian epoch, na,y, in ceritain matters, it is ,necessary to go even
1
1
1
1
SLOVAKIA
37
further, into the pre-histork period, when our ancestors were not
yet baptized and did not particiiPate im, the European cul<ture whiich
was introduced to us by Chrisit-iani:ty."
(9) Prof. A. Mraz: Dej iny slovenskej literatury, Braitisfava,
Slovenska akademia vied a UJ!l1eni, 1948.
(lJl) F . Travnicek: Historicka mluvnice ceskoslovenska, Brno,
1935, p. 21-23.
(10) This thesis wa,s propa•g ated by Dr. Ed'Uard Benes throurg h
his pUJblication Detruisez I' Autriche, Paris, 11916, and, with the helip
of Czech philologists, it penetrated also inito many western university oiTcles and was reoeated by the Slavists on this continent
a·s well.
(13) Besides aiuthors of Slovak origin, (Hrobak, Konus, Potocek,
and others), the correct attitude towards the Slovak lang;uage, in the
Englislh lan!guage works, was taken particUilarly by Professor Alfred
Senn in the syunrposi,um A Handbook of Slavic Studies, edited by
L. I. Strakhovsky, Camlbridlge, Massachu,s etts, Harvard UnLversity
Press, 1949.
(12) Profiessor Bartek pub1'ished, boith in Slovakia and in exiile,
a numlber of prul. 0Iogica1! wo,r ks, S'Ome Off w,h ich were piulblished i,n,
French and Eng-lish. Elana.r"s "Bibliografia" cites thirteen titles
of his works. 'Ilhe best known philologists, besides B'artek, are S-tanislav and Novak. StaniS'lav is known parti<cUilarliy for his research
i,n,to the OyriJoJMethodian period and for his works in toponyimy.
Novak was siJenced by the cOJin1Inunist regime; Sitanislav is still
actiive. Bartek performed a very meritorious service, pa-r ticular,l'Y by
foundilllg the peri10dical "Slovenska rec" (Slovak Langua,ge), and
by his uncOJinpramising stand in the so-called "ma1ticne" (Slovak [nstitu1:e) strwggles for the purity of the S1ov,a k language and its
separate development since Vhe d isaippearance of the Old Slovanic
laruguaige.
1
1
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his
latest statemen!ts rulways stressed, tihait OUT pact of •a lliance
with Soviet Russia and our friendshiJp with other Slav na,..
tions must not encroach on our friendly and cordial re1ations with other democratic states. This is the natural desire, shared by an enormous majority of our people, and
nothing prevents us from keeping the confidence of the
democratic states and strengthening and deepening our
friendship with our great western Allies. Moscow, too,
wa.Illts to fol4ow this line of poliicy. rt will, however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to·
the Soviet Union, which are still existing, to be swept
away." - Premier Fierlinger of Czecho-Slovakia, O'WI Bulletin, June 1, 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
Contemporary Tendencies in Slovak Philology
Description
An account of the resource
Joseph M. Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.
Slovakia, Vol. 10, No. 7 (32), September-December 1960
pp. 25-37
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
September-December 1960
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/3713ef3cc29fa218ec421bdfd7454552.pdf
e8b954324f7ce1bf2097ef4c3d59ab5b
PDF Text
Text
112
SLOVAKIA-2015
CORRUPTION IN SLOVAKIA:
TIME TO RECLAIM THE STATE 1
Tom Nicholson
On the way home one March night, I lost a hubcap. I heard it pop
off the front right wheel of my car as I smashed into a massive pothole on the main road from Bratislava to Svaty Jur. The impact was
so severe that it bent the wheel rim and punctured the tire. If my son
had been present he might have learned a few new English cusswords to go with his rich Slovak collection.
I didn't own a car when I first came to Slovakia in 1992, so I
can't say whether there are more potholes now than then. But it
seems to me there are altogether too many potholes here for a European Union member country (the closest comparison I can come to
Slovak roads in the spring is Moldova, or maybe rural Cuba). And
there are definitely way too many potholes - and it takes way too
long to fill them in - for a country that has had twenty years to get its
shit together.
Sure, they have potholes in Canada (I can no longer say 'we' because I have long since transferred my allegiance to Slovak potholes). But even though the winters in the Great White North are far
more severe, and Canada has about a quintillion miles more roads,
potholes are infrequent, and drivers are alerted to them with a homey
Canadian solicitousness - a SO-meter flashing DANGER sign, say,
or a cordon of Mounties in reflecto-vests.
Not here. Even on Racianska ulica, a four-lane artery into the
heart of the capital, the worst holes after three weeks get a perfunctory monocle of paint, promising a pending repair in the indefinite future (that paint is the Slovak equivalent of the Mexican 'manana').
For me, Slovakia's potholes are another entry on the list of basic
Slovak things that don't work as they should. It's a depressingly long
list - education, health care, justice, politics (especially politics).
And it provides a starting point for understanding why corruption
continues to flourish in this country.
1
This is a revised and updated version ofmy original article "Je cas dat tomuto statu
zmysel," in Odkial' a kam ? Dvadsat' rokov samostatnosti, ed. by Martin Butora et.
al. (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2013), 281-304.
�SLOV AKIA-2015
113
***
If I had been asked to write an essay about corruption in Slovakia a few years ago, I know what I would have come up with - a
rogues' gallery of powerful figures who had abused other people's
trust over the years to enrich themselves. But last year I was swept
up in the Gori/a scandal, a political tempest that challenged my certainties and changed my life. As much as I wanted to remain detached as a journalist, I found myself speaking at public rallies and
giving interviews . Suddenly, I was expected to tell people not just
where corruption could be found , but how to defeat it as well. And I
discovered that I actually knew very little about it.
For starters, the story of corruption in Slovakia is not just one of
rich people gaming the system. Corruption takes many forms and has
many causes - such as that the country presents innumerable small
but vexing barriers to living one's life without vexation. Some of
these barriers encourage people to give small bribes (the box of chocolates for the doctor, the cash envelope for the building permit officer). Others - a plague of potholes, for example - just let everyone
know that public servants could care less about serving the public
interest, creating an atmosphere that indirectly encourages bribery.
But none of these stories, it seems to me, answer the key question: why corruption flourishes after twenty years of independence
and a decade of EU membership, six general elections and countless
devastating political scandals. We now know, thanks to Gori/a, exactly what high- level corruption looks like. We see oligarchs enriching themselves, we see politicians and civil servants abusing their
offices and neglecting their duties to us. And still it continues, and
still the potholes proliferate. So why don't Slovaks do something
about it?
***
Over the past year, I've often been told how ironic it is that a
foreigner had to bring the Gori/a scandal to light, as if a Slovak journalist would have done differently. This does a great disservice to the
probity of my colleagues, and greatly exaggerates my own. If a foreigner can be of service here, it is perhaps to see things in a context
that is not available to Slovaks, not having grown up elsewhere.
�114
SLOV AKIA-2015
Now, I' ve read enough foreign descriptions of Slovak life to know
how flawed this 'vision' can be, especially when delivered to foreign
audiences that have no opportunity to verify its authenticity (the film
Hostel comes to mind). But I'm hoping I can be an exception.
As a transplanted Canadian who has spent twenty years in this
country, I am still struck by the loyalty that people feel to their tribes
- to family, to friends, to old classmates, to other people who come
from their hometowns. These tribal bonds are what Slovaks living
abroad miss most about their country . In modem Slovakia, there are
still no higher loyalties.
This is striking for a Canadian because our country does not run
on informal networks. Sure, we have tribal loyalties, but they often
divide us - there isn't much that Greek Canadians have in common
with Chinese Canadians, say, or with Jamaican Canadians, except
the fact that we all live in Canada. Perhaps that's why Canada has
such a strong political identity: without ethnic, cultural or other natural bonds, we need it to hold us together. After all, we have few
common traditions or national dishes in the sense that Slovaks have
bryndzove halusky. But I'm pretty sure most Canadians could tell
you what values the country stands for - tolerance, social solidarity,
respect for human rights, and caring more about the rest of the world
than Americans, for starters. How many Slovaks could do the same?
While I'm sure people could name traits that Slovaks have as an ethnic nation - you can't live here for twenty years without hearing a
thing or two about zavist or pohostinnost', for example - what about
the ideals and principles their country is founded on?
Slovaks can be forgiven for not having a clear idea of what values the modem Slovak state stands for. The average person, after all,
was not consulted before the division of Czechoslovakia in 1993,
despite repeated promises of a referendum, and probably regarded
the project of an independent Slovakia as something foisted on him
from above. And because he had no hand in creating the state - and
in many cases probably hadn't even wanted it, or at least hadn ' t
wanted it yet - it's understandable that the average person might
have felt that the modem Slovak state was someone else's responsibility. Common ideals, like the Constitution, would be scripted by
old, grey men behind closed doors, while Slovakia's tribes would go
about their business as they always had.
�SLOV AKIA-2015
115
You could say that 'the state', on Slovak territory, had always
been someone else's responsibility. Magyars, Austrians, Czechs,
Germans, Russians, then Czechs again . After centuries of having
someone else to fill in the potholes and make sure people paid their
taxes, it's understandable that Slovaks were slow to respond to the
call to administer their own affairs. But everything might have
worked out differently if the Slovak Republic had come into being
from a statotvorny akt, by which I mean an experience that unites a
people as a political nation rather than just an ethnic one. Americans
had their War of Independence, the Brits had Napoleon, while early
Canadians ran a cruel gauntlet of Constitutional Conferences (a punishment that continues to be imposed on Canadian history students as
an object lesson in the burning sincerity of all boredom). Slovaks,
meanwhile, had no birthing experience that could rival the moral,
economic and civilizational value of Czechoslovakia. They had nothing to comfort or inspire them when Czechoslovakia was dismantled,
beyond the sour nationalism of pubs and football matches.
The way Slovakia came into the world, as a child welcomed only
by nationalists and political opportunists, left a dangerous vacuum at
the center of the Slovak body politic. People naturally shrank from
any new duties towards a state they hadn't wanted or had a hand in
creating. In doing so, they abandoned public affairs to anyone claiming to want the responsibility. And there was no shortage of applicants.
Twenty years later, this vacuum is still full of dark matter, dead
stars and other space junk - stuff that absorbs light rather than produces it. It is responsible for many of the ills that afflict Slovakia,
among them the indifference that ordinary people feel towards their
state and towards the millions of strangers who inhabit it. If I had to
give this ailment a name, I would call it the "mam v pici" disease.
***
Let me describe some of the symptoms of this disease. Slovaks
rarely sing their national anthem at sporting events, even at important
internationals in front of tens of thousands of people (compare that to
British football fans or Canadian hockey fans) . People complain incessantly about corruption in politics, and according to a recent survey trust their leaders less than almost any country on earth - but few
�116
SLOVAKIA-2015
are willing to even get off the couch to attend a protest rally. More
than half of each secondary school graduating class intends to emigrate, rather than stay home and help fix what ails the country.
Or, if you prefer a local perspective: truck drivers in my village
regularly make their deliveries while blocking traffic in both directions, reasoning that they have work to do so everyone else can just
wait. People shovel snow from in front of their houses into the street,
apparently indifferent to the inconvenience of other drivers. Private
homes are beautifully renovated and tenderly cared for, while discarded bottles and other garbage litter the edges of public streets and
walkways. In the summer, even though signs claim the forest above
the village is a protected area and off-limits to vehicles, motorcycles
and A TVs constantly disturb the peace of man and beast. And the
potholes would be a disgrace anywhere.
I know that a great many objections can be raised to each example I have mentioned . Maybe Slovaks don't know the words to their
national anthem; maybe it's just not a very sing-able song. And Slovakia hardly has a monopoly on apathy, selfishness and bad roads .
But after twenty years in this country, I'm convinced there is something else going on here.
For a country to work, it has to inspire its citizens with an idea
that is bigger than themselves individually. It has to give them areason to look beyond their tribes and take an interest in public affairs.
It has to give people a sense of political community, of mutual responsibility to each other as citizens. Without this sense of community, people will rarely have the confidence to resist social diseases
like corruption, or to stand up for unwritten standards of public behavior.
I got a taste of this in 1984 as a tipsy 17-year-old returning by
train from a baseball game in Toronto. They had been giving away
free bars of soap that day, and my friend and I thought it would be
fun to mark up the backs of the seats in front of us. As I scrawled
away, an older man behind me leaned over and told me to stop .
Cowed, but still insolent, I asked why I should. "Because he told you
to," said another man, and I had the feeling the entire train carriage
was sharing in and approving my humiliation. As much as the public
embarrassment stung at the time, the experience left a deeper impression - that in Canada, you could stand up to bullies and miscreants,
and other people would have your back.
�SLOVAKIA-2015
117
A decade later, in late 1992, I was sitting in the U Kuba pub in
Senec with my best friend Sean Ellacott. We were both in our 20s,
university graduates taking a year off to teach English in Czechoslovakia. At a nearby table were two dark-skinned men whom we
wouldn't have noticed if not for the fact that they were slowly getting beaten up. Twice I had seen a young man from a party of youths
come over and punch one of the dark-skinned men in the face - hard,
repeatedly, drawing blood. The victim made no attempt to protect
himself, and no one else seemed to pay the slightest attention. As the
young puncher approached for a third round, I had had enough and
grabbed him from behind by the shoulders. He wasn't big, and
seemed more surprised than belligerent, so we wrestled to a standoff
and he went back to his chair and I to mine.
At no point did anyone else in the bar intervene in our little drama or give any sign they supported my actions. On the contrary, as
the waiter brought me a brandy ordered by the battered victim, an
older patron drew up a chair at our table. The men who had been attacked were Gypsies, he said, and in Slovakia one didn't help them.
We should be wary of the young attacker and his friends .
It didn't occur to me at the time, but as the years passed, I came
to see that incident as illustrative of an important difference between
Canadian and Slovak society. At home, if something similar had
happened, I would have been risking much less because most patrons
of the bar would have approved of what I did, and would presumably
have come to my aid if the young man had put up more resistance.
But in Slovakia, you are on your own in such situations. As much as
other people may sympathize with you, and may be sickened by
what is happening, they will rarely do anything to help a stranger in
trouble (especially if the stranger is a Gypsy). It's not a matter of
cowardice or indifference to another's fate - it's that people aren't
sure of what they can expect from one another when the chips are
down. They lack the confidence you derive from a shared community and shared values, such as that one does not suffer a weaker person to be hurt. In Slovakia, no such glue binds strangers together. No
social contract exists.
***
�118
SLOV AKIA-2015
Again, it's hopelessly anecdotal, but I came to believe that I
learned something fundamental about Slovaks in U Kuba that day in
1992. Confronted with an obnoxious teenager on a train, people will
tend to look out the window rather than intervene, even if they are no
fonder of public vandalism or casual violence than Canadians. The
problem is that such incidents leave you with a horrible feeling inside if you don 't do anything. Whether you like it or not, you are involved, and looking out the window causes your soul to ache in a
way that no punch on the nose can.
Is it the same with corruption? Are we all like passengers on a
train, every day witnessing gross misconduct by strangers and yet
somehow failing to protest? Hating the offenders, but hating ourselves as well for looking out the window?
For me, this is as good an explanation as any . Think back for a
minute on the modem history of corruption in Slovakia: First came
authoritarian PM Vladimir Meciar, who was captain of the ship when
Czechoslovakia went down. Deciding not to risk a referendum on
Slovak independence, Meciar soon revealed his hand. Everything
revolved around privatization, around the use of public assets to create a "domestic capital group" that was politically loyal to the prime
minister and his HZDS party . As we were later told by Stefan Gavomik, head of the FNM privatization agency, every Wednesday the
Meciar government met privately to decide who would be allowed to
buy what companies (Monday's regular cabinet meetings were devoted to public matters). Most sales were announced only after they
had happened, leaving the media scrambling to find out who really
stood behind "white horse" purchasers. In many instances, the purchase price was only a fraction of the real worth of the shares (onesixth, in the case of gas storage company Nafta Gbely, for instance).
And even then, agreed purchase prices were often spread over many
years, or could be paid in the form of unverifiable ' investments' into
the privatized company. Information on privatization was closely
guarded, none more so than by the secret service, whose director,
Ivan Lexa, had been Meciar's first choice as privatization minister
before President Michal Kovac refused to appoint him to the post.
Understandably, privatization was a major campaign issue in the
1998 elections, which proved so crucial to Slovakia's future direction as a country. Mikulas Dzurinda, who defeated Meciar, promised
that his government would go after malefactors, and ministers in the
�SLOV AKIA-2015
119
first Dzurinda government began compiling 'black books' of misdeeds by their predecessors. And then - silence. The new leadership
of the FNM, we were told, had realized there was little point in
launching some 700 legal challenges to past privatization deals victory would take many years and countless man-hours, it was far
from certain that the courts would side with the government, while
the fall-out in terms of social unrest and damage to the principle of
legal certainty might be severe. And so the first Dzurinda government reached 'an accommodation' with Meciar's privatizers, allowing almost all of them to keep their assets.
Knowledge of human nature tells us that this detente must have
been built on payoffs by privatizers to the new stewards of state
property. Regardless, the Dzurinda administration soon had privatization scandals of its own, including some involving ' financial
groups' that had arisen at the end of the 1990s. While these groups
featured a few names from the past - the son of a Meciar-era state
bank chief (Patrik Tkcic), for example, or the last boss of the Communist-era secret police (Aloiz Lorenz) - on the whole they were far
more sophisticated than Meciar's crude privatizers, and invested far
more in public relations. When these groups bought state assets for
suspiciously little money, stripped them down and achieved enormous profits - Penta group boss Jaroslav Hascak once said he
wouldn't look at a deal that did not yield at least a 30 percent annual
return on investment - they were actually bringing efficiency to the
business environment, we were told. Their partnership with the first
and second Dzurinda administrations was so close that, according to
leaked cables from the US embassy in Bratislava, they helped draft
legislation and bribed MPs to pass it (which is the very definition of
'state capture '). And when the second Dzurinda government fell in
2005, leaving undone some key privatization deals, Penta financed
the purchase of a new parliamentary majority from independent
MPs.
Meanwhile, a professed social democrat named Robert Fico was
waiting in the wings . Fico's Smer party was reportedly sponsored by
people who had become rich under Meciar, and who had changed
horses following his defeat in 1998 after realizing that the authoritarian former PM would never again lead a government. Fico finally
came to power in 2006 by criticizing insensitive economic reforms
and corruption under Dzurinda. But again, no further action was tak-
�120
SLOV AKIA-2015
en against the alleged malefactors, while Fico himself battled charges of massive corruption in public procurement to the benefit of his
alleged sponsors. And so it went, through another change in government in 2010, and back to Fico two years later.
At the end of December in 2011 , on one of the darkest days of
the year, a file was uploaded to the Internet containing transcripts of
conversations that took place in a Bratislava apartment in 2006 .
Dubbed "the Gorilla file," the document was the result of a secret
service surveillance operation that had monitored meetings between
top government officials and politicians on the one hand, and Hascak
of Penta on the other. The transcripts suggested that financial groups
were not only benefiting from privatization decisions but in some
cases were also helping to make them; that they had managed to
have their own employees named to key state posts; and that they
used a sophisticated system of bribery and kickbacks to get what
they wanted from public servants. The Gorilla file also revealed that
incumbent officials had refused to aid police investigations of their
predecessors, a practice in keeping with what Interior Minister Daniel Lipsie described as an "unspoken agreement" among the political
elite that no one important would ever go to jail in Slovakia.
When I first read the Gorilla file over five years ago, I was struck
not just by the extent of the corruption, but also by how well organized it was, how brisk and businesslike. Now I am more amazed at
the lack of public response - for all the anger and disgust people felt
on reading the Gorilla file , for all the suspicions confirmed and then
exceeded, the largest public demonstration at the height of the Gorilla scandal in February 2012 still only drew a few thousand people to
SNP Square in Bratislava. What was everyone else doing?
***
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do
nothing, the saying goes, and the modem history of Slovakia is as
good a case as any . So what will it take to get people to act? I am
confident the problem is not one of indifference. A book I wrote in
2012 on the Gorilla case sold over 50,000 copies, a record for nonfiction in this country, which is a pretty reliable sign that people
wanted to know about it. And having met with thousands of people
around Slovakia over the past two years, I know that they are still
�SLOVAKIA-2015
121
angry and upset. But for some reason all that emotion remains bottled up .
One popular and very persuasive explanation goes as follows:
the reason that Slovaks don't respond more vigorously to corruption
is that most people, if they had the opportunity, would behave exactly the same as the main actors in the Gorilla file. Lacking that opportunity, most people are just as likely to be corrupt in their daily lives.
Corruption may be technically illegal in Slovakia, but it is far from
clear that it violates the informal rules that govern how Slovak society actually works.
On the surface this argument makes sense, but upon examination
it has important flaws . I have taught at a dozen Slovak postsecondary schools over the past twenty years (currently I teach at
five). I have always had problems with cheating and plagiarism in
my courses, despite the fact that in the first lesson I always warn my
students against it (even this year, I had to fail seven out of twentyeight students in an investigative journalism course because they
plagiarized their term papers). So yes, I would say students here
cheat more than they do in Canada. In trying to get Slovak students
to stop cheating, however, I have never had the support of a single
school administratr beyond the obligatory verbal commitments.
Once, in 2009, a student submitted as his term paper a 500-word article that had been published in the SME newspaper that I worked for
at the time. He hadn't bothered to do more than change the font, perhaps believing that as the brother of a Slovak film producer he didn't
need to break a sweat. A couple of queries established that he had
done the same to other course instructors. But even a joint submission before the disciplinary commission failed to produce more than
a promise to supervise the student's future work.
A few years ago I had a chance to ask a student and a university
professor about plagiarism over a few beers. The student admitted
that she and many of her peers did it, but asked why they should behave differently given that their teachers never read their papers.
Why make the effort, if no one cares one way or another? For his
part, the professor admitted that full-time teaching duties at three
different universities - a load he had to carry in order to support his
family - left him with no time to do more than make sure students
met the formal requirements to hand in an essay and attend class. No
�122
SLOV AKIA-2015
time, that is, to actually read anything beyond exam papers and dissertation theses.
I'm convinced that while it may appear that ordinary Slovaks are
as corrupt as their political and economic leaders, their corruption
has different roots. It springs from the fact that basic things don ' t
work in this country, which turns 'low-level' corruption into a coping mechanism. Rather than waste three hours at the doctor's office,
or risk an indifferent diagnosis or treatment, people go through informal, tribal channels to get what they need . Rather than spend several hours at a police station to get a car registered, they may give a
cop friend twenty euros to speed things up. Rather than spend two
weeks on a school assignment that will end up in the waste bin, unread, they copy and paste from Wikipedia .
'High-level' corruption, on the other hand, is not a coping mechanism. It is a strategy to capture the state, to hijack democratic
mechanisms for personal gain. It is not the result of a malfunctioning
public sector; it is the direct cause of it.
Clearly, if the Slovak state could be rescued from the hijackers,
several things would happen. First, ordinary people would have fewer reasons to cheat or offer bribes, because basic services would improve. Without the massive financial drain of systemic corruption,
teachers and medical staff could be paid more; free from its captors,
the state and its servants could once again serve the public interest,
including making sure that teachers and doctors did their (now better-paid) jobs properly. There would be more money for fixing potholes and building better roads, and more pressure on civil servants
to provide them . The garbage littering public spaces, in a figurative
sense, would be cleaned up, improving everyone's mood and challenging the belief that "things don't work" in Slovakia. In other
words - if we could fix high-level corruption, we would at the same
time be eliminating the largest cause of low-level corruption. Easier
said than done, of course. But perhaps not impossible.
***
One thing you learn from reading about successful anticorruption fights around the world is that there is no magic formula.
Successful strategies do have common elements, however: they engage the widest possible spectrum of society by giving people small,
�SLOVAKIA-2015
123
non-confrontational tasks that allow them to participate without fear
of sanction.
In Slovakia, if the objective is to retake the state from the oligarchs who captured it, the battle will have to be fought on several
fronts. First, we need to create a community of people united by other than ethnic or tribal loyalties; one that is united by shared beliefs,
such as that the Slovak state belongs to its people. Building this
community requires more than just putting people in touch with each
other, however. It requires a statotvorny akt of the kind that was
lacking before 1993 .
Then, we have to offer this community small but tangible acts of
resistance that they can perform. We have to enable them to recapture their state through a kind of guerilla warfare, which while peaceful must be fought on multiple fronts at the same time.
After Slovakia's gold medal victory in 2002 at the World Hockey Championships in Sweden, it did indeed seem, as sociologist
Sona Szomolanyi claimed, that in the ensuing celebration we were
witnessing the birth of the modem Slovak nation. People were finally
assembling on city squares for reasons other than political protest;
the winning team had a multi-ethnic roster; and team captain Miroslav Satan was even scolding politicians for betraying the interests of
the nation : "this is what we can achieve when we play as a team," he
said during a parliamentary address.
How brief and how shallow that moment of triumph now seems.
A hockey championship could never have triggered the birth of the
modem Slovak nation because the brilliant play of the hockey team
was in such stark contrast to the dysfunction of the rest of the country. Calling it a statotvorny moment was thus merely wishful thinking; in reality, states arise when a critical mass of people agrees that
they need it, want it and can run it themselves.
This year, the 25 th anniversary of the end of Communism, we are
officially too old for wishful thinking. We know now that our state
has been kidnapped and is being used by wealthy men hidden from
our sight. We lack a community of like-minded people to oppose
them, and to take their state back. Can one be created, before this
second coming of normalizacia entrenches the oligarchs in power for
a generation to come?
This is the challenge facing all third-sector (non-profit) actors
whose focus is on corruption and public activism. One thing we have
�124
SLOVAKIA-2015
learned is that people need to be better informed - it is not enough to
simply expect that they will be able to decipher politics from the occasional evening news broadcast or from their morning tabloids.
They must be shown how power is used in this country - how politics really works. They need - and incredibly, still do not have - a
history of the past twenty years that puts all the scandals and the disappointments and the betrayals in a context that will help voters
make better choices at election time.
Above all, they need to be connected to each other. Everyone
who despairs at the state of Slovakia and wants to do something
about it needs to feel part of a community of likeminded strangers.
Only then will they be able to overcome the apathy that they feel as
individuals.
Shortly after the 2012 elections I founded a civic association,
Pod povrchom, that aims to do these things - educate people about
politics and public affairs, and provide an Internet platform for them
to associate with each other. Through regular meetings with secondary school and university students (sixty-two schools so far), we are
slowly building up a database of contacts to people who are concerned about corruption and want to do something about it (over
2,000 to date). We have also set up a Center for Independent Journalism that publishes investigative articles and provides training and
mentoring for young would-be journalists.
But as the months go by, it has become clear to me that the people leading the fight against corruption - NGOs, journalists, political
activists - must themselves unite if we can hope to create a strong
and lasting community of concerned Slovaks. Because on the other
side of the barriers, the process of state capture is accelerating, not
only in politics but everywhere that society remains open and independent.
In a development that would have been inconceivable at the
height of the Gorilla demonstrations, the giant holding company Penta and its managing partner Jaroslav Hascak have rolled out an aggressive strategy to buy up over half a dozen Slovak TV, online and
print media assets. In early September of 2014 he announced the
capture of the tabloid publisher 7 Plus (which gives him the mostread weekly Plus 7 dni and the second-most read daily Plus 1 den),
as well as of the respected business weekly Trend. Later in the month
Hascak admitted he had bid for a controlling share in Petit Press,
�SLOV AKIA-2015
125
publisher of over thirty titles including the iconic and feisty Sme
broadsheet, which remains a symbol of journalistic independence. If
his bid is accepted - and at the time of writing this essay there was
nothing standing in his way - the Sme newsroom and management
will be gutted, which was perhaps Hascak:' s true purpose in buying
the paper in the first place. After all, it was Petit Press that published
my book on the Gorilla scandal - and Petit Press that Penta sued,
unsuccessfully, to keep the book off the shelves.
��
112
SLOVAKIA-2015
CORRUPTION IN SLOVAKIA:
TIME TO RECLAIM THE STATE 1
Tom Nicholson
On the way home one March night, I lost a hubcap. I heard it pop
off the front right wheel of my car as I smashed into a massive pothole on the main road from Bratislava to Svaty Jur. The impact was
so severe that it bent the wheel rim and punctured the tire. If my son
had been present he might have learned a few new English cusswords to go with his rich Slovak collection.
I didn't own a car when I first came to Slovakia in 1992, so I
can't say whether there are more potholes now than then. But it
seems to me there are altogether too many potholes here for a European Union member country (the closest comparison I can come to
Slovak roads in the spring is Moldova, or maybe rural Cuba). And
there are definitely way too many potholes - and it takes way too
long to fill them in - for a country that has had twenty years to get its
shit together.
Sure, they have potholes in Canada (I can no longer say 'we' because I have long since transferred my allegiance to Slovak potholes). But even though the winters in the Great White North are far
more severe, and Canada has about a quintillion miles more roads,
potholes are infrequent, and drivers are alerted to them with a homey
Canadian solicitousness - a SO-meter flashing DANGER sign, say,
or a cordon of Mounties in reflecto-vests.
Not here. Even on Racianska ulica, a four-lane artery into the
heart of the capital, the worst holes after three weeks get a perfunctory monocle of paint, promising a pending repair in the indefinite future (that paint is the Slovak equivalent of the Mexican 'manana').
For me, Slovakia's potholes are another entry on the list of basic
Slovak things that don't work as they should. It's a depressingly long
list - education, health care, justice, politics (especially politics).
And it provides a starting point for understanding why corruption
continues to flourish in this country.
1
This is a revised and updated version ofmy original article "Je cas dat tomuto statu
zmysel," in Odkial' a kam ? Dvadsat' rokov samostatnosti, ed. by Martin Butora et.
al. (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2013), 281-304.
�SLOV AKIA-2015
113
***
If I had been asked to write an essay about corruption in Slovakia a few years ago, I know what I would have come up with - a
rogues' gallery of powerful figures who had abused other people's
trust over the years to enrich themselves. But last year I was swept
up in the Gori/a scandal, a political tempest that challenged my certainties and changed my life. As much as I wanted to remain detached as a journalist, I found myself speaking at public rallies and
giving interviews . Suddenly, I was expected to tell people not just
where corruption could be found , but how to defeat it as well. And I
discovered that I actually knew very little about it.
For starters, the story of corruption in Slovakia is not just one of
rich people gaming the system. Corruption takes many forms and has
many causes - such as that the country presents innumerable small
but vexing barriers to living one's life without vexation. Some of
these barriers encourage people to give small bribes (the box of chocolates for the doctor, the cash envelope for the building permit officer). Others - a plague of potholes, for example - just let everyone
know that public servants could care less about serving the public
interest, creating an atmosphere that indirectly encourages bribery.
But none of these stories, it seems to me, answer the key question: why corruption flourishes after twenty years of independence
and a decade of EU membership, six general elections and countless
devastating political scandals. We now know, thanks to Gori/a, exactly what high- level corruption looks like. We see oligarchs enriching themselves, we see politicians and civil servants abusing their
offices and neglecting their duties to us. And still it continues, and
still the potholes proliferate. So why don't Slovaks do something
about it?
***
Over the past year, I've often been told how ironic it is that a
foreigner had to bring the Gori/a scandal to light, as if a Slovak journalist would have done differently. This does a great disservice to the
probity of my colleagues, and greatly exaggerates my own. If a foreigner can be of service here, it is perhaps to see things in a context
that is not available to Slovaks, not having grown up elsewhere.
�114
SLOV AKIA-2015
Now, I' ve read enough foreign descriptions of Slovak life to know
how flawed this 'vision' can be, especially when delivered to foreign
audiences that have no opportunity to verify its authenticity (the film
Hostel comes to mind). But I'm hoping I can be an exception.
As a transplanted Canadian who has spent twenty years in this
country, I am still struck by the loyalty that people feel to their tribes
- to family, to friends, to old classmates, to other people who come
from their hometowns. These tribal bonds are what Slovaks living
abroad miss most about their country . In modem Slovakia, there are
still no higher loyalties.
This is striking for a Canadian because our country does not run
on informal networks. Sure, we have tribal loyalties, but they often
divide us - there isn't much that Greek Canadians have in common
with Chinese Canadians, say, or with Jamaican Canadians, except
the fact that we all live in Canada. Perhaps that's why Canada has
such a strong political identity: without ethnic, cultural or other natural bonds, we need it to hold us together. After all, we have few
common traditions or national dishes in the sense that Slovaks have
bryndzove halusky. But I'm pretty sure most Canadians could tell
you what values the country stands for - tolerance, social solidarity,
respect for human rights, and caring more about the rest of the world
than Americans, for starters. How many Slovaks could do the same?
While I'm sure people could name traits that Slovaks have as an ethnic nation - you can't live here for twenty years without hearing a
thing or two about zavist or pohostinnost', for example - what about
the ideals and principles their country is founded on?
Slovaks can be forgiven for not having a clear idea of what values the modem Slovak state stands for. The average person, after all,
was not consulted before the division of Czechoslovakia in 1993,
despite repeated promises of a referendum, and probably regarded
the project of an independent Slovakia as something foisted on him
from above. And because he had no hand in creating the state - and
in many cases probably hadn't even wanted it, or at least hadn ' t
wanted it yet - it's understandable that the average person might
have felt that the modem Slovak state was someone else's responsibility. Common ideals, like the Constitution, would be scripted by
old, grey men behind closed doors, while Slovakia's tribes would go
about their business as they always had.
�SLOV AKIA-2015
115
You could say that 'the state', on Slovak territory, had always
been someone else's responsibility. Magyars, Austrians, Czechs,
Germans, Russians, then Czechs again . After centuries of having
someone else to fill in the potholes and make sure people paid their
taxes, it's understandable that Slovaks were slow to respond to the
call to administer their own affairs. But everything might have
worked out differently if the Slovak Republic had come into being
from a statotvorny akt, by which I mean an experience that unites a
people as a political nation rather than just an ethnic one. Americans
had their War of Independence, the Brits had Napoleon, while early
Canadians ran a cruel gauntlet of Constitutional Conferences (a punishment that continues to be imposed on Canadian history students as
an object lesson in the burning sincerity of all boredom). Slovaks,
meanwhile, had no birthing experience that could rival the moral,
economic and civilizational value of Czechoslovakia. They had nothing to comfort or inspire them when Czechoslovakia was dismantled,
beyond the sour nationalism of pubs and football matches.
The way Slovakia came into the world, as a child welcomed only
by nationalists and political opportunists, left a dangerous vacuum at
the center of the Slovak body politic. People naturally shrank from
any new duties towards a state they hadn't wanted or had a hand in
creating. In doing so, they abandoned public affairs to anyone claiming to want the responsibility. And there was no shortage of applicants.
Twenty years later, this vacuum is still full of dark matter, dead
stars and other space junk - stuff that absorbs light rather than produces it. It is responsible for many of the ills that afflict Slovakia,
among them the indifference that ordinary people feel towards their
state and towards the millions of strangers who inhabit it. If I had to
give this ailment a name, I would call it the "mam v pici" disease.
***
Let me describe some of the symptoms of this disease. Slovaks
rarely sing their national anthem at sporting events, even at important
internationals in front of tens of thousands of people (compare that to
British football fans or Canadian hockey fans) . People complain incessantly about corruption in politics, and according to a recent survey trust their leaders less than almost any country on earth - but few
�116
SLOVAKIA-2015
are willing to even get off the couch to attend a protest rally. More
than half of each secondary school graduating class intends to emigrate, rather than stay home and help fix what ails the country.
Or, if you prefer a local perspective: truck drivers in my village
regularly make their deliveries while blocking traffic in both directions, reasoning that they have work to do so everyone else can just
wait. People shovel snow from in front of their houses into the street,
apparently indifferent to the inconvenience of other drivers. Private
homes are beautifully renovated and tenderly cared for, while discarded bottles and other garbage litter the edges of public streets and
walkways. In the summer, even though signs claim the forest above
the village is a protected area and off-limits to vehicles, motorcycles
and A TVs constantly disturb the peace of man and beast. And the
potholes would be a disgrace anywhere.
I know that a great many objections can be raised to each example I have mentioned . Maybe Slovaks don't know the words to their
national anthem; maybe it's just not a very sing-able song. And Slovakia hardly has a monopoly on apathy, selfishness and bad roads .
But after twenty years in this country, I'm convinced there is something else going on here.
For a country to work, it has to inspire its citizens with an idea
that is bigger than themselves individually. It has to give them areason to look beyond their tribes and take an interest in public affairs.
It has to give people a sense of political community, of mutual responsibility to each other as citizens. Without this sense of community, people will rarely have the confidence to resist social diseases
like corruption, or to stand up for unwritten standards of public behavior.
I got a taste of this in 1984 as a tipsy 17-year-old returning by
train from a baseball game in Toronto. They had been giving away
free bars of soap that day, and my friend and I thought it would be
fun to mark up the backs of the seats in front of us. As I scrawled
away, an older man behind me leaned over and told me to stop .
Cowed, but still insolent, I asked why I should. "Because he told you
to," said another man, and I had the feeling the entire train carriage
was sharing in and approving my humiliation. As much as the public
embarrassment stung at the time, the experience left a deeper impression - that in Canada, you could stand up to bullies and miscreants,
and other people would have your back.
�SLOVAKIA-2015
117
A decade later, in late 1992, I was sitting in the U Kuba pub in
Senec with my best friend Sean Ellacott. We were both in our 20s,
university graduates taking a year off to teach English in Czechoslovakia. At a nearby table were two dark-skinned men whom we
wouldn't have noticed if not for the fact that they were slowly getting beaten up. Twice I had seen a young man from a party of youths
come over and punch one of the dark-skinned men in the face - hard,
repeatedly, drawing blood. The victim made no attempt to protect
himself, and no one else seemed to pay the slightest attention. As the
young puncher approached for a third round, I had had enough and
grabbed him from behind by the shoulders. He wasn't big, and
seemed more surprised than belligerent, so we wrestled to a standoff
and he went back to his chair and I to mine.
At no point did anyone else in the bar intervene in our little drama or give any sign they supported my actions. On the contrary, as
the waiter brought me a brandy ordered by the battered victim, an
older patron drew up a chair at our table. The men who had been attacked were Gypsies, he said, and in Slovakia one didn't help them.
We should be wary of the young attacker and his friends .
It didn't occur to me at the time, but as the years passed, I came
to see that incident as illustrative of an important difference between
Canadian and Slovak society. At home, if something similar had
happened, I would have been risking much less because most patrons
of the bar would have approved of what I did, and would presumably
have come to my aid if the young man had put up more resistance.
But in Slovakia, you are on your own in such situations. As much as
other people may sympathize with you, and may be sickened by
what is happening, they will rarely do anything to help a stranger in
trouble (especially if the stranger is a Gypsy). It's not a matter of
cowardice or indifference to another's fate - it's that people aren't
sure of what they can expect from one another when the chips are
down. They lack the confidence you derive from a shared community and shared values, such as that one does not suffer a weaker person to be hurt. In Slovakia, no such glue binds strangers together. No
social contract exists.
***
�118
SLOV AKIA-2015
Again, it's hopelessly anecdotal, but I came to believe that I
learned something fundamental about Slovaks in U Kuba that day in
1992. Confronted with an obnoxious teenager on a train, people will
tend to look out the window rather than intervene, even if they are no
fonder of public vandalism or casual violence than Canadians. The
problem is that such incidents leave you with a horrible feeling inside if you don 't do anything. Whether you like it or not, you are involved, and looking out the window causes your soul to ache in a
way that no punch on the nose can.
Is it the same with corruption? Are we all like passengers on a
train, every day witnessing gross misconduct by strangers and yet
somehow failing to protest? Hating the offenders, but hating ourselves as well for looking out the window?
For me, this is as good an explanation as any . Think back for a
minute on the modem history of corruption in Slovakia: First came
authoritarian PM Vladimir Meciar, who was captain of the ship when
Czechoslovakia went down. Deciding not to risk a referendum on
Slovak independence, Meciar soon revealed his hand. Everything
revolved around privatization, around the use of public assets to create a "domestic capital group" that was politically loyal to the prime
minister and his HZDS party . As we were later told by Stefan Gavomik, head of the FNM privatization agency, every Wednesday the
Meciar government met privately to decide who would be allowed to
buy what companies (Monday's regular cabinet meetings were devoted to public matters). Most sales were announced only after they
had happened, leaving the media scrambling to find out who really
stood behind "white horse" purchasers. In many instances, the purchase price was only a fraction of the real worth of the shares (onesixth, in the case of gas storage company Nafta Gbely, for instance).
And even then, agreed purchase prices were often spread over many
years, or could be paid in the form of unverifiable ' investments' into
the privatized company. Information on privatization was closely
guarded, none more so than by the secret service, whose director,
Ivan Lexa, had been Meciar's first choice as privatization minister
before President Michal Kovac refused to appoint him to the post.
Understandably, privatization was a major campaign issue in the
1998 elections, which proved so crucial to Slovakia's future direction as a country. Mikulas Dzurinda, who defeated Meciar, promised
that his government would go after malefactors, and ministers in the
�SLOV AKIA-2015
119
first Dzurinda government began compiling 'black books' of misdeeds by their predecessors. And then - silence. The new leadership
of the FNM, we were told, had realized there was little point in
launching some 700 legal challenges to past privatization deals victory would take many years and countless man-hours, it was far
from certain that the courts would side with the government, while
the fall-out in terms of social unrest and damage to the principle of
legal certainty might be severe. And so the first Dzurinda government reached 'an accommodation' with Meciar's privatizers, allowing almost all of them to keep their assets.
Knowledge of human nature tells us that this detente must have
been built on payoffs by privatizers to the new stewards of state
property. Regardless, the Dzurinda administration soon had privatization scandals of its own, including some involving ' financial
groups' that had arisen at the end of the 1990s. While these groups
featured a few names from the past - the son of a Meciar-era state
bank chief (Patrik Tkcic), for example, or the last boss of the Communist-era secret police (Aloiz Lorenz) - on the whole they were far
more sophisticated than Meciar's crude privatizers, and invested far
more in public relations. When these groups bought state assets for
suspiciously little money, stripped them down and achieved enormous profits - Penta group boss Jaroslav Hascak once said he
wouldn't look at a deal that did not yield at least a 30 percent annual
return on investment - they were actually bringing efficiency to the
business environment, we were told. Their partnership with the first
and second Dzurinda administrations was so close that, according to
leaked cables from the US embassy in Bratislava, they helped draft
legislation and bribed MPs to pass it (which is the very definition of
'state capture '). And when the second Dzurinda government fell in
2005, leaving undone some key privatization deals, Penta financed
the purchase of a new parliamentary majority from independent
MPs.
Meanwhile, a professed social democrat named Robert Fico was
waiting in the wings . Fico's Smer party was reportedly sponsored by
people who had become rich under Meciar, and who had changed
horses following his defeat in 1998 after realizing that the authoritarian former PM would never again lead a government. Fico finally
came to power in 2006 by criticizing insensitive economic reforms
and corruption under Dzurinda. But again, no further action was tak-
�120
SLOV AKIA-2015
en against the alleged malefactors, while Fico himself battled charges of massive corruption in public procurement to the benefit of his
alleged sponsors. And so it went, through another change in government in 2010, and back to Fico two years later.
At the end of December in 2011 , on one of the darkest days of
the year, a file was uploaded to the Internet containing transcripts of
conversations that took place in a Bratislava apartment in 2006 .
Dubbed "the Gorilla file," the document was the result of a secret
service surveillance operation that had monitored meetings between
top government officials and politicians on the one hand, and Hascak
of Penta on the other. The transcripts suggested that financial groups
were not only benefiting from privatization decisions but in some
cases were also helping to make them; that they had managed to
have their own employees named to key state posts; and that they
used a sophisticated system of bribery and kickbacks to get what
they wanted from public servants. The Gorilla file also revealed that
incumbent officials had refused to aid police investigations of their
predecessors, a practice in keeping with what Interior Minister Daniel Lipsie described as an "unspoken agreement" among the political
elite that no one important would ever go to jail in Slovakia.
When I first read the Gorilla file over five years ago, I was struck
not just by the extent of the corruption, but also by how well organized it was, how brisk and businesslike. Now I am more amazed at
the lack of public response - for all the anger and disgust people felt
on reading the Gorilla file , for all the suspicions confirmed and then
exceeded, the largest public demonstration at the height of the Gorilla scandal in February 2012 still only drew a few thousand people to
SNP Square in Bratislava. What was everyone else doing?
***
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do
nothing, the saying goes, and the modem history of Slovakia is as
good a case as any . So what will it take to get people to act? I am
confident the problem is not one of indifference. A book I wrote in
2012 on the Gorilla case sold over 50,000 copies, a record for nonfiction in this country, which is a pretty reliable sign that people
wanted to know about it. And having met with thousands of people
around Slovakia over the past two years, I know that they are still
�SLOVAKIA-2015
121
angry and upset. But for some reason all that emotion remains bottled up .
One popular and very persuasive explanation goes as follows:
the reason that Slovaks don't respond more vigorously to corruption
is that most people, if they had the opportunity, would behave exactly the same as the main actors in the Gorilla file. Lacking that opportunity, most people are just as likely to be corrupt in their daily lives.
Corruption may be technically illegal in Slovakia, but it is far from
clear that it violates the informal rules that govern how Slovak society actually works.
On the surface this argument makes sense, but upon examination
it has important flaws . I have taught at a dozen Slovak postsecondary schools over the past twenty years (currently I teach at
five). I have always had problems with cheating and plagiarism in
my courses, despite the fact that in the first lesson I always warn my
students against it (even this year, I had to fail seven out of twentyeight students in an investigative journalism course because they
plagiarized their term papers). So yes, I would say students here
cheat more than they do in Canada. In trying to get Slovak students
to stop cheating, however, I have never had the support of a single
school administratr beyond the obligatory verbal commitments.
Once, in 2009, a student submitted as his term paper a 500-word article that had been published in the SME newspaper that I worked for
at the time. He hadn't bothered to do more than change the font, perhaps believing that as the brother of a Slovak film producer he didn't
need to break a sweat. A couple of queries established that he had
done the same to other course instructors. But even a joint submission before the disciplinary commission failed to produce more than
a promise to supervise the student's future work.
A few years ago I had a chance to ask a student and a university
professor about plagiarism over a few beers. The student admitted
that she and many of her peers did it, but asked why they should behave differently given that their teachers never read their papers.
Why make the effort, if no one cares one way or another? For his
part, the professor admitted that full-time teaching duties at three
different universities - a load he had to carry in order to support his
family - left him with no time to do more than make sure students
met the formal requirements to hand in an essay and attend class. No
�122
SLOV AKIA-2015
time, that is, to actually read anything beyond exam papers and dissertation theses.
I'm convinced that while it may appear that ordinary Slovaks are
as corrupt as their political and economic leaders, their corruption
has different roots. It springs from the fact that basic things don ' t
work in this country, which turns 'low-level' corruption into a coping mechanism. Rather than waste three hours at the doctor's office,
or risk an indifferent diagnosis or treatment, people go through informal, tribal channels to get what they need . Rather than spend several hours at a police station to get a car registered, they may give a
cop friend twenty euros to speed things up. Rather than spend two
weeks on a school assignment that will end up in the waste bin, unread, they copy and paste from Wikipedia .
'High-level' corruption, on the other hand, is not a coping mechanism. It is a strategy to capture the state, to hijack democratic
mechanisms for personal gain. It is not the result of a malfunctioning
public sector; it is the direct cause of it.
Clearly, if the Slovak state could be rescued from the hijackers,
several things would happen. First, ordinary people would have fewer reasons to cheat or offer bribes, because basic services would improve. Without the massive financial drain of systemic corruption,
teachers and medical staff could be paid more; free from its captors,
the state and its servants could once again serve the public interest,
including making sure that teachers and doctors did their (now better-paid) jobs properly. There would be more money for fixing potholes and building better roads, and more pressure on civil servants
to provide them . The garbage littering public spaces, in a figurative
sense, would be cleaned up, improving everyone's mood and challenging the belief that "things don't work" in Slovakia. In other
words - if we could fix high-level corruption, we would at the same
time be eliminating the largest cause of low-level corruption. Easier
said than done, of course. But perhaps not impossible.
***
One thing you learn from reading about successful anticorruption fights around the world is that there is no magic formula.
Successful strategies do have common elements, however: they engage the widest possible spectrum of society by giving people small,
�SLOVAKIA-2015
123
non-confrontational tasks that allow them to participate without fear
of sanction.
In Slovakia, if the objective is to retake the state from the oligarchs who captured it, the battle will have to be fought on several
fronts. First, we need to create a community of people united by other than ethnic or tribal loyalties; one that is united by shared beliefs,
such as that the Slovak state belongs to its people. Building this
community requires more than just putting people in touch with each
other, however. It requires a statotvorny akt of the kind that was
lacking before 1993 .
Then, we have to offer this community small but tangible acts of
resistance that they can perform. We have to enable them to recapture their state through a kind of guerilla warfare, which while peaceful must be fought on multiple fronts at the same time.
After Slovakia's gold medal victory in 2002 at the World Hockey Championships in Sweden, it did indeed seem, as sociologist
Sona Szomolanyi claimed, that in the ensuing celebration we were
witnessing the birth of the modem Slovak nation. People were finally
assembling on city squares for reasons other than political protest;
the winning team had a multi-ethnic roster; and team captain Miroslav Satan was even scolding politicians for betraying the interests of
the nation : "this is what we can achieve when we play as a team," he
said during a parliamentary address.
How brief and how shallow that moment of triumph now seems.
A hockey championship could never have triggered the birth of the
modem Slovak nation because the brilliant play of the hockey team
was in such stark contrast to the dysfunction of the rest of the country. Calling it a statotvorny moment was thus merely wishful thinking; in reality, states arise when a critical mass of people agrees that
they need it, want it and can run it themselves.
This year, the 25 th anniversary of the end of Communism, we are
officially too old for wishful thinking. We know now that our state
has been kidnapped and is being used by wealthy men hidden from
our sight. We lack a community of like-minded people to oppose
them, and to take their state back. Can one be created, before this
second coming of normalizacia entrenches the oligarchs in power for
a generation to come?
This is the challenge facing all third-sector (non-profit) actors
whose focus is on corruption and public activism. One thing we have
�124
SLOVAKIA-2015
learned is that people need to be better informed - it is not enough to
simply expect that they will be able to decipher politics from the occasional evening news broadcast or from their morning tabloids.
They must be shown how power is used in this country - how politics really works. They need - and incredibly, still do not have - a
history of the past twenty years that puts all the scandals and the disappointments and the betrayals in a context that will help voters
make better choices at election time.
Above all, they need to be connected to each other. Everyone
who despairs at the state of Slovakia and wants to do something
about it needs to feel part of a community of likeminded strangers.
Only then will they be able to overcome the apathy that they feel as
individuals.
Shortly after the 2012 elections I founded a civic association,
Pod povrchom, that aims to do these things - educate people about
politics and public affairs, and provide an Internet platform for them
to associate with each other. Through regular meetings with secondary school and university students (sixty-two schools so far), we are
slowly building up a database of contacts to people who are concerned about corruption and want to do something about it (over
2,000 to date). We have also set up a Center for Independent Journalism that publishes investigative articles and provides training and
mentoring for young would-be journalists.
But as the months go by, it has become clear to me that the people leading the fight against corruption - NGOs, journalists, political
activists - must themselves unite if we can hope to create a strong
and lasting community of concerned Slovaks. Because on the other
side of the barriers, the process of state capture is accelerating, not
only in politics but everywhere that society remains open and independent.
In a development that would have been inconceivable at the
height of the Gorilla demonstrations, the giant holding company Penta and its managing partner Jaroslav Hascak have rolled out an aggressive strategy to buy up over half a dozen Slovak TV, online and
print media assets. In early September of 2014 he announced the
capture of the tabloid publisher 7 Plus (which gives him the mostread weekly Plus 7 dni and the second-most read daily Plus 1 den),
as well as of the respected business weekly Trend. Later in the month
Hascak admitted he had bid for a controlling share in Petit Press,
�SLOV AKIA-2015
125
publisher of over thirty titles including the iconic and feisty Sme
broadsheet, which remains a symbol of journalistic independence. If
his bid is accepted - and at the time of writing this essay there was
nothing standing in his way - the Sme newsroom and management
will be gutted, which was perhaps Hascak:' s true purpose in buying
the paper in the first place. After all, it was Petit Press that published
my book on the Gorilla scandal - and Petit Press that Penta sued,
unsuccessfully, to keep the book off the shelves.
��
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
2015, Vol. 42
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 42 (No. 78-79), 2015.
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
2015
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
112
SLOVAKIA-2015
CORRUPTION IN SLOVAKIA:
TIME TO RECLAIM THE STATE 1
Tom Nicholson
On the way home one March night, I lost a hubcap. I heard it pop
off the front right wheel of my car as I smashed into a massive pothole on the main road from Bratislava to Svaty Jur. The impact was
so severe that it bent the wheel rim and punctured the tire. If my son
had been present he might have learned a few new English cusswords to go with his rich Slovak collection.
I didn't own a car when I first came to Slovakia in 1992, so I
can't say whether there are more potholes now than then. But it
seems to me there are altogether too many potholes here for a European Union member country (the closest comparison I can come to
Slovak roads in the spring is Moldova, or maybe rural Cuba). And
there are definitely way too many potholes - and it takes way too
long to fill them in - for a country that has had twenty years to get its
shit together.
Sure, they have potholes in Canada (I can no longer say 'we' because I have long since transferred my allegiance to Slovak potholes). But even though the winters in the Great White North are far
more severe, and Canada has about a quintillion miles more roads,
potholes are infrequent, and drivers are alerted to them with a homey
Canadian solicitousness - a SO-meter flashing DANGER sign, say,
or a cordon of Mounties in reflecto-vests.
Not here. Even on Racianska ulica, a four-lane artery into the
heart of the capital, the worst holes after three weeks get a perfunctory monocle of paint, promising a pending repair in the indefinite future (that paint is the Slovak equivalent of the Mexican 'manana').
For me, Slovakia's potholes are another entry on the list of basic
Slovak things that don't work as they should. It's a depressingly long
list - education, health care, justice, politics (especially politics).
And it provides a starting point for understanding why corruption
continues to flourish in this country.
1
This is a revised and updated version ofmy original article "Je cas dat tomuto statu
zmysel," in Odkial' a kam ? Dvadsat' rokov samostatnosti, ed. by Martin Butora et.
al. (Bratislava: Kalligram, 2013), 281-304.
SLOV AKIA-2015
113
***
If I had been asked to write an essay about corruption in Slovakia a few years ago, I know what I would have come up with - a
rogues' gallery of powerful figures who had abused other people's
trust over the years to enrich themselves. But last year I was swept
up in the Gori/a scandal, a political tempest that challenged my certainties and changed my life. As much as I wanted to remain detached as a journalist, I found myself speaking at public rallies and
giving interviews . Suddenly, I was expected to tell people not just
where corruption could be found , but how to defeat it as well. And I
discovered that I actually knew very little about it.
For starters, the story of corruption in Slovakia is not just one of
rich people gaming the system. Corruption takes many forms and has
many causes - such as that the country presents innumerable small
but vexing barriers to living one's life without vexation. Some of
these barriers encourage people to give small bribes (the box of chocolates for the doctor, the cash envelope for the building permit officer). Others - a plague of potholes, for example - just let everyone
know that public servants could care less about serving the public
interest, creating an atmosphere that indirectly encourages bribery.
But none of these stories, it seems to me, answer the key question: why corruption flourishes after twenty years of independence
and a decade of EU membership, six general elections and countless
devastating political scandals. We now know, thanks to Gori/a, exactly what high- level corruption looks like. We see oligarchs enriching themselves, we see politicians and civil servants abusing their
offices and neglecting their duties to us. And still it continues, and
still the potholes proliferate. So why don't Slovaks do something
about it?
***
Over the past year, I've often been told how ironic it is that a
foreigner had to bring the Gori/a scandal to light, as if a Slovak journalist would have done differently. This does a great disservice to the
probity of my colleagues, and greatly exaggerates my own. If a foreigner can be of service here, it is perhaps to see things in a context
that is not available to Slovaks, not having grown up elsewhere.
114
SLOV AKIA-2015
Now, I' ve read enough foreign descriptions of Slovak life to know
how flawed this 'vision' can be, especially when delivered to foreign
audiences that have no opportunity to verify its authenticity (the film
Hostel comes to mind). But I'm hoping I can be an exception.
As a transplanted Canadian who has spent twenty years in this
country, I am still struck by the loyalty that people feel to their tribes
- to family, to friends, to old classmates, to other people who come
from their hometowns. These tribal bonds are what Slovaks living
abroad miss most about their country . In modem Slovakia, there are
still no higher loyalties.
This is striking for a Canadian because our country does not run
on informal networks. Sure, we have tribal loyalties, but they often
divide us - there isn't much that Greek Canadians have in common
with Chinese Canadians, say, or with Jamaican Canadians, except
the fact that we all live in Canada. Perhaps that's why Canada has
such a strong political identity: without ethnic, cultural or other natural bonds, we need it to hold us together. After all, we have few
common traditions or national dishes in the sense that Slovaks have
bryndzove halusky. But I'm pretty sure most Canadians could tell
you what values the country stands for - tolerance, social solidarity,
respect for human rights, and caring more about the rest of the world
than Americans, for starters. How many Slovaks could do the same?
While I'm sure people could name traits that Slovaks have as an ethnic nation - you can't live here for twenty years without hearing a
thing or two about zavist or pohostinnost', for example - what about
the ideals and principles their country is founded on?
Slovaks can be forgiven for not having a clear idea of what values the modem Slovak state stands for. The average person, after all,
was not consulted before the division of Czechoslovakia in 1993,
despite repeated promises of a referendum, and probably regarded
the project of an independent Slovakia as something foisted on him
from above. And because he had no hand in creating the state - and
in many cases probably hadn't even wanted it, or at least hadn ' t
wanted it yet - it's understandable that the average person might
have felt that the modem Slovak state was someone else's responsibility. Common ideals, like the Constitution, would be scripted by
old, grey men behind closed doors, while Slovakia's tribes would go
about their business as they always had.
SLOV AKIA-2015
115
You could say that 'the state', on Slovak territory, had always
been someone else's responsibility. Magyars, Austrians, Czechs,
Germans, Russians, then Czechs again . After centuries of having
someone else to fill in the potholes and make sure people paid their
taxes, it's understandable that Slovaks were slow to respond to the
call to administer their own affairs. But everything might have
worked out differently if the Slovak Republic had come into being
from a statotvorny akt, by which I mean an experience that unites a
people as a political nation rather than just an ethnic one. Americans
had their War of Independence, the Brits had Napoleon, while early
Canadians ran a cruel gauntlet of Constitutional Conferences (a punishment that continues to be imposed on Canadian history students as
an object lesson in the burning sincerity of all boredom). Slovaks,
meanwhile, had no birthing experience that could rival the moral,
economic and civilizational value of Czechoslovakia. They had nothing to comfort or inspire them when Czechoslovakia was dismantled,
beyond the sour nationalism of pubs and football matches.
The way Slovakia came into the world, as a child welcomed only
by nationalists and political opportunists, left a dangerous vacuum at
the center of the Slovak body politic. People naturally shrank from
any new duties towards a state they hadn't wanted or had a hand in
creating. In doing so, they abandoned public affairs to anyone claiming to want the responsibility. And there was no shortage of applicants.
Twenty years later, this vacuum is still full of dark matter, dead
stars and other space junk - stuff that absorbs light rather than produces it. It is responsible for many of the ills that afflict Slovakia,
among them the indifference that ordinary people feel towards their
state and towards the millions of strangers who inhabit it. If I had to
give this ailment a name, I would call it the "mam v pici" disease.
***
Let me describe some of the symptoms of this disease. Slovaks
rarely sing their national anthem at sporting events, even at important
internationals in front of tens of thousands of people (compare that to
British football fans or Canadian hockey fans) . People complain incessantly about corruption in politics, and according to a recent survey trust their leaders less than almost any country on earth - but few
116
SLOVAKIA-2015
are willing to even get off the couch to attend a protest rally. More
than half of each secondary school graduating class intends to emigrate, rather than stay home and help fix what ails the country.
Or, if you prefer a local perspective: truck drivers in my village
regularly make their deliveries while blocking traffic in both directions, reasoning that they have work to do so everyone else can just
wait. People shovel snow from in front of their houses into the street,
apparently indifferent to the inconvenience of other drivers. Private
homes are beautifully renovated and tenderly cared for, while discarded bottles and other garbage litter the edges of public streets and
walkways. In the summer, even though signs claim the forest above
the village is a protected area and off-limits to vehicles, motorcycles
and A TVs constantly disturb the peace of man and beast. And the
potholes would be a disgrace anywhere.
I know that a great many objections can be raised to each example I have mentioned . Maybe Slovaks don't know the words to their
national anthem; maybe it's just not a very sing-able song. And Slovakia hardly has a monopoly on apathy, selfishness and bad roads .
But after twenty years in this country, I'm convinced there is something else going on here.
For a country to work, it has to inspire its citizens with an idea
that is bigger than themselves individually. It has to give them areason to look beyond their tribes and take an interest in public affairs.
It has to give people a sense of political community, of mutual responsibility to each other as citizens. Without this sense of community, people will rarely have the confidence to resist social diseases
like corruption, or to stand up for unwritten standards of public behavior.
I got a taste of this in 1984 as a tipsy 17-year-old returning by
train from a baseball game in Toronto. They had been giving away
free bars of soap that day, and my friend and I thought it would be
fun to mark up the backs of the seats in front of us. As I scrawled
away, an older man behind me leaned over and told me to stop .
Cowed, but still insolent, I asked why I should. "Because he told you
to," said another man, and I had the feeling the entire train carriage
was sharing in and approving my humiliation. As much as the public
embarrassment stung at the time, the experience left a deeper impression - that in Canada, you could stand up to bullies and miscreants,
and other people would have your back.
SLOVAKIA-2015
117
A decade later, in late 1992, I was sitting in the U Kuba pub in
Senec with my best friend Sean Ellacott. We were both in our 20s,
university graduates taking a year off to teach English in Czechoslovakia. At a nearby table were two dark-skinned men whom we
wouldn't have noticed if not for the fact that they were slowly getting beaten up. Twice I had seen a young man from a party of youths
come over and punch one of the dark-skinned men in the face - hard,
repeatedly, drawing blood. The victim made no attempt to protect
himself, and no one else seemed to pay the slightest attention. As the
young puncher approached for a third round, I had had enough and
grabbed him from behind by the shoulders. He wasn't big, and
seemed more surprised than belligerent, so we wrestled to a standoff
and he went back to his chair and I to mine.
At no point did anyone else in the bar intervene in our little drama or give any sign they supported my actions. On the contrary, as
the waiter brought me a brandy ordered by the battered victim, an
older patron drew up a chair at our table. The men who had been attacked were Gypsies, he said, and in Slovakia one didn't help them.
We should be wary of the young attacker and his friends .
It didn't occur to me at the time, but as the years passed, I came
to see that incident as illustrative of an important difference between
Canadian and Slovak society. At home, if something similar had
happened, I would have been risking much less because most patrons
of the bar would have approved of what I did, and would presumably
have come to my aid if the young man had put up more resistance.
But in Slovakia, you are on your own in such situations. As much as
other people may sympathize with you, and may be sickened by
what is happening, they will rarely do anything to help a stranger in
trouble (especially if the stranger is a Gypsy). It's not a matter of
cowardice or indifference to another's fate - it's that people aren't
sure of what they can expect from one another when the chips are
down. They lack the confidence you derive from a shared community and shared values, such as that one does not suffer a weaker person to be hurt. In Slovakia, no such glue binds strangers together. No
social contract exists.
***
118
SLOV AKIA-2015
Again, it's hopelessly anecdotal, but I came to believe that I
learned something fundamental about Slovaks in U Kuba that day in
1992. Confronted with an obnoxious teenager on a train, people will
tend to look out the window rather than intervene, even if they are no
fonder of public vandalism or casual violence than Canadians. The
problem is that such incidents leave you with a horrible feeling inside if you don 't do anything. Whether you like it or not, you are involved, and looking out the window causes your soul to ache in a
way that no punch on the nose can.
Is it the same with corruption? Are we all like passengers on a
train, every day witnessing gross misconduct by strangers and yet
somehow failing to protest? Hating the offenders, but hating ourselves as well for looking out the window?
For me, this is as good an explanation as any . Think back for a
minute on the modem history of corruption in Slovakia: First came
authoritarian PM Vladimir Meciar, who was captain of the ship when
Czechoslovakia went down. Deciding not to risk a referendum on
Slovak independence, Meciar soon revealed his hand. Everything
revolved around privatization, around the use of public assets to create a "domestic capital group" that was politically loyal to the prime
minister and his HZDS party . As we were later told by Stefan Gavomik, head of the FNM privatization agency, every Wednesday the
Meciar government met privately to decide who would be allowed to
buy what companies (Monday's regular cabinet meetings were devoted to public matters). Most sales were announced only after they
had happened, leaving the media scrambling to find out who really
stood behind "white horse" purchasers. In many instances, the purchase price was only a fraction of the real worth of the shares (onesixth, in the case of gas storage company Nafta Gbely, for instance).
And even then, agreed purchase prices were often spread over many
years, or could be paid in the form of unverifiable ' investments' into
the privatized company. Information on privatization was closely
guarded, none more so than by the secret service, whose director,
Ivan Lexa, had been Meciar's first choice as privatization minister
before President Michal Kovac refused to appoint him to the post.
Understandably, privatization was a major campaign issue in the
1998 elections, which proved so crucial to Slovakia's future direction as a country. Mikulas Dzurinda, who defeated Meciar, promised
that his government would go after malefactors, and ministers in the
SLOV AKIA-2015
119
first Dzurinda government began compiling 'black books' of misdeeds by their predecessors. And then - silence. The new leadership
of the FNM, we were told, had realized there was little point in
launching some 700 legal challenges to past privatization deals victory would take many years and countless man-hours, it was far
from certain that the courts would side with the government, while
the fall-out in terms of social unrest and damage to the principle of
legal certainty might be severe. And so the first Dzurinda government reached 'an accommodation' with Meciar's privatizers, allowing almost all of them to keep their assets.
Knowledge of human nature tells us that this detente must have
been built on payoffs by privatizers to the new stewards of state
property. Regardless, the Dzurinda administration soon had privatization scandals of its own, including some involving ' financial
groups' that had arisen at the end of the 1990s. While these groups
featured a few names from the past - the son of a Meciar-era state
bank chief (Patrik Tkcic), for example, or the last boss of the Communist-era secret police (Aloiz Lorenz) - on the whole they were far
more sophisticated than Meciar's crude privatizers, and invested far
more in public relations. When these groups bought state assets for
suspiciously little money, stripped them down and achieved enormous profits - Penta group boss Jaroslav Hascak once said he
wouldn't look at a deal that did not yield at least a 30 percent annual
return on investment - they were actually bringing efficiency to the
business environment, we were told. Their partnership with the first
and second Dzurinda administrations was so close that, according to
leaked cables from the US embassy in Bratislava, they helped draft
legislation and bribed MPs to pass it (which is the very definition of
'state capture '). And when the second Dzurinda government fell in
2005, leaving undone some key privatization deals, Penta financed
the purchase of a new parliamentary majority from independent
MPs.
Meanwhile, a professed social democrat named Robert Fico was
waiting in the wings . Fico's Smer party was reportedly sponsored by
people who had become rich under Meciar, and who had changed
horses following his defeat in 1998 after realizing that the authoritarian former PM would never again lead a government. Fico finally
came to power in 2006 by criticizing insensitive economic reforms
and corruption under Dzurinda. But again, no further action was tak-
120
SLOV AKIA-2015
en against the alleged malefactors, while Fico himself battled charges of massive corruption in public procurement to the benefit of his
alleged sponsors. And so it went, through another change in government in 2010, and back to Fico two years later.
At the end of December in 2011 , on one of the darkest days of
the year, a file was uploaded to the Internet containing transcripts of
conversations that took place in a Bratislava apartment in 2006 .
Dubbed "the Gorilla file," the document was the result of a secret
service surveillance operation that had monitored meetings between
top government officials and politicians on the one hand, and Hascak
of Penta on the other. The transcripts suggested that financial groups
were not only benefiting from privatization decisions but in some
cases were also helping to make them; that they had managed to
have their own employees named to key state posts; and that they
used a sophisticated system of bribery and kickbacks to get what
they wanted from public servants. The Gorilla file also revealed that
incumbent officials had refused to aid police investigations of their
predecessors, a practice in keeping with what Interior Minister Daniel Lipsie described as an "unspoken agreement" among the political
elite that no one important would ever go to jail in Slovakia.
When I first read the Gorilla file over five years ago, I was struck
not just by the extent of the corruption, but also by how well organized it was, how brisk and businesslike. Now I am more amazed at
the lack of public response - for all the anger and disgust people felt
on reading the Gorilla file , for all the suspicions confirmed and then
exceeded, the largest public demonstration at the height of the Gorilla scandal in February 2012 still only drew a few thousand people to
SNP Square in Bratislava. What was everyone else doing?
***
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do
nothing, the saying goes, and the modem history of Slovakia is as
good a case as any . So what will it take to get people to act? I am
confident the problem is not one of indifference. A book I wrote in
2012 on the Gorilla case sold over 50,000 copies, a record for nonfiction in this country, which is a pretty reliable sign that people
wanted to know about it. And having met with thousands of people
around Slovakia over the past two years, I know that they are still
SLOVAKIA-2015
121
angry and upset. But for some reason all that emotion remains bottled up .
One popular and very persuasive explanation goes as follows:
the reason that Slovaks don't respond more vigorously to corruption
is that most people, if they had the opportunity, would behave exactly the same as the main actors in the Gorilla file. Lacking that opportunity, most people are just as likely to be corrupt in their daily lives.
Corruption may be technically illegal in Slovakia, but it is far from
clear that it violates the informal rules that govern how Slovak society actually works.
On the surface this argument makes sense, but upon examination
it has important flaws . I have taught at a dozen Slovak postsecondary schools over the past twenty years (currently I teach at
five). I have always had problems with cheating and plagiarism in
my courses, despite the fact that in the first lesson I always warn my
students against it (even this year, I had to fail seven out of twentyeight students in an investigative journalism course because they
plagiarized their term papers). So yes, I would say students here
cheat more than they do in Canada. In trying to get Slovak students
to stop cheating, however, I have never had the support of a single
school administratr beyond the obligatory verbal commitments.
Once, in 2009, a student submitted as his term paper a 500-word article that had been published in the SME newspaper that I worked for
at the time. He hadn't bothered to do more than change the font, perhaps believing that as the brother of a Slovak film producer he didn't
need to break a sweat. A couple of queries established that he had
done the same to other course instructors. But even a joint submission before the disciplinary commission failed to produce more than
a promise to supervise the student's future work.
A few years ago I had a chance to ask a student and a university
professor about plagiarism over a few beers. The student admitted
that she and many of her peers did it, but asked why they should behave differently given that their teachers never read their papers.
Why make the effort, if no one cares one way or another? For his
part, the professor admitted that full-time teaching duties at three
different universities - a load he had to carry in order to support his
family - left him with no time to do more than make sure students
met the formal requirements to hand in an essay and attend class. No
122
SLOV AKIA-2015
time, that is, to actually read anything beyond exam papers and dissertation theses.
I'm convinced that while it may appear that ordinary Slovaks are
as corrupt as their political and economic leaders, their corruption
has different roots. It springs from the fact that basic things don ' t
work in this country, which turns 'low-level' corruption into a coping mechanism. Rather than waste three hours at the doctor's office,
or risk an indifferent diagnosis or treatment, people go through informal, tribal channels to get what they need . Rather than spend several hours at a police station to get a car registered, they may give a
cop friend twenty euros to speed things up. Rather than spend two
weeks on a school assignment that will end up in the waste bin, unread, they copy and paste from Wikipedia .
'High-level' corruption, on the other hand, is not a coping mechanism. It is a strategy to capture the state, to hijack democratic
mechanisms for personal gain. It is not the result of a malfunctioning
public sector; it is the direct cause of it.
Clearly, if the Slovak state could be rescued from the hijackers,
several things would happen. First, ordinary people would have fewer reasons to cheat or offer bribes, because basic services would improve. Without the massive financial drain of systemic corruption,
teachers and medical staff could be paid more; free from its captors,
the state and its servants could once again serve the public interest,
including making sure that teachers and doctors did their (now better-paid) jobs properly. There would be more money for fixing potholes and building better roads, and more pressure on civil servants
to provide them . The garbage littering public spaces, in a figurative
sense, would be cleaned up, improving everyone's mood and challenging the belief that "things don't work" in Slovakia. In other
words - if we could fix high-level corruption, we would at the same
time be eliminating the largest cause of low-level corruption. Easier
said than done, of course. But perhaps not impossible.
***
One thing you learn from reading about successful anticorruption fights around the world is that there is no magic formula.
Successful strategies do have common elements, however: they engage the widest possible spectrum of society by giving people small,
SLOVAKIA-2015
123
non-confrontational tasks that allow them to participate without fear
of sanction.
In Slovakia, if the objective is to retake the state from the oligarchs who captured it, the battle will have to be fought on several
fronts. First, we need to create a community of people united by other than ethnic or tribal loyalties; one that is united by shared beliefs,
such as that the Slovak state belongs to its people. Building this
community requires more than just putting people in touch with each
other, however. It requires a statotvorny akt of the kind that was
lacking before 1993 .
Then, we have to offer this community small but tangible acts of
resistance that they can perform. We have to enable them to recapture their state through a kind of guerilla warfare, which while peaceful must be fought on multiple fronts at the same time.
After Slovakia's gold medal victory in 2002 at the World Hockey Championships in Sweden, it did indeed seem, as sociologist
Sona Szomolanyi claimed, that in the ensuing celebration we were
witnessing the birth of the modem Slovak nation. People were finally
assembling on city squares for reasons other than political protest;
the winning team had a multi-ethnic roster; and team captain Miroslav Satan was even scolding politicians for betraying the interests of
the nation : "this is what we can achieve when we play as a team," he
said during a parliamentary address.
How brief and how shallow that moment of triumph now seems.
A hockey championship could never have triggered the birth of the
modem Slovak nation because the brilliant play of the hockey team
was in such stark contrast to the dysfunction of the rest of the country. Calling it a statotvorny moment was thus merely wishful thinking; in reality, states arise when a critical mass of people agrees that
they need it, want it and can run it themselves.
This year, the 25 th anniversary of the end of Communism, we are
officially too old for wishful thinking. We know now that our state
has been kidnapped and is being used by wealthy men hidden from
our sight. We lack a community of like-minded people to oppose
them, and to take their state back. Can one be created, before this
second coming of normalizacia entrenches the oligarchs in power for
a generation to come?
This is the challenge facing all third-sector (non-profit) actors
whose focus is on corruption and public activism. One thing we have
124
SLOVAKIA-2015
learned is that people need to be better informed - it is not enough to
simply expect that they will be able to decipher politics from the occasional evening news broadcast or from their morning tabloids.
They must be shown how power is used in this country - how politics really works. They need - and incredibly, still do not have - a
history of the past twenty years that puts all the scandals and the disappointments and the betrayals in a context that will help voters
make better choices at election time.
Above all, they need to be connected to each other. Everyone
who despairs at the state of Slovakia and wants to do something
about it needs to feel part of a community of likeminded strangers.
Only then will they be able to overcome the apathy that they feel as
individuals.
Shortly after the 2012 elections I founded a civic association,
Pod povrchom, that aims to do these things - educate people about
politics and public affairs, and provide an Internet platform for them
to associate with each other. Through regular meetings with secondary school and university students (sixty-two schools so far), we are
slowly building up a database of contacts to people who are concerned about corruption and want to do something about it (over
2,000 to date). We have also set up a Center for Independent Journalism that publishes investigative articles and provides training and
mentoring for young would-be journalists.
But as the months go by, it has become clear to me that the people leading the fight against corruption - NGOs, journalists, political
activists - must themselves unite if we can hope to create a strong
and lasting community of concerned Slovaks. Because on the other
side of the barriers, the process of state capture is accelerating, not
only in politics but everywhere that society remains open and independent.
In a development that would have been inconceivable at the
height of the Gorilla demonstrations, the giant holding company Penta and its managing partner Jaroslav Hascak have rolled out an aggressive strategy to buy up over half a dozen Slovak TV, online and
print media assets. In early September of 2014 he announced the
capture of the tabloid publisher 7 Plus (which gives him the mostread weekly Plus 7 dni and the second-most read daily Plus 1 den),
as well as of the respected business weekly Trend. Later in the month
Hascak admitted he had bid for a controlling share in Petit Press,
SLOV AKIA-2015
125
publisher of over thirty titles including the iconic and feisty Sme
broadsheet, which remains a symbol of journalistic independence. If
his bid is accepted - and at the time of writing this essay there was
nothing standing in his way - the Sme newsroom and management
will be gutted, which was perhaps Hascak:' s true purpose in buying
the paper in the first place. After all, it was Petit Press that published
my book on the Gorilla scandal - and Petit Press that Penta sued,
unsuccessfully, to keep the book off the shelves.
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
Corruption in Slovakia: Time to Reclaim the State
Description
An account of the resource
Tom Nicholson
Slovakia, Vol. 42 (No. 78-79), 2015
pp. 112-125
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Nicholson, Tom, 1966-
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2015
LCNAF
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/4de0f9b3f07a1d48924005bb08767f0b.pdf
3fb70797b3aaf1a050b830587ab19be9
PDF Text
Text
46
SLOVAKIA
COULD CZECHS AND SLOVAKS AGREE?
Joseph Kirschbaum, M. A., LL. D.
In his schol,a rly work "The HaJbsburrg Monare'hy," the
emment English historian A. J. P. Taylor, writing in regard to O.rech tenden:cies to assimilate the SIJ.ovak people
and to dommate 'Slovakia, stated that the Ozechs overlooked the fact that the age of national amal gama<tion
was over and, therefore, ".the Czech could outplay the
Slovaks; .they could not satisfy them." According to Mr.
Ta:yJor:
"Masaryk revived the radical idea of 1848 and · proposed to create a sing;le 'Oreclloslovak' nation 1by will
power. Masaryk knew little of ·t he Slovaks; others knew
even less This was his strength in dealing 'with the al1ied
leaders; it ,c ould not solve the Slovak rproiblem. Masaryk
had hoped thaJt the Czechs ,amd the Slovaks would come
together as the English and the Scotch had done ; the
Slovaks tUTned out to lbe the Irish."
1
Just recenUy I quoted this statement of Mr. Taylor's
whi:le converaing with a representative of American politics. My interilocutor said nothing a/bout 1t, but asked
whether the Czechs ·t hemselves ,t hought along .those lines.
"Not all Czechs," I replied; "however, I do not think
that would or could alter the fact ,s tated by Taylor."
In reality, even though Taylor notes olbjectively the
development of the relationship between the Czechs and
the Slova,ks, the leadershi1p of the Czech exile obstinately
refuses to see this historic aotuality and dr.aw from i,t
the logical ·c onclusion. Still imbued with imperialistic
ideas, certain Ozeoh exiles continue to foHow the illusions
of the hrupless past which can never return. IDven today
they are ,n ot interested in a federated Ozecho-Slova'kia,
but are dreaJining of forcing the Slovaks once a,gain into
a political system which came into .b eing with the Constitution orf 1920, the 1preamlble of which begins wiith the words
"We the Ozechoslcwak nation." That Constitution was
�46
SLOV.AKJA
authored. iby the Czechs without Slovak participation. Of
course, the P•r ague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryik,
saw to it that the Slovaks had a voice in it: it 8JPpointed.
such genuine S1oivaks Hke Dr. Edward Benes and Alice
Masaryk (lboth Ozechs ! ) to represent the Slovak nation
on the committee on the constitution!
On the other ,hand, these Ozech emigrants forget
the "imponderalbilia," such as the faict that their names
inevita'bly evoke in the Slovaks not only bjtter reminiscences of the twenty-yeaT-o ld centralism, but aJso the phantom orf the galllQlws, concenJtration ca:mps, deportations, murders and the destruction of properties of thousands of
Slovak families after the re-establishm ent of Crecho-Slova1kia in 1945. Ail this is connected with the names of Rvpka,
Peroutka, Zen1kl, Prochazka and the political parties which
the Czech emigrants in the "Ootmcil of Free Czeichoslovalkia"
represent.
For every selt--consoious Slovaik, therefore, it i:s an insult
when these Ozech emigraints thinik that the Slovak nation
could agree wiith their political conceptions, or thaJt it
could recognruze a representati'On of people with an antliS1ovaik record such as has practically every representative of the "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia." They definitely do 111ot represent the will of the Sllovak nation,
and when the representative s of the "Council orf Free
Ozechoslova:kia" pretend ,t hat they do, they are only deceiving the international pUlblic. 'Dhe mandate given them
in the shadow of the gallows and under the threat of
Russian bayonets for services rendered to CommUiliist expansion has long lost its validity.
Does this mean that every understanding and cooperation between the Czechs and Slovaks in exile and between the Czeicih nation and the Slovak nation is excluded
a priori after liberation?
It does not.
The Slovaik nation and its representa•ti<ves in exile are
suffi•cient:Jly aware of the fact that the fig,ht against
Communism and, later, the destiny of Central Eu.Tope require the understanding and cooperation of all the Central-
�47
European nations. That is why the Slovaks are for an
understand ing in Cent:r,al Europe. At the same time, however, it is clear to the Sfovruks that a new organizatio n of
Central Europe must lbe built on realities whi'ch respect
historical rea,litJies and geopolitica l laws, and !Ilot on the
im1perialisti'c dreams of the emigrants in the "Council of
Free Ozechoslov iakia." Therefore, the Slovaks are conrvinced tha;t cooperation with the Czech emigrants of the Council cannat be considered in the interest of a better future
of Central Europe.
This has already become dear even to severaJl individuals of the Czech exile. Unfortll!Ilat ely, their numlber
is small, but they are pohtically sober and in.Jt:ella!tually
strong. Professor Dr. Bohdian Ohuddba is the foremost
among them. He has ithe oourage not only to see the problems of Europe in their right perspective , 'b ut also to
•p ersistently propa;gate a;nd defend his truth against all the
hatred of his own countryme n in exile. lt is self-eviden t
to Dr. Chudoba that "just as a hundred years ago, so even
today aH Central-IDu,r opean nations, including the Sudeten
Geimans, want to have their own properties and their
own administrat ions." Therefore, says Chudolba altogetiher correctly, Czech politics will either "concur with this
reality and so also have chance to say somet!hing alb.o ut
it, or ~lse it will continue in the captivity of imperialisti c
dreams, which can be nothing else ,b ut an ephemeral
chapter in Czech ,h istory, and then reality will develop
without the Czechs exactly as it did during MUilli.ch"
(ROZPRAV Y, Rome, Vol. IV, No. 1).
In practical ,politics, for Dr. Chuddba this means: 1.
A new Central European order must have the full assent
of Germany right from the beginning, because otherwise
it would not be real ; 2. the Czechs must resolrve the question of the Sudeten Germans as quickly as ;possible; 3.
the Czechs must come to an agreement, just as quiokly a,s
possible, with the Slovaks so that they could have at
least one friend in Central . Europe.
Undoll!bted ly no one will object to Chudoba's views,
a t least no one who is realJy interested in estaiblishin g a
�SLOVAKIA
48
reaJ, permanent peace in Central Europe, and not a new,
dangerous, provisional condition. Conversei,y, such an outlook on CentraJ-Eu:rop ean problems must be truken as an
indication that not onlry sensilble talks •w ould be possible
with the younger Czech generation, but even a sober
cooperatio1I1 couft.d be ef.fected with it on the ibasi.s of
"suum cuique." Of course, in ,p ractical politics further development will depend on how mainy Czooh ipo1iticians will
haive :bhe ooura;ge to fiace realities and also adrupt political
acts to reality. Im the last amailysis, whether Ozecih politics
will be governed by the spirit of mpka and Zen'kl, or by
the spirit of the views fomrnfated lby Chudo!ba, on this will
depend the relationship 1between the Ozechs amd ,t he Slov,a ks. Today, ail.ong with Communiism, the Czech exihle amd
espedaUy the "Council oif Free Cze~hoslovaki,a" is the
greatest enemy of the SlovaJks. The incontrover:t~ble fact
is the Ozechs are the only nation on earth fighting a:gainst
the freedom and ,independenice of Slovaks.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"WE ARE THE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION A.ND SHALL
REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THAT ALLIANCE. We are friends of the
Western Allies, we shall maintain our friendship towards them and
will do our loyal best to retain their friendship and we shall sincerely
(Dr. Bene!, Message to the
pursue A NEW SLAVONIC Policy." Provisional N'a.tional Assembly, Prague, Oct. 28. 1945) .
•
•
•
•
•
•
"There are some individuals who assert that we are in the hands
of the Soviets, yet the governments look upon us In a different way.
WE ARE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION AND WE SHALL ALWAYS REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THE SOVIETS. We are friends of
the west, and we shall remain SUCH friends. In the form of our alliance with the Soviet Union we proceed and we shall proceed IN OUR
OWN WAY." - (Dr. Bene!§ Statement to the Praesidium of the Slovak National Council, Prague, 0-ot. 9. 1945) .
"But I say quite openly that the path which Soviet Russia took
after the last war Is not the one which will be followed in Czechoslovakia. Our conditions are completely different from every point
of view, and we shall not abandon our old method of evolutionary
adaptation and our old policy of ba.Jance between the east and the
west. Our geographical position does not permit us to change thl1
(Dr. Benes , Foreign Affairs, New
century-old policy violently." York , Oct. 1944).
�
46
SLOVAKIA
COULD CZECHS AND SLOVAKS AGREE?
Joseph Kirschbaum, M. A., LL. D.
In his schol,a rly work "The HaJbsburrg Monare'hy," the
emment English historian A. J. P. Taylor, writing in regard to O.rech tenden:cies to assimilate the SIJ.ovak people
and to dommate 'Slovakia, stated that the Ozechs overlooked the fact that the age of national amal gama<tion
was over and, therefore, ".the Czech could outplay the
Slovaks; .they could not satisfy them." According to Mr.
Ta:yJor:
"Masaryk revived the radical idea of 1848 and · proposed to create a sing;le 'Oreclloslovak' nation 1by will
power. Masaryk knew little of ·t he Slovaks; others knew
even less This was his strength in dealing 'with the al1ied
leaders; it ,c ould not solve the Slovak rproiblem. Masaryk
had hoped thaJt the Czechs ,amd the Slovaks would come
together as the English and the Scotch had done ; the
Slovaks tUTned out to lbe the Irish."
1
Just recenUy I quoted this statement of Mr. Taylor's
whi:le converaing with a representative of American politics. My interilocutor said nothing a/bout 1t, but asked
whether the Czechs ·t hemselves ,t hought along .those lines.
"Not all Czechs," I replied; "however, I do not think
that would or could alter the fact ,s tated by Taylor."
In reality, even though Taylor notes olbjectively the
development of the relationship between the Czechs and
the Slova,ks, the leadershi1p of the Czech exile obstinately
refuses to see this historic aotuality and dr.aw from i,t
the logical ·c onclusion. Still imbued with imperialistic
ideas, certain Ozeoh exiles continue to foHow the illusions
of the hrupless past which can never return. IDven today
they are ,n ot interested in a federated Ozecho-Slova'kia,
but are dreaJining of forcing the Slovaks once a,gain into
a political system which came into .b eing with the Constitution orf 1920, the 1preamlble of which begins wiith the words
"We the Ozechoslcwak nation." That Constitution was
�46
SLOV.AKJA
authored. iby the Czechs without Slovak participation. Of
course, the P•r ague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryik,
saw to it that the Slovaks had a voice in it: it 8JPpointed.
such genuine S1oivaks Hke Dr. Edward Benes and Alice
Masaryk (lboth Ozechs ! ) to represent the Slovak nation
on the committee on the constitution!
On the other ,hand, these Ozech emigrants forget
the "imponderalbilia," such as the faict that their names
inevita'bly evoke in the Slovaks not only bjtter reminiscences of the twenty-yeaT-o ld centralism, but aJso the phantom orf the galllQlws, concenJtration ca:mps, deportations, murders and the destruction of properties of thousands of
Slovak families after the re-establishm ent of Crecho-Slova1kia in 1945. Ail this is connected with the names of Rvpka,
Peroutka, Zen1kl, Prochazka and the political parties which
the Czech emigrants in the "Ootmcil of Free Czeichoslovalkia"
represent.
For every selt--consoious Slovaik, therefore, it i:s an insult
when these Ozech emigraints thinik that the Slovak nation
could agree wiith their political conceptions, or thaJt it
could recognruze a representati'On of people with an antliS1ovaik record such as has practically every representative of the "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia." They definitely do 111ot represent the will of the Sllovak nation,
and when the representative s of the "Council orf Free
Ozechoslova:kia" pretend ,t hat they do, they are only deceiving the international pUlblic. 'Dhe mandate given them
in the shadow of the gallows and under the threat of
Russian bayonets for services rendered to CommUiliist expansion has long lost its validity.
Does this mean that every understanding and cooperation between the Czechs and Slovaks in exile and between the Czeicih nation and the Slovak nation is excluded
a priori after liberation?
It does not.
The Slovaik nation and its representa•ti<ves in exile are
suffi•cient:Jly aware of the fact that the fig,ht against
Communism and, later, the destiny of Central Eu.Tope require the understanding and cooperation of all the Central-
�47
European nations. That is why the Slovaks are for an
understand ing in Cent:r,al Europe. At the same time, however, it is clear to the Sfovruks that a new organizatio n of
Central Europe must lbe built on realities whi'ch respect
historical rea,litJies and geopolitica l laws, and !Ilot on the
im1perialisti'c dreams of the emigrants in the "Council of
Free Ozechoslov iakia." Therefore, the Slovaks are conrvinced tha;t cooperation with the Czech emigrants of the Council cannat be considered in the interest of a better future
of Central Europe.
This has already become dear even to severaJl individuals of the Czech exile. Unfortll!Ilat ely, their numlber
is small, but they are pohtically sober and in.Jt:ella!tually
strong. Professor Dr. Bohdian Ohuddba is the foremost
among them. He has ithe oourage not only to see the problems of Europe in their right perspective , 'b ut also to
•p ersistently propa;gate a;nd defend his truth against all the
hatred of his own countryme n in exile. lt is self-eviden t
to Dr. Chudoba that "just as a hundred years ago, so even
today aH Central-IDu,r opean nations, including the Sudeten
Geimans, want to have their own properties and their
own administrat ions." Therefore, says Chudolba altogetiher correctly, Czech politics will either "concur with this
reality and so also have chance to say somet!hing alb.o ut
it, or ~lse it will continue in the captivity of imperialisti c
dreams, which can be nothing else ,b ut an ephemeral
chapter in Czech ,h istory, and then reality will develop
without the Czechs exactly as it did during MUilli.ch"
(ROZPRAV Y, Rome, Vol. IV, No. 1).
In practical ,politics, for Dr. Chuddba this means: 1.
A new Central European order must have the full assent
of Germany right from the beginning, because otherwise
it would not be real ; 2. the Czechs must resolrve the question of the Sudeten Germans as quickly as ;possible; 3.
the Czechs must come to an agreement, just as quiokly a,s
possible, with the Slovaks so that they could have at
least one friend in Central . Europe.
Undoll!bted ly no one will object to Chudoba's views,
a t least no one who is realJy interested in estaiblishin g a
�SLOVAKIA
48
reaJ, permanent peace in Central Europe, and not a new,
dangerous, provisional condition. Conversei,y, such an outlook on CentraJ-Eu:rop ean problems must be truken as an
indication that not onlry sensilble talks •w ould be possible
with the younger Czech generation, but even a sober
cooperatio1I1 couft.d be ef.fected with it on the ibasi.s of
"suum cuique." Of course, in ,p ractical politics further development will depend on how mainy Czooh ipo1iticians will
haive :bhe ooura;ge to fiace realities and also adrupt political
acts to reality. Im the last amailysis, whether Ozecih politics
will be governed by the spirit of mpka and Zen'kl, or by
the spirit of the views fomrnfated lby Chudo!ba, on this will
depend the relationship 1between the Ozechs amd ,t he Slov,a ks. Today, ail.ong with Communiism, the Czech exihle amd
espedaUy the "Council oif Free Cze~hoslovaki,a" is the
greatest enemy of the SlovaJks. The incontrover:t~ble fact
is the Ozechs are the only nation on earth fighting a:gainst
the freedom and ,independenice of Slovaks.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"WE ARE THE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION A.ND SHALL
REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THAT ALLIANCE. We are friends of the
Western Allies, we shall maintain our friendship towards them and
will do our loyal best to retain their friendship and we shall sincerely
(Dr. Bene!, Message to the
pursue A NEW SLAVONIC Policy." Provisional N'a.tional Assembly, Prague, Oct. 28. 1945) .
•
•
•
•
•
•
"There are some individuals who assert that we are in the hands
of the Soviets, yet the governments look upon us In a different way.
WE ARE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION AND WE SHALL ALWAYS REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THE SOVIETS. We are friends of
the west, and we shall remain SUCH friends. In the form of our alliance with the Soviet Union we proceed and we shall proceed IN OUR
OWN WAY." - (Dr. Bene!§ Statement to the Praesidium of the Slovak National Council, Prague, 0-ot. 9. 1945) .
"But I say quite openly that the path which Soviet Russia took
after the last war Is not the one which will be followed in Czechoslovakia. Our conditions are completely different from every point
of view, and we shall not abandon our old method of evolutionary
adaptation and our old policy of ba.Jance between the east and the
west. Our geographical position does not permit us to change thl1
(Dr. Benes , Foreign Affairs, New
century-old policy violently." York , Oct. 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
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
45
SLOVAKIA
COULD CZECHS AND SLOVAKS AGREE?
Joseph Kirschbaum, M. A., LL. D.
In his schol,a rly work "The HaJbsburrg Monare'hy," the
emment English historian A. J. P. Taylor, writing in regard to O.rech tenden:cies to assimilate the SIJ.ovak people
and to dommate 'Slovakia, stated that the Ozechs overlooked the fact that the age of national amal gama<tion
was over and, therefore, ".the Czech could outplay the
Slovaks; .they could not satisfy them." According to Mr.
Ta:yJor:
"Masaryk revived the radical idea of 1848 and · proposed to create a sing;le 'Oreclloslovak' nation 1by will
power. Masaryk knew little of ·t he Slovaks; others knew
even less This was his strength in dealing 'with the al1ied
leaders; it ,c ould not solve the Slovak rproiblem. Masaryk
had hoped thaJt the Czechs ,amd the Slovaks would come
together as the English and the Scotch had done ; the
Slovaks tUTned out to lbe the Irish."
1
Just recenUy I quoted this statement of Mr. Taylor's
whi:le converaing with a representative of American politics. My interilocutor said nothing a/bout 1t, but asked
whether the Czechs ·t hemselves ,t hought along .those lines.
"Not all Czechs," I replied; "however, I do not think
that would or could alter the fact ,s tated by Taylor."
In reality, even though Taylor notes olbjectively the
development of the relationship between the Czechs and
the Slova,ks, the leadershi1p of the Czech exile obstinately
refuses to see this historic aotuality and dr.aw from i,t
the logical ·c onclusion. Still imbued with imperialistic
ideas, certain Ozeoh exiles continue to foHow the illusions
of the hrupless past which can never return. IDven today
they are ,n ot interested in a federated Ozecho-Slova'kia,
but are dreaJining of forcing the Slovaks once a,gain into
a political system which came into .b eing with the Constitution orf 1920, the 1preamlble of which begins wiith the words
"We the Ozechoslcwak nation." That Constitution was
46
SLOV.AKJA
authored. iby the Czechs without Slovak participation. Of
course, the P•r ague Government, headed by T. G. Masaryik,
saw to it that the Slovaks had a voice in it: it 8JPpointed.
such genuine S1oivaks Hke Dr. Edward Benes and Alice
Masaryk (lboth Ozechs ! ) to represent the Slovak nation
on the committee on the constitution!
On the other ,hand, these Ozech emigrants forget
the "imponderalbilia," such as the faict that their names
inevita'bly evoke in the Slovaks not only bjtter reminiscences of the twenty-yeaT-o ld centralism, but aJso the phantom orf the galllQlws, concenJtration ca:mps, deportations, murders and the destruction of properties of thousands of
Slovak families after the re-establishm ent of Crecho-Slova1kia in 1945. Ail this is connected with the names of Rvpka,
Peroutka, Zen1kl, Prochazka and the political parties which
the Czech emigrants in the "Ootmcil of Free Czeichoslovalkia"
represent.
For every selt--consoious Slovaik, therefore, it i:s an insult
when these Ozech emigraints thinik that the Slovak nation
could agree wiith their political conceptions, or thaJt it
could recognruze a representati'On of people with an antliS1ovaik record such as has practically every representative of the "Council of Free Czechoslovak ia." They definitely do 111ot represent the will of the Sllovak nation,
and when the representative s of the "Council orf Free
Ozechoslova:kia" pretend ,t hat they do, they are only deceiving the international pUlblic. 'Dhe mandate given them
in the shadow of the gallows and under the threat of
Russian bayonets for services rendered to CommUiliist expansion has long lost its validity.
Does this mean that every understanding and cooperation between the Czechs and Slovaks in exile and between the Czeicih nation and the Slovak nation is excluded
a priori after liberation?
It does not.
The Slovaik nation and its representa•ti<ves in exile are
suffi•cient:Jly aware of the fact that the fig,ht against
Communism and, later, the destiny of Central Eu.Tope require the understanding and cooperation of all the Central-
47
European nations. That is why the Slovaks are for an
understand ing in Cent:r,al Europe. At the same time, however, it is clear to the Sfovruks that a new organizatio n of
Central Europe must lbe built on realities whi'ch respect
historical rea,litJies and geopolitica l laws, and !Ilot on the
im1perialisti'c dreams of the emigrants in the "Council of
Free Ozechoslov iakia." Therefore, the Slovaks are conrvinced tha;t cooperation with the Czech emigrants of the Council cannat be considered in the interest of a better future
of Central Europe.
This has already become dear even to severaJl individuals of the Czech exile. Unfortll!Ilat ely, their numlber
is small, but they are pohtically sober and in.Jt:ella!tually
strong. Professor Dr. Bohdian Ohuddba is the foremost
among them. He has ithe oourage not only to see the problems of Europe in their right perspective , 'b ut also to
•p ersistently propa;gate a;nd defend his truth against all the
hatred of his own countryme n in exile. lt is self-eviden t
to Dr. Chudoba that "just as a hundred years ago, so even
today aH Central-IDu,r opean nations, including the Sudeten
Geimans, want to have their own properties and their
own administrat ions." Therefore, says Chudolba altogetiher correctly, Czech politics will either "concur with this
reality and so also have chance to say somet!hing alb.o ut
it, or ~lse it will continue in the captivity of imperialisti c
dreams, which can be nothing else ,b ut an ephemeral
chapter in Czech ,h istory, and then reality will develop
without the Czechs exactly as it did during MUilli.ch"
(ROZPRAV Y, Rome, Vol. IV, No. 1).
In practical ,politics, for Dr. Chuddba this means: 1.
A new Central European order must have the full assent
of Germany right from the beginning, because otherwise
it would not be real ; 2. the Czechs must resolrve the question of the Sudeten Germans as quickly as ;possible; 3.
the Czechs must come to an agreement, just as quiokly a,s
possible, with the Slovaks so that they could have at
least one friend in Central . Europe.
Undoll!bted ly no one will object to Chudoba's views,
a t least no one who is realJy interested in estaiblishin g a
SLOVAKIA
48
reaJ, permanent peace in Central Europe, and not a new,
dangerous, provisional condition. Conversei,y, such an outlook on CentraJ-Eu:rop ean problems must be truken as an
indication that not onlry sensilble talks •w ould be possible
with the younger Czech generation, but even a sober
cooperatio1I1 couft.d be ef.fected with it on the ibasi.s of
"suum cuique." Of course, in ,p ractical politics further development will depend on how mainy Czooh ipo1iticians will
haive :bhe ooura;ge to fiace realities and also adrupt political
acts to reality. Im the last amailysis, whether Ozecih politics
will be governed by the spirit of mpka and Zen'kl, or by
the spirit of the views fomrnfated lby Chudo!ba, on this will
depend the relationship 1between the Ozechs amd ,t he Slov,a ks. Today, ail.ong with Communiism, the Czech exihle amd
espedaUy the "Council oif Free Cze~hoslovaki,a" is the
greatest enemy of the SlovaJks. The incontrover:t~ble fact
is the Ozechs are the only nation on earth fighting a:gainst
the freedom and ,independenice of Slovaks.
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"WE ARE THE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION A.ND SHALL
REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THAT ALLIANCE. We are friends of the
Western Allies, we shall maintain our friendship towards them and
will do our loyal best to retain their friendship and we shall sincerely
(Dr. Bene!, Message to the
pursue A NEW SLAVONIC Policy." Provisional N'a.tional Assembly, Prague, Oct. 28. 1945) .
•
•
•
•
•
•
"There are some individuals who assert that we are in the hands
of the Soviets, yet the governments look upon us In a different way.
WE ARE ALLIES OF THE SOVIET UNION AND WE SHALL ALWAYS REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THE SOVIETS. We are friends of
the west, and we shall remain SUCH friends. In the form of our alliance with the Soviet Union we proceed and we shall proceed IN OUR
OWN WAY." - (Dr. Bene!§ Statement to the Praesidium of the Slovak National Council, Prague, 0-ot. 9. 1945) .
"But I say quite openly that the path which Soviet Russia took
after the last war Is not the one which will be followed in Czechoslovakia. Our conditions are completely different from every point
of view, and we shall not abandon our old method of evolutionary
adaptation and our old policy of ba.Jance between the east and the
west. Our geographical position does not permit us to change thl1
(Dr. Benes , Foreign Affairs, New
century-old policy violently." York , Oct. 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
Could Czechs and Slovaks Agree?
Description
An account of the resource
Joseph Kirschbaum, M. A., LL. D.
Slovakia, Vol. 3, No. 1 (6), April 1953
pp. 45-48
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
April 1953
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/84fc1576fce2ebe7a0f282dd1398c614.pdf
627d8e71ad728989ee286f3133c5db4b
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
36
Counter-Reformation and
Early Czech Catholic
Kancionaly
in the Kingdom of Bohemia
(1588-1683)
Marie- Elizabeth Ducreux
I) THE BACKGROUND
It is surely unnecessary here to go deeply into the hi story of th e
Counter Reformation in the Czech Kingdom , so intima tely linked in
m y mind to its integration into the H apsburg Monarchy . In any case,
exploring this history in detail is obviously beyond the scope of this paper ,
but to situate the context of my subj ect, I shall begin by sketching its
general outline and suggesting a periodization.
Four phases can be di stin gui shed in th e elaboration and application of the policy of co nversion . Th e first period, extending from th e
arrival ofthejesuits in Prague (1556) to the d efeat at White M ountain
(Nov. 8 , 1620), set the stage for what followed. The second period , from
1621 to the reign of Leopold I , witnessed active attempts to implement
the poli cy of con ve rsion . This includes the Thirty Years' War, which
seve rely h ampered effort s to convert the rural areas, a nd the milesto ne
of 1650 , whi ch marked the energetic resurgence of the civil powers and
th e archbishopric in supervi sing the population . Then , under L eopold
I , followed a period of relative respite. Bohemia was then supposedl y
Catholic, although proof ex ists of the persistence of m a ny non-C atholi cs, eve n in the ranks of the nobility. For inst ance, h ym nologist Vaclav
Kleych (who was not an aristocrat) , born at Lazany near Litom ysl in
1682 , who emigrated with all his family to Zittau at the beginning of
the 18th century . Finally the fourth period, from 1705 to 1780 , witnessed
the tightening of rep ression and a search for heretics all over Bohem ia. 1
The judicial regulation of Joseph I ( 1705-1 711) made punishable by death
the peddlin g of heretical books, preaching, and suspicious assembli es.
�SLOVAKIA
37
The death penalty was confirmed by Charles VI ( 1711-1740) several
times, with at least five patents from March 15, 1721 to February 4,
1 724. 2 He reinforced existing antiheretical legislation with a publication on Jan. 29, 1726, which was confirmed at least twenty-two times
until 1770, i.e. a lso during the reign of Maria Theresa. 3 In this system
of laws, heresy was punished by forced labor and, in case of relapse,
the galleys, exile and death . This was, of course, also the time of the
well-known bookburning - and, more often, book confiscation and
rectification . 4 The patent of October 13, 1781 put an end to the repression by accepting - with reservations - the Lutheran, Calvinist and
Greek Catholic confessions . But only 45,000 persons 5 publically proclaimed their adherence to these two Protestant denominations, and the
adherents of popular sects (for example that of the "Lambs,'' Berankove)
continued long after to be persecuted by being press-ganged into the
army . 6
We shall be concerned here with only the first two periods of the
Counter Reformation . They co nstitute the background for the emergency of a Catholic hymnology in Czech.
II) POLITICS AND RELIGION FROM THE END OF THE 16TH
CENTURY TO 1620
From the end of the 16th century to White Mountain, the Czech
Counter-Reformation lacked the means to carry out its program, even
though the Hapsburgs had made Catholicism one of the principal tools
of their politics in Bohemia . The Diet was torn apart by the religious
conflict. After 1575 and the elaboration of the Confessio Bohemica, 1 the
Sub Utraque party acquired increasing importance . 8 The events leading
up to the de finitive d estruction of religious coexistence in 1618, after
it had finally been won in 1609 , are too well known to be gone into here.
Despite this profound upheaval , part of the intellectual elite of Prague
remained open to the ideas of religious tolerance. 9 In general, the towns
and cities of Bohemia were mainly Neo-Utraquist (ci:-ypto-Lutheran),
with the exception of Catholic Plzeii and some others. In the countrysid e, the great majority of the clergy seems also to have been NeoUtraquist; but it must be admitted that very little is known about the
realities of rural religious life in 16th century Bohemia. Despite proceedings against them, 10 the Czech Brethren were well established in
ce rtain areas, especially in Moravia.
�38
SLOVAKIA
Throughout Bohemia, where the archbishopric ' s seat remained vacant from 14 71 to 1561 ( the year of the enthronization of Brus of
Mohelnice), the structures of the Catholic Church were in deep disarray. The lack of priests was so severe that it made itself felt until at least
the last third of the 17th century. 11 Therefore, religious and missionary
orders, especially the Jesuits , had a lot to do to fill the vacuum.
Catholicism in Moravia seems to have been more resistant , for at
least the episcopal seat in Olomouc never went empty. But the towns
were mostly Lutheran, even as their patrician elite was perhaps more
Germanized than elsewhere . Sects abounded: in the 16th century, as
is well known, Moravia had become the refuge for all the heretics of
Europe. 12 The bastions of the Czech Brethren were there, especially in
the lands of the Zerotfns , where they printed many of their books in
the second half of the century, including the famous Kralice Bible
(1579-1593) . Since the beginning of the 16th century the Moravian Diet
had counted freedom of religion among its acquired privileges.
In the last third of the 16th century, as a party of Catholic activists
and Hapsburg faithfuls was reconstituted among the great lords in the
Diet of Bohemia (Zdenek and Ladislav of Lobkovic , Vilem Slavata, J aroslav Martinie, Vilem of Rozmberk and so on), Jesuits frequently had
~issions on the estates of the nobility which had been won over by the
new style of the Counter-Reformation. But this still remained a sporadic
phenomenon, affecting only individuals.
In the last analysis, although the figures are not entirely trustworthy,
the population of the Czech Kingdom around 1620 was at least 75 %
non-Catholic; the figure of 90% has also been advanced and seems to
be reliable for Bohemia (without Moravia) . 13 It was a hybrid " Protestantism," deeply affected by the popular sects. Unfortunately, space does
not permit me to dwell upon the extremely particular case of Czech Protestantism as it developed after the period of Hussitism . 14
III) CZECH CATHOLIC HYMNOLOGY
Tfanovskfs Cithara Sanctorum (Lyre of the Saints, 1636, Levoca)
represented an entirely successful attempt to renew and unify the
evangelical repertoire of both the Slovak and the Czech Protestants expelled from the kingdom of Bohemia after White Mountain.
Nevertheless, Tfanovsky had also delved into the rich traditions
of the Utraquists, the Brethren and even the Czech Lutherans , whose
�SLOVAKIA
39
first printed songbooks went back to 1501 , Pfsnicky (Little Songs , Praha
1501 , editor Jan Severyn z Kapi'. Hory, a Czech Brethren songbook).
206 canticles in the 1636 edition, or 50 % , came from the abundant repertoire of his Czech predecessors . Thus even though Tfanovsky's efforts
were innovative and in many respects uniqu e in contemporary Czech
and Slovak Protestant hymnology, they were rooted in a rich past and
inserted within a hymnological continuum.
Could the same have been true for Czech Catholic hymnology? Did
it possess Catholic models anterior to the Counter-Reformation? If not,
what was its relationship to the repertoires of the Utraquists , the Brethren, and even Tfanovsky? Finally, why did the Counter- Reformation
so consistently resort to songbooks in the vernacular throughout the 17th
and 18th centuries? All these questions will guide the following investigation.
1) Quantification of Catholic canticles and anthologies from 1580 to the
end of the 18th century
First, to give an idea of the imposing dimensions of Czech Catholic
hymnology , I would like to provide a few figures. The Utraquists, Czech
Brethren and Czech Lutherans published at least 106 different collections of canticles in Czech between 1501 and 1620. 15 Between 1580 and
1800, 85 editions of Catholic anthologies appeared. This latter figure
is minimal and partial, for with a few but significant exceptions, it includes only titles beginning with Pfsne, Pfsnicky, Kancional, Kancionalnfk and Kancionalek (Songs, Little Songs, Songbook , Little Songbook). 16
The sheer quantity of canticles involved is overwhelming: 24 of these
anthologies are over 500 pages long, 21 of them are over 400 pages long,
and some of their number contain almost 1,000 canticles (e .g. Steyer's
songbooks).
A few more data before we proceed: I myself have gone through
and analyzed 29 of the most important collections . Taken together, they
contain around 10 ,000 can tides . There is considerable overlap , and as
it emerges from these 29 anthologies, some 2,330 canticles actually circulated in 17th and 18th ce ntury Bohemia and Morav ia. Included in
this figure are 1,950 canticl es which first appeared between 1580 and
the end of the 18th century. Ifl stick to the temporal limits ofmy paper,
that is from 1588 to 1683, the fourteen pertin ent coll ections together
�40
SLOVAKIA
contain 1,941 canticles including 1,128 novelties, or 58 % of the 1,950
new canticles catalogued up to 1798.
2) Catholic coJlections of hymns from the beginning of the Counter-Reformation to 1683 and their relationship to Protestant Czech hymnol-
ogy
Before the beginning of the Counter-Reformation in Bohemia (circa
1555-1560), only one Catholic songbook existed in the face of the numerous anthologies of the Brethren, Utraquists and Lutherans. Published
anonymously in Pizer\ in 1529, both its title, Pfsnicky velmi pekne a
pffkladne na nedelnf ctenf do roka (Very pretty and exemplary songs
on the Sunday Gospels of the year)' 7 and its contents are reminiscent
of the contemporaneous publications of the Utraquist Mfrinsky (in 1522,
1531 , then 1567, 1577 and 1590).
In 1550 and 1595, the poet - or rather versifier - Simon Lomnicky z Budce published his Pfsne na Evangelia (Songs on the Gospels
of the year, Praha 1580) containing 115 new canticles, and his Pfsne
historicke (H istorical Songs, Praha 1595) containing 51 new canticles
versifying the lives of 51 Saints, for which he had delved into diverse
legendary sources, including the Legenda Aurea . But Lomnicky's
songbooks are not products of the Counter-Reformation. Their tone is
different, and their author did not belong to the circles of those seeking
the conversion of Bohemia. He was rather a provincial writer who took
pleasure in converting everything coming into his hands into songs, and
who belonged to the "learned middle classes," ifl am allowed to speak
in such a way . He was a school master, and in publishing two songbooks he was following late sixteenth-century fashion in urban milieux
which were essentially Utraquist. Furthermore, nothing indicates that
Lomnicky's collections were destined for the Church , for liturgical or
paraiiturgical use; on the contrary, their author himself conceived the
possibility of simple reading as well as singing. 18
These three songbooks, of which two were anterior to the first hymnological efforts of the Counter-Reformation , could well have served
as models for the editors of Catholic songbooks . But in fact neither the
1529 anthology nor the Pfsne na Evangelia of 1580 (with the exception
of two canticles) left any traces , while Lomnicky ' s Pfsne historicke were
widely used as canticles on the Saints in 1631, 1642, 1659 and then in
1712 and 1719 . 19
�SLOVAKIA
41
The first real songbook of the Counter-Reformation emerged only
in 1588 in Prague, under the aegis of the Jesuits of St. Clement College . 20
Containing 91 canticles, it was entitled Pfsne nave, kratke naucenf
kfestanskeho v sobe obsahujfcf, sjinymi nekterymi na vajrocnf slavnosti
i k vsidnf potfebe pfidanymi, pro Mladez a sprostnejsf lid, v nave
vydane .. . (New songs containing a brief instruction in the Christian religion , with others for the feast d ays of the year and daily requirements,
newly published for the young and ignorant. .. , Praha 1588) . 21 The first
twenty canticles adapted P eter Canisius's Parvus Catechismus and preserved its original order. The rest were divided into canticles for the
feast s of the liturgical year, including the Virgin Mary and the Saints;
occasion al canticles; and canticles for public and personal devotion, i.e.
for mass , before and after the sermon, for the Parish patron Sa int's day
(po svfcenf) , before and after meals , for morning and evening, Rogation d ays and pilgrimages; so-called "general " or "common" canticles
or perhaps canticles " for the laity " (obecnf); and canticles about death
(sometimes - but not always - funeral canticles) . The two big categories, the Liturgical Year and public and private needs , are the classic
categories for all Catholic collections of hymns .
Among the 71 canticles remaining after the catechism in the 1588
songbook, there are 34 Protestant canticles ( one of Hussite origin, 21 27
of Utraquist origin, 23 and 6 from the Czech Brethren 14 ), four earlier
canticl es from the 12th to the 15th centuries, 25 and 33 novelties, almost
all of which concern public and private devotional needs. 26 P aradoxically ,
at least in appearance, a little more than 65 % of the canticles co ncernin g the liturgical year a re of Protestant origin (25 out of 38), with special
em phasis on Christmas, Easter , Lent , Ascension D ay, P entecost and
Adven t. The recycling of songs used by contemporary Protestants is considerable and very interesting indeed , for four out of eight canticles for
the m ass are from the Utraquists (Gloria , Cred o, Sanctus), or from the
Czech Brethren (Kyrie M agn e Deus).
Coincidences of thi s kind are frequ ent in the Catholic hymnology
of the Counter- R efo rmation . All the collection s of hymns retain a high
proportion of canticles of Utraquist or Czech Brethren origin until the
end of the 18th century . 11 These Protestant canticles belon g to the unchan ged repertory of the Liturgical Year , especially Ascension D ay and
Pentecost, both very rigid categories with nearl y unchan gin g repertory ,
but also to the more or less movin g contents of categories like Christ-
�42
SLOVAKIA
mas , Lent, Easter and Advent. 28 As for canticles for occasions of public
and private devotional needs , the proportion varies from songbook to
songbook, but recourse to Protestant canticles anterior to 1620 is a constant . Sometimes, it seems even to be incredible: for instance, the J esuit
Steyer went so far as to incorporate 45 psalms of the Czech Brother Jirfk
StrejcintohisKancional cesky( 1683 , then 1687 , 1697 , 171 2, 1727 and
1764), without changing a single word from the 1587 edition . Among
the essential prayers - those we call '' doctrinal ,'' that is the Pater, Ave,
Credo, Ten Commandments and so on - all the son gbooks include
canticles of Protestant origin. A songbook of 1652, Pfsne rocnf (Songs
for the Year, published by Ludmila Sipafova, printer Jirik Sipar's widow)
and the 6 editions of Steyer ' s songbook even contain a Czech version
of Luther's Credo, M y vsickni veffme v jednoho Boh a (Wir glauben
all' an einen Gott), 29 reprinting it perhaps from the Cithara Sanctorum
of 1636. 30 By the same token , up to 1683 , i.e. the first edition ofSteyer's
songbook 31 but later also, whenever an anthology presents the heading
"for the holy mass " it contains texts of Protestant origin (that is 6 out
of 8 anthologies from 1588 until 1683) . 32 This remained the rule until
the end of the 18th century, except in Kania.s 's songbooks.ll
I have chosen to spend a rather long time writing about these Pfsne
na ve (New Songs) of 1588, because they exemplify the orientations of
early Catholic hymnology. Indeed, putting aside the three songbooks
of the poet-musician Adam Michna z Otradovic (1600-1676 ?), i.e. Ceska
marianska muzika (Czech Marian Music, Praha 1647), Loutna ceska
(Czech Lute, Praha 1653) and Svatorocnf muzika (M u sic for the Feasts
of the Year, Praha 1661), whose 197 canticles included 195 (or perhaps
only 194) written by the poet himself in a very baroque and mystical
lyricism, and also excludin g j eslicky (Little Cribs, Praha 1658) of the
J esuit Bedrich Bride!, all the subsequent Catholic hymnbooks from 1601
to 1683 proceed accordin g to the sam e plan, with similar contents.
So let us see now what exactly were these hymnbooks. In 160 1 appeared the K an cional of R ozenplut (355 canticles in Czech), and in 1622
the Pisne katolicke (Catholi c Songs) of Hlohovsky (234 canticles in
Czech). Both were published at Olomouc , and both were official hymnbooks of the diocese of Moravia, with the approval of Cardinal Dietrichstein. I n Bohemia there appeared in 163 1 the Kancional (Songbook) of
the Prague printer Pavel Sessius (formerly the Protestant printer of
Prague University, who converted) with 325 canticles; in 1639 a little,
�43
SLOVAKIA
anonymou s songbook, K an cionalnfk , due to the J esu its ofKlatovy College and perhaps to Father Albrecht Chanovsky, 34 with 121 canticles ;
in 1642 the Cesky D ekakord (Czech Decacorde) of the printer Jirfk Sipar
(400 can ticles); then in 1652 the Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year) by his
widow Ludmila Sipafova ( 171 canticles) . 35 In 1659 the Cesky Dekakord
of 1642 was reprinted by Urban Golias, still in Prague. The first edition of Steyer' s K ancional cesky (Czech Songbook) , also known as
"sva tovacla ysk y" (St. W enceslas's songbook) , dates from 1683, as we
already saw, with 828 canticles. 36 For the sake of completeness, a 1618
Postilla by the J esuit Vojtech Scipio Berlicka should be mentioned as
containing canticles on the yearly gospels which appeared also in the
collections of 163 1, 1642 and Steyer. All in all, without Berlicka , that
brings us to nine anthologies, counting one reedition (in 1659), from
1588 to 1683 .
Now, to finish with the relations between Czech Catholic and Protestant hymnologies, here are some percentages of Protestant and new
canticles in these nine Catholic collections:
Songbooks
Canticles
(in all)
1588
1601
1622
1631
1639
1642
(1659)*
1652
1683
91
355
234
325
121
400
(400)
171
828
Protestant
Canticles
34
46
54
103
61
145
(145
131
280
37 %
13 %
23%
32 %
50 %
36%
36 %)
77 %
34%
New Canticles
53
261
81
46
4
4
(0
8
328
58 %
73,5 %
34 %
14 %
3%
1%
0)
5%
40 %
• R eediti on of 1642 Cesk y dekacord b y Urban Golias.
Some of the Czech Catholic collections also had canticles from the Cithara
Sanctorum:
collection of 1639
1642
1653
1683
"
2
7
6
34
canticles from 1636 Cithara
canticles
"
canticles
''
canticles from 1636 and 1653 Cithara
�44
SLOVAKIA
The 1631 Czech songbook already had 3 canticles which were later put
into the Cithara of 1636, and Steyer's book of 1683 includes also one
canticle from the Amsterdam songbook by Jan Amos Komensky (Kancional, Amsterdam 1659).
As a comparison, here are identical data concerning now the first
Slovak Catholic songbook Cantus Catholici, which appeared in Levoca
m 1655 : 37
Total number of canticles in Slovak (not Latin)
Czech Protestant canticles (all in Slovak)
Canticles from 1636 Cithara Sanctorum
"
1653
"
New Canticles
227
88 (38%)
20
(10%)
3
56 (25%)
Thus the percentage of Protestant canticles in the Catholic songbooks of the first Counter-Reformation from 1588 to 1683 ( not including this latter collection) was approximately 38 % . If Rozenplut 's K ancional (1601), the only one which explicitly sought to exclude the Utraquist and Czech Brethren repertory , is left aside, the percentage increases
to 42 % . Later, the average percentage declines (from 1683 to 1764, for
twelve collections) but remains nonetheless at 30%. Inversely, from 1588
to 1683 (not including this one), the average percentage of novelties is
only 24 %, and from 1683 to 1764, it attains 36 %. 38
The hymnbook of 1601 by Rozenplut , which is very co mbative ,
and to a lesser extent that of 1622 by Hlohovsky , tried to create hymnology and had less recourse than their successors to Protestant texts. But
subsequently, and until 1660 , Catholic hymnbooks are characterized
by a progressive return to Protestant sources. After 1683, as Steyer so
amply demonstrates, Jesuit editors of hymnbooks ev in ce an astounding
capacity to absorb texts from multifarious origins. Even the most
" heretical" texts, as we have seen, could be admitted as long as they
did not attack the Church or the Catholic doctrines themselves .
Moreove r , in the 17th and 18th centuries, little hymnbooks without
musical notation and destined to a more popular public, retained a much
more conservative, static repertoire than the great official songbooks (like
Steyer, Holan , Bozan and Konias 's songbooks). Such is the case of the
Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year), a series of little books having roots in
the second halfofthe 16th century (and therefore Utraquist) and continuing until the 19th century (in the 1652 ed ition , as we saw, there were
�SLOVAKIA
45
13 1 P rotes tan t canticles out of 171 !). For there were two parallel tracks
in the produ ction of C atholic hy mnbooks : first , there was that of big
volumes m eant fo r the Pa rish K antor and most directly controlled by
the C hurch . Second , outside the official k an cionaly , was the production of little volumes or anonym ous booklets in which particular hymnologic tradition s of the 15th and 16th century Czech R eform survived .
This very important point proves that can ticles actually sung in Bohemia
du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries went way beyond the choice, albeit
large, p roposed b y the anth ologies of the Counter-Reform a tion : vernacul ar religiou s so ngs continued to fl ourish , sha ping sensibility in a
way relatively independent of the context of re-Catholicization. Obviously
the production of these booklets did not escape the ecclesiastical and civil
censorship . But in Bohemia, in the context of a triumphal but indeed
still ve ry ill-rooted and badl y organized Catholicism , the canticle underwent the sa.{Tle fate as other in gred ients of wha t is called the " popular
Baroqu e": its purity of origin was of little importance, provided that
it m obili zed lay piety.
3) Places and uses of th e canticle
But how and where was the Catholic canticl e supposed to mobilize
thi s lay piety? Like its P rotes tant counterpart, the Catholic h ymnbook
was fi rst and fo rem ost a coll ection of Church songs intended for the u se
of P arish K an to ff (Cantors) and brotherhoods (mostly , for instance, socalled literack a bratrstva). Of course, in the C a tholic Church , the canticl e was no longe r at the heart of the H oly Service. Its role was to double the liturgy to stimul ate popula r participation and ardor, and in so
doin g it d oubtless, in cidentall y, played also a significant role in m aintenance of the Czech lan gu age du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries . It was
also employed in catechization , in mi ssionary contexts, and in diverse
situat ions of d omestic or comm uni ty devotion s and praye rs. Th at will
be m y fi rst conclu sion .
T he second one I should like to point out is tha t from the thematic
point of view, beginnin g with Steyer in 1683, there is a verita ble eruption of personal piety in can ticles. 39 Thus, alongside the traditional themes
and the son gs for the litu rgical year, there appear canti cles " to combat
a nxiety," " to bear one's cross," on " m an 's love for God " and som eti mes "even if H ell does not ex ist ," on "submi ssion to Divin e will ,"
" pat ience in cri ses," and so on , all evokin g contemporary Germ an
�46
SLOVAKIA
Pietism and manifesting great similarity with the collection of Evangelical
emigres.
Of course, it cannot be proved that all the canticles proposed by
the songbooks were actually sung in community or in church . In particular, these last ones I just referred to seem rather to have been m eant
for personal meditation . But I do hope to have provided a sense of the
deep richness of Catholic Czech hymnology as well as of its fundamental ambivalence. The very success of the Catholic canticle was based
upon this ambivalence, and upon its roots in a tradition of popular liturgy
of Protestant origin (i.e . Utraquist or Brethren) origin. It thus became
a privileged means of mass indoctrination for the Counter-Reformation ,
contributing to the reconversion of Bohemia to Catholicism.
NOTES
' From 1670 ca to the end of the 17th century records kept in the Prague Archiepiscopal archives indicate only a very small number of heretics by pari sh . For instance,
curates' answers (Relationes, R esponsae) to a 1677 questionnaire often do not know
notoriou s or public heretics (heretici aperti) (see Statnf usti'ednf archiv, APA I , B
11/7 - B 13/4). I would like to suggest that the same conception of heresy was changing during the process of conversion . Ca 1700 , Viscars' visitations often suspect hidden heretics, especiall y in East and North Bohemia (Ci rcles of Caslav and Chrudim).
Then around 17 25, some of the archbishopric Missionarii Ordinarii began to seek
out both heretics a nd books all over the country. The Archiepiscopal archives also
include various kinds of inquisition documents.
' However, these patents forbade the missionaries to personally imprison the accused
and transferred the judgement of heretics from ecclesiastical courts to civil courts .
In the same way , as of 1735 the functions of the "extra-ordinary" missionaries had
to be handed ove r to 14 secular priests ( rather th an the previous 12 J esuits) . See
Tomas Vaclav Bflek, R eform ace katolicka neboli obn ovenf naboienstvf k atolick eho
v Kralovstvf ceskem po bitve belohorske (Praha 1892), p. 269-271 , 293.
l Id., ibid.
4
See note 1 •
5
See T. V. Bflek, op. cit., p. 296.
• See T. V . Bflek, op. cit., p . 296, and Antonin Rezek, Dejiny prostonarodnfho hnutf
naboien sk eho v Cech ach , I (Praha 1887).
' Maximilian II only accepted this verball y in 1575 , and Rud olph II only ratified it,
with the famous Letter of Majesty , as of 1609.
' The composition of the nobility present in the Diet of 1575 was as fo llows : Old Utraquists, 2 Lords (pani), including the Grand Chamberlain Jan ofValdstejn, 3 Kni ghts
(rytffi); Neo-Utraquists , 4/ 5 of the attending nobility; Catholics, 1/8; Czech Brethren,
1/4. Figures are given by Jaroslav Panek, "Zapis o charakter ceske stavovske opozice
a snem roku 1575 ," Ceskoslovensky casopis historicky, XXVIII ( 1980), 6, 878-880 .
�SLOVAKIA
9
'
0
"
"
13
"
"
"
17
"
"
'
0
"
ll
47
See m y paper "The T welve Sons of Carnival," to be published in Fifteenth Century Studies (D etroit) .
The first expulsion orders issued against the Czech Brethren d a te from the rei gn of
Jiri of Podebrady, at the end of the 15th Centu ry . The last before White M ountain
was issued in 1602, seven yea rs before the Letter of M ajesty.
See the record s of the Archiepiscopal archives in Prague (APA I , B 11 /7 -B 13/4, for
instance); see also Frantisek Kras!, Arno.st hra be H arrach , kardinal sv. cirkve i'fmske
a kn fze arcibiskup prazsk y. Historick o- kritick e vypsan f nabozen sk ych pomeru v
Cechach od roku 1623- 1667 (Praha 1886), p . 134.
See J osef Polise nsky, T fi cetileta valk a a evropsk e krize 17. stoletf (Praha 1970), p .
59-60 .
In fac t , there a re no m ode rn es tim ates of the number of P ro tes tants in Bohemia.
H owever, see Zikm unt Win ter, Zivot cirkevn f v Cechach . Kulturn f historicky obraz
XV. a XVI . stoletf, I-II (Praha 1895-1 896) ; see also J osef J anacek , Gesk e dejin y .
D oba pfedbelohorska 1526-1 547 , l/ 1 (Praha, 2nd edition 197 1).
It must be rem embered that , aft er 1436, both Catholicism and Utraquism were state
religions in Bohemia whereas Lutheranism was not offi cially tolerated until 1609.
The tables conta ining the confessional breakdown of these 106 son gbooks are in my
D octoral disse rt ation : H ymnologia Bohemica. Cantinnaires tch equ es d e la ContreR eform e, 1588- 1764 , vol. I , p . 107, U nive rsite de Pa ri s - Ill , 1982.
These figures are based on Zdenek Tobolka andJiri H orak , Knihopis ceskych a slovensk ych tisk u od doby n ejstarsi at do k once 18. stoletf. .. II. T isk y z let 1501 -1800 (Praha
1939) etc, and Vaclav Pumprla , Soupis starych tisku ve fondech Statnf vedeck e knihovn y v Olom ouci. I . T isk y vydan e na uzem f Cech a Moravy v letech 1501-1 800 , 12
vols. (Olomouc 1974- 1979) .
Pfsni cky velm i pekn e a pi'fkladne na nedeln f C ten f do roka . T ez O Sva tych ze Ctenf
take z postn fch Epistol i ze C ten f pfsn e a na p osledy vseck y tuto p ofadn e V n ove
zpravney najdes. A znova tistene a opravene. V Plzni ujana Pekka. Leta M DCXXIX
dn e X III! Unora m esfce. 8°, 122p.
See the Pfedmluva k ctenafi (Preface to the reader) in the Pfsne Historick e (Historical
Songs) of 1595.
Lomnicky's songs can be found in the following songbooks: Sessius (K an cional, Prague
163 1), Sipai' (Cesk y D ekakord , Prague 1642) and its reprint by Golias (P ragu e 1659) ,
R osenmuller (Kancionalek historicky, Prague 1712), Steyer (K ancional cesk y , Prague,
1683 , 1687 , 1697, 1712, 172 7, 1764) , and Bozan (Slavfcek rajsky , H rad ec Kralove
1719).
Antonfn Skarka attributes this work to th e J esuit Alexander Vojt, at that time Su perior
a t St. C lem ent Coll ege . I n a ny case, d ue to his offi cia l positi on, V ojt would have
had to approve a nd supervise its publication , as well as th at of th e transl ati on of
Canisiu s's Parvus Ca cscchimus pu blished in 1584 by the sa me printer , Bu ryiin Valda .
Printed by Buryiin V a lda.
Otce Boze Vse m ohoud, j en z jsi nam dal clo vecenstvf, Syna sveho jedin eho . .. , acco rd ing to Jirecek, H ymnolog ia Bohemica (P ra ha 1878): 15th ce ntury, Tabor
so ngbook, on Corpu s Christi.
�48
SLOVAKIA
" Canticles for Advent: I K e cti, k ch vale Krista krale
Christm as: 6 Andelove, andelo ve Jsou zpfvali; Na.radii se Kristus Pan ; Na Bozf
Narozenf radujf se AnJele; Nasca] nam den vesely,z rodu kralo vsk eh o; ZnameneJ,
kfest'an vern y, Kristovo Vtelenf; ZvestuJem vam radost
Lent: 4 - Nebesky Pan , at'by dokazal k nam dobrocu svou velikou; 0 velika milost
Syna Boi fh o; Umucenf naseho Pana milostneho; PosloucheJte ialoby nebeskeho Otce
Easter: 6 Vstalt'Jest teto ch v11e ctn y Vykupitel nas; Uteseny nam den nastal; Vzkffsenf
Spasitele sveh o ch val k aidy clovek ; L eto chvfle teto vesele vydava; AJ ten siln y lev
udatny; V eselyt' nam den nastal
Ascension Day: 1 Boie Otce z velike milosti ucinils nam vice neili dosti
Pentecost: 2 VftaJ sladk y tesiteli, temnosti osvetiteli; Seslanf Du cha S vateh o
Holy Virgin: I Zdravas neJsveteJsf kralovno, milost i TroJice Svare osvfcena
Holy Ma ss: 3 Ana zemi budii /idem pokoJ (Gloria); Vefmez v B oha Orce Stvofitele
vseho (Credo); Vsemohoucf Stvofiteli, Orce Svaty (Sa nctus)
Before th e sermon : 2 Boie Otce, seslii nam nynf Du cha Svateho; Otce nas, mily
Pan e, deJi nam Du cha S vateh o
"Common ": 1 Pam atiIJ, clo vece, proc re Pan Buh stvofil
(For d eta ils and refe rences see m y Doctoral di ssertat ion, op. cit. , pp. 390-437).
" Canticles for : Advent: 2 Pas/an Jest ArchanJel k M arii Panne; Vesele zpfveJm e, Boha
Orce chvalme
Parish Patron Saint D ay: I Chvalmei nynf Boha sveho z posvecenf mfsta Jeho
Saints and Angels: I V moci moudrosti dobreh o chvalm ez Boha v Svatych Jeho
H oly Mass: I Boie Orce nas, Jeni Jsi na nebesfch
"Common ": I Pane Boie bud' pfi nas, kdyi budem e m ffti
(For deta ils and references, see ibid., Joe. cit .).
" Buh Vsemohoucf; Svaty Va.clave; Dnesn fh o dne vstal Stvofitel; VftaJ, m ily j ezu Kriste,
vftaJ, Synu z Pann y ciste
" Canticles for Advent: 5 Zaff pfeJasnou navstfvil Gabriel; Zdrava Bohem pozdravena,
rodicku blah oslavena; Zdrava bud p feslavna matko J ezfsova; Zdravas Pann o cista,
tys pfimluva Jista; Vyk vetla hill Aronova
Christmas : I Tff krali znam enali hvezdu
H oly Virgin: I O Maria, vsech ctn ostf zrcadlo neJkrassf
Saints and Angels: 3j ezu Kriste Vsem ohoucf(St. Andrew); Pochvalm ez Boha vecneho
(St. Nicholas); Vsickni Bohu ke cit, ch vale (S t . M a ry M agdalene)
H oly M ass: 3 A na zemi budii lidem pokoJ, dobra ville vsechnem (Gloria); VftaJ
vdecna, vftaJ vzactna, milosti z milosti dana (Eucharisi); Zdrav bud', mily jezu Kriste,
Jeni narozen z Panny ciste ( Eucharist)
After the serm on: 1 Poprosmez Svateho Du cha
D eath : 2 Boie Orce nas, k cobe se m odlfm e; Boie Orce nebesky, prosfmJa rve milosci
R ogacions, Pilgrimages: 3 H ospodin e uslys nas, spomeii na nas; - Orce Boie smiliIJ
se, o Boie; - Ve Jmeno Bozfm kraceJme
M orning: 7 D aru svetlych milosti; L askavy H ospodine, ch valfme Te v 1e10 hodine;
M ocny Boie, sveta spravce; Nocnf temnost se zm eiiuJe; Nut vsicknipovstavse z Jute;
Orce Svaty, tesiteli, vsech vernych osveticeli; VeJmenu Svaie TroJice k nebi zdvfham
hffsne ru ce
�SLOVAKIA
11
"
"
'
0
"
"
"
"
"
36
"
49
Before and after dinn er: 2 Dfky Panu lask avemu vzd ejm ei (aft e r dinn er); Stedry
darce vsech milostf (before dinn er)
"Common " : 1 B oie, kteryi z sve velike milosti
(For details a nd references see m y Doctoral di sse rta ti on , op . cit., pp . 390-43 7).
Canticl es of Lutheran ori gin da tin g prior to 1620 a re mu ch less frequ ent . This is
becau se th e rare anthologies con sidered to be " Lutheran " ran ge from 1576 to 1606,
and a re little diffe rent from the U traqui st son gbooks.
Although th e repertoire of C hri stm as canticles reta ins a perm an ent co re of I 5th and
16th century son gs , it is ren ewed in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The new repertory
a ppears with R oze nplu t's anth ology ( 1601 ) and is henceforth reinforced from one
collecti on to the nex t. The "Christmas canticle" catego ry is therefo re one of the most
mobile of all. The same is tru e, to a mu ch lesser degree, of Advent son gs. On th e
other ha nd , Easter ca nticl es a re mu ch more co nse rvati ve, despite the new elements
which appear in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The Ascen sion and Pentecos t ca tego ri es
a re ve ry traditi on al. In so far as Lent is co nce rned , thin gs are so mewh at different:
canticles of Utraqui st origin and so ngs from th e C zech Brethren predomin a te until
1650 . Mi chn a's son gbooks ( 1647 a nd 1661 ) m ark the beginn ing of a renovation in
th e theme of th e C ru cified Christ, whi ch is henceforth based upon a personal link
with th e sinner . This th eme is continu all y enl arged upon unti l th e beginnin g of th e
18th ce ntury. If one can believe th e ca nticles, in the later thi rd of th e 17th ce ntury
th e Czech Coun te r-R eform ation is "C hristological. " This te nden cy is also found
in pa mphl ets featurin g a n ave rage of 1 to 4 canti cles.
The numbe r of doc trin al canticl es re-used by Cath olic son gbooks now totals 14 (2
T en Co mm and m ents , 6 Pater , 2 canticles on th e Trin ity, 4 C red o).
But th e Czech tex t is older than 163 6 .
M atej V aclav Steye r , K an cion al cesk y, Praha 1683, 1687, 1697, 1712, 17 27 , 1764.
3 K y rie, 2 Gloria, 1 fo r th e Epi stle, 1 for th e G os pel, 2 C redo, 3 S an ctu s , in oth er
word s a total of 12 canticl es.
Antonin Konias, C itara Noveh o Zakona (The C ithara of the N ew T estament), Hradec
Kralove 1727 , 1738 , 1746, 1750, Pra ha 1752, no date / mi d 18th century/, Hradec
Kralove 1762, 1799 . So K oni as ' s m ain so n gbook was publi shed eight tim es between
1727 an d 1799.
For fu rth er in for ma ti ons on Father C hanovsky see my D octoral di ssertat ion (op . cit. ,
pp . 2 16-222 an d pp . 225-227).
J an Rozenplut z Svarcenbachu , K an cional , 4°, Olomouc 1601 ; Ji rik Hlohovsky, Pfs ne
k atolick e, 8°, O lomouc 1622; Pavel Sessius, K ancional , 4°, Praha 163 1; Anonymous,
K an cionalnfk , 8 ° , Praha 1639 ; Ji rik Sipai', Cesk y D ek ak ord , 4° , P raha 1642 ; Ludm ila Sipai'ova, P fs n e rocnf, 12° , Prah a 1652; Urb a n Goli as , Cesk y D ekak ord, 4° ,
P raha 1659.
O th er ed itions of Steye r' s son gboo k contained th e fo llowing number of canticles:
1687: 883 (P ro testant: 32%)
1727: 927 (P rotest a nt: 32 % )
1697: 896 (P rotestant: 32 % )
1764: 927 (Protesta nt: 32 %)
1712: 947 (Protestant: 31,5 % )
Figures calcu lated on th e bas is of J an Vi li kovsky's "Cantus Catholici, " Trn avsky
sbornik (Bratislava 1935) , pp 57-94. On the Levoca printi n g, see Jan Caplov ic,
�50
38
39
SLOVAKIA
Bibliogralia tla ci vyd an ych na Slovensku do roku 1700, Diel 1. (Martin: Matica slo·
venska , 1972), p. 364.
The· Catholic songbook can therefore be co mpared to contemporary Czech collec·
tions, the only difference being th e much high er proportion of songs borrowed from
the C ithara Sanctorum, which can be explained by their geogra phic proxi mit y. The
Steyer a nd Konias songbooks co nta in 35 (for 1687- 1764 editions) and 24 (for 1752
a nd furth er editions) canticles from the 1636 Cithara Sanctorum.
All of them are included in the so-called "common " or "general " canticles in Steyer's
songbook. In Bozan 's and K onias's songbooks, th ey have their own categories be·
sides "common " or "general" can ticles. Most of them insist on man ' s love for God .
Presented in Panel 99, " Devotional Literature in Seventeenth C entury Slovakia ," at
th e AAASS co nvention in W ashin gton , D.C. on 17 O ctober 1982 .
�
SLOVAKIA
36
Counter-Reformation and
Early Czech Catholic
Kancionaly
in the Kingdom of Bohemia
(1588-1683)
Marie- Elizabeth Ducreux
I) THE BACKGROUND
It is surely unnecessary here to go deeply into the hi story of th e
Counter Reformation in the Czech Kingdom , so intima tely linked in
m y mind to its integration into the H apsburg Monarchy . In any case,
exploring this history in detail is obviously beyond the scope of this paper ,
but to situate the context of my subj ect, I shall begin by sketching its
general outline and suggesting a periodization.
Four phases can be di stin gui shed in th e elaboration and application of the policy of co nversion . Th e first period, extending from th e
arrival ofthejesuits in Prague (1556) to the d efeat at White M ountain
(Nov. 8 , 1620), set the stage for what followed. The second period , from
1621 to the reign of Leopold I , witnessed active attempts to implement
the poli cy of con ve rsion . This includes the Thirty Years' War, which
seve rely h ampered effort s to convert the rural areas, a nd the milesto ne
of 1650 , whi ch marked the energetic resurgence of the civil powers and
th e archbishopric in supervi sing the population . Then , under L eopold
I , followed a period of relative respite. Bohemia was then supposedl y
Catholic, although proof ex ists of the persistence of m a ny non-C atholi cs, eve n in the ranks of the nobility. For inst ance, h ym nologist Vaclav
Kleych (who was not an aristocrat) , born at Lazany near Litom ysl in
1682 , who emigrated with all his family to Zittau at the beginning of
the 18th century . Finally the fourth period, from 1705 to 1780 , witnessed
the tightening of rep ression and a search for heretics all over Bohem ia. 1
The judicial regulation of Joseph I ( 1705-1 711) made punishable by death
the peddlin g of heretical books, preaching, and suspicious assembli es.
�SLOVAKIA
37
The death penalty was confirmed by Charles VI ( 1711-1740) several
times, with at least five patents from March 15, 1721 to February 4,
1 724. 2 He reinforced existing antiheretical legislation with a publication on Jan. 29, 1726, which was confirmed at least twenty-two times
until 1770, i.e. a lso during the reign of Maria Theresa. 3 In this system
of laws, heresy was punished by forced labor and, in case of relapse,
the galleys, exile and death . This was, of course, also the time of the
well-known bookburning - and, more often, book confiscation and
rectification . 4 The patent of October 13, 1781 put an end to the repression by accepting - with reservations - the Lutheran, Calvinist and
Greek Catholic confessions . But only 45,000 persons 5 publically proclaimed their adherence to these two Protestant denominations, and the
adherents of popular sects (for example that of the "Lambs,'' Berankove)
continued long after to be persecuted by being press-ganged into the
army . 6
We shall be concerned here with only the first two periods of the
Counter Reformation . They co nstitute the background for the emergency of a Catholic hymnology in Czech.
II) POLITICS AND RELIGION FROM THE END OF THE 16TH
CENTURY TO 1620
From the end of the 16th century to White Mountain, the Czech
Counter-Reformation lacked the means to carry out its program, even
though the Hapsburgs had made Catholicism one of the principal tools
of their politics in Bohemia . The Diet was torn apart by the religious
conflict. After 1575 and the elaboration of the Confessio Bohemica, 1 the
Sub Utraque party acquired increasing importance . 8 The events leading
up to the de finitive d estruction of religious coexistence in 1618, after
it had finally been won in 1609 , are too well known to be gone into here.
Despite this profound upheaval , part of the intellectual elite of Prague
remained open to the ideas of religious tolerance. 9 In general, the towns
and cities of Bohemia were mainly Neo-Utraquist (ci:-ypto-Lutheran),
with the exception of Catholic Plzeii and some others. In the countrysid e, the great majority of the clergy seems also to have been NeoUtraquist; but it must be admitted that very little is known about the
realities of rural religious life in 16th century Bohemia. Despite proceedings against them, 10 the Czech Brethren were well established in
ce rtain areas, especially in Moravia.
�38
SLOVAKIA
Throughout Bohemia, where the archbishopric ' s seat remained vacant from 14 71 to 1561 ( the year of the enthronization of Brus of
Mohelnice), the structures of the Catholic Church were in deep disarray. The lack of priests was so severe that it made itself felt until at least
the last third of the 17th century. 11 Therefore, religious and missionary
orders, especially the Jesuits , had a lot to do to fill the vacuum.
Catholicism in Moravia seems to have been more resistant , for at
least the episcopal seat in Olomouc never went empty. But the towns
were mostly Lutheran, even as their patrician elite was perhaps more
Germanized than elsewhere . Sects abounded: in the 16th century, as
is well known, Moravia had become the refuge for all the heretics of
Europe. 12 The bastions of the Czech Brethren were there, especially in
the lands of the Zerotfns , where they printed many of their books in
the second half of the century, including the famous Kralice Bible
(1579-1593) . Since the beginning of the 16th century the Moravian Diet
had counted freedom of religion among its acquired privileges.
In the last third of the 16th century, as a party of Catholic activists
and Hapsburg faithfuls was reconstituted among the great lords in the
Diet of Bohemia (Zdenek and Ladislav of Lobkovic , Vilem Slavata, J aroslav Martinie, Vilem of Rozmberk and so on), Jesuits frequently had
~issions on the estates of the nobility which had been won over by the
new style of the Counter-Reformation. But this still remained a sporadic
phenomenon, affecting only individuals.
In the last analysis, although the figures are not entirely trustworthy,
the population of the Czech Kingdom around 1620 was at least 75 %
non-Catholic; the figure of 90% has also been advanced and seems to
be reliable for Bohemia (without Moravia) . 13 It was a hybrid " Protestantism," deeply affected by the popular sects. Unfortunately, space does
not permit me to dwell upon the extremely particular case of Czech Protestantism as it developed after the period of Hussitism . 14
III) CZECH CATHOLIC HYMNOLOGY
Tfanovskfs Cithara Sanctorum (Lyre of the Saints, 1636, Levoca)
represented an entirely successful attempt to renew and unify the
evangelical repertoire of both the Slovak and the Czech Protestants expelled from the kingdom of Bohemia after White Mountain.
Nevertheless, Tfanovsky had also delved into the rich traditions
of the Utraquists, the Brethren and even the Czech Lutherans , whose
�SLOVAKIA
39
first printed songbooks went back to 1501 , Pfsnicky (Little Songs , Praha
1501 , editor Jan Severyn z Kapi'. Hory, a Czech Brethren songbook).
206 canticles in the 1636 edition, or 50 % , came from the abundant repertoire of his Czech predecessors . Thus even though Tfanovsky's efforts
were innovative and in many respects uniqu e in contemporary Czech
and Slovak Protestant hymnology, they were rooted in a rich past and
inserted within a hymnological continuum.
Could the same have been true for Czech Catholic hymnology? Did
it possess Catholic models anterior to the Counter-Reformation? If not,
what was its relationship to the repertoires of the Utraquists , the Brethren, and even Tfanovsky? Finally, why did the Counter- Reformation
so consistently resort to songbooks in the vernacular throughout the 17th
and 18th centuries? All these questions will guide the following investigation.
1) Quantification of Catholic canticles and anthologies from 1580 to the
end of the 18th century
First, to give an idea of the imposing dimensions of Czech Catholic
hymnology , I would like to provide a few figures. The Utraquists, Czech
Brethren and Czech Lutherans published at least 106 different collections of canticles in Czech between 1501 and 1620. 15 Between 1580 and
1800, 85 editions of Catholic anthologies appeared. This latter figure
is minimal and partial, for with a few but significant exceptions, it includes only titles beginning with Pfsne, Pfsnicky, Kancional, Kancionalnfk and Kancionalek (Songs, Little Songs, Songbook , Little Songbook). 16
The sheer quantity of canticles involved is overwhelming: 24 of these
anthologies are over 500 pages long, 21 of them are over 400 pages long,
and some of their number contain almost 1,000 canticles (e .g. Steyer's
songbooks).
A few more data before we proceed: I myself have gone through
and analyzed 29 of the most important collections . Taken together, they
contain around 10 ,000 can tides . There is considerable overlap , and as
it emerges from these 29 anthologies, some 2,330 canticles actually circulated in 17th and 18th ce ntury Bohemia and Morav ia. Included in
this figure are 1,950 canticl es which first appeared between 1580 and
the end of the 18th century. Ifl stick to the temporal limits ofmy paper,
that is from 1588 to 1683, the fourteen pertin ent coll ections together
�40
SLOVAKIA
contain 1,941 canticles including 1,128 novelties, or 58 % of the 1,950
new canticles catalogued up to 1798.
2) Catholic coJlections of hymns from the beginning of the Counter-Reformation to 1683 and their relationship to Protestant Czech hymnol-
ogy
Before the beginning of the Counter-Reformation in Bohemia (circa
1555-1560), only one Catholic songbook existed in the face of the numerous anthologies of the Brethren, Utraquists and Lutherans. Published
anonymously in Pizer\ in 1529, both its title, Pfsnicky velmi pekne a
pffkladne na nedelnf ctenf do roka (Very pretty and exemplary songs
on the Sunday Gospels of the year)' 7 and its contents are reminiscent
of the contemporaneous publications of the Utraquist Mfrinsky (in 1522,
1531 , then 1567, 1577 and 1590).
In 1550 and 1595, the poet - or rather versifier - Simon Lomnicky z Budce published his Pfsne na Evangelia (Songs on the Gospels
of the year, Praha 1580) containing 115 new canticles, and his Pfsne
historicke (H istorical Songs, Praha 1595) containing 51 new canticles
versifying the lives of 51 Saints, for which he had delved into diverse
legendary sources, including the Legenda Aurea . But Lomnicky's
songbooks are not products of the Counter-Reformation. Their tone is
different, and their author did not belong to the circles of those seeking
the conversion of Bohemia. He was rather a provincial writer who took
pleasure in converting everything coming into his hands into songs, and
who belonged to the "learned middle classes," ifl am allowed to speak
in such a way . He was a school master, and in publishing two songbooks he was following late sixteenth-century fashion in urban milieux
which were essentially Utraquist. Furthermore, nothing indicates that
Lomnicky's collections were destined for the Church , for liturgical or
paraiiturgical use; on the contrary, their author himself conceived the
possibility of simple reading as well as singing. 18
These three songbooks, of which two were anterior to the first hymnological efforts of the Counter-Reformation , could well have served
as models for the editors of Catholic songbooks . But in fact neither the
1529 anthology nor the Pfsne na Evangelia of 1580 (with the exception
of two canticles) left any traces , while Lomnicky ' s Pfsne historicke were
widely used as canticles on the Saints in 1631, 1642, 1659 and then in
1712 and 1719 . 19
�SLOVAKIA
41
The first real songbook of the Counter-Reformation emerged only
in 1588 in Prague, under the aegis of the Jesuits of St. Clement College . 20
Containing 91 canticles, it was entitled Pfsne nave, kratke naucenf
kfestanskeho v sobe obsahujfcf, sjinymi nekterymi na vajrocnf slavnosti
i k vsidnf potfebe pfidanymi, pro Mladez a sprostnejsf lid, v nave
vydane .. . (New songs containing a brief instruction in the Christian religion , with others for the feast d ays of the year and daily requirements,
newly published for the young and ignorant. .. , Praha 1588) . 21 The first
twenty canticles adapted P eter Canisius's Parvus Catechismus and preserved its original order. The rest were divided into canticles for the
feast s of the liturgical year, including the Virgin Mary and the Saints;
occasion al canticles; and canticles for public and personal devotion, i.e.
for mass , before and after the sermon, for the Parish patron Sa int's day
(po svfcenf) , before and after meals , for morning and evening, Rogation d ays and pilgrimages; so-called "general " or "common" canticles
or perhaps canticles " for the laity " (obecnf); and canticles about death
(sometimes - but not always - funeral canticles) . The two big categories, the Liturgical Year and public and private needs , are the classic
categories for all Catholic collections of hymns .
Among the 71 canticles remaining after the catechism in the 1588
songbook, there are 34 Protestant canticles ( one of Hussite origin, 21 27
of Utraquist origin, 23 and 6 from the Czech Brethren 14 ), four earlier
canticl es from the 12th to the 15th centuries, 25 and 33 novelties, almost
all of which concern public and private devotional needs. 26 P aradoxically ,
at least in appearance, a little more than 65 % of the canticles co ncernin g the liturgical year a re of Protestant origin (25 out of 38), with special
em phasis on Christmas, Easter , Lent , Ascension D ay, P entecost and
Adven t. The recycling of songs used by contemporary Protestants is considerable and very interesting indeed , for four out of eight canticles for
the m ass are from the Utraquists (Gloria , Cred o, Sanctus), or from the
Czech Brethren (Kyrie M agn e Deus).
Coincidences of thi s kind are frequ ent in the Catholic hymnology
of the Counter- R efo rmation . All the collection s of hymns retain a high
proportion of canticles of Utraquist or Czech Brethren origin until the
end of the 18th century . 11 These Protestant canticles belon g to the unchan ged repertory of the Liturgical Year , especially Ascension D ay and
Pentecost, both very rigid categories with nearl y unchan gin g repertory ,
but also to the more or less movin g contents of categories like Christ-
�42
SLOVAKIA
mas , Lent, Easter and Advent. 28 As for canticles for occasions of public
and private devotional needs , the proportion varies from songbook to
songbook, but recourse to Protestant canticles anterior to 1620 is a constant . Sometimes, it seems even to be incredible: for instance, the J esuit
Steyer went so far as to incorporate 45 psalms of the Czech Brother Jirfk
StrejcintohisKancional cesky( 1683 , then 1687 , 1697 , 171 2, 1727 and
1764), without changing a single word from the 1587 edition . Among
the essential prayers - those we call '' doctrinal ,'' that is the Pater, Ave,
Credo, Ten Commandments and so on - all the son gbooks include
canticles of Protestant origin. A songbook of 1652, Pfsne rocnf (Songs
for the Year, published by Ludmila Sipafova, printer Jirik Sipar's widow)
and the 6 editions of Steyer ' s songbook even contain a Czech version
of Luther's Credo, M y vsickni veffme v jednoho Boh a (Wir glauben
all' an einen Gott), 29 reprinting it perhaps from the Cithara Sanctorum
of 1636. 30 By the same token , up to 1683 , i.e. the first edition ofSteyer's
songbook 31 but later also, whenever an anthology presents the heading
"for the holy mass " it contains texts of Protestant origin (that is 6 out
of 8 anthologies from 1588 until 1683) . 32 This remained the rule until
the end of the 18th century, except in Kania.s 's songbooks.ll
I have chosen to spend a rather long time writing about these Pfsne
na ve (New Songs) of 1588, because they exemplify the orientations of
early Catholic hymnology. Indeed, putting aside the three songbooks
of the poet-musician Adam Michna z Otradovic (1600-1676 ?), i.e. Ceska
marianska muzika (Czech Marian Music, Praha 1647), Loutna ceska
(Czech Lute, Praha 1653) and Svatorocnf muzika (M u sic for the Feasts
of the Year, Praha 1661), whose 197 canticles included 195 (or perhaps
only 194) written by the poet himself in a very baroque and mystical
lyricism, and also excludin g j eslicky (Little Cribs, Praha 1658) of the
J esuit Bedrich Bride!, all the subsequent Catholic hymnbooks from 1601
to 1683 proceed accordin g to the sam e plan, with similar contents.
So let us see now what exactly were these hymnbooks. In 160 1 appeared the K an cional of R ozenplut (355 canticles in Czech), and in 1622
the Pisne katolicke (Catholi c Songs) of Hlohovsky (234 canticles in
Czech). Both were published at Olomouc , and both were official hymnbooks of the diocese of Moravia, with the approval of Cardinal Dietrichstein. I n Bohemia there appeared in 163 1 the Kancional (Songbook) of
the Prague printer Pavel Sessius (formerly the Protestant printer of
Prague University, who converted) with 325 canticles; in 1639 a little,
�43
SLOVAKIA
anonymou s songbook, K an cionalnfk , due to the J esu its ofKlatovy College and perhaps to Father Albrecht Chanovsky, 34 with 121 canticles ;
in 1642 the Cesky D ekakord (Czech Decacorde) of the printer Jirfk Sipar
(400 can ticles); then in 1652 the Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year) by his
widow Ludmila Sipafova ( 171 canticles) . 35 In 1659 the Cesky Dekakord
of 1642 was reprinted by Urban Golias, still in Prague. The first edition of Steyer' s K ancional cesky (Czech Songbook) , also known as
"sva tovacla ysk y" (St. W enceslas's songbook) , dates from 1683, as we
already saw, with 828 canticles. 36 For the sake of completeness, a 1618
Postilla by the J esuit Vojtech Scipio Berlicka should be mentioned as
containing canticles on the yearly gospels which appeared also in the
collections of 163 1, 1642 and Steyer. All in all, without Berlicka , that
brings us to nine anthologies, counting one reedition (in 1659), from
1588 to 1683 .
Now, to finish with the relations between Czech Catholic and Protestant hymnologies, here are some percentages of Protestant and new
canticles in these nine Catholic collections:
Songbooks
Canticles
(in all)
1588
1601
1622
1631
1639
1642
(1659)*
1652
1683
91
355
234
325
121
400
(400)
171
828
Protestant
Canticles
34
46
54
103
61
145
(145
131
280
37 %
13 %
23%
32 %
50 %
36%
36 %)
77 %
34%
New Canticles
53
261
81
46
4
4
(0
8
328
58 %
73,5 %
34 %
14 %
3%
1%
0)
5%
40 %
• R eediti on of 1642 Cesk y dekacord b y Urban Golias.
Some of the Czech Catholic collections also had canticles from the Cithara
Sanctorum:
collection of 1639
1642
1653
1683
"
2
7
6
34
canticles from 1636 Cithara
canticles
"
canticles
''
canticles from 1636 and 1653 Cithara
�44
SLOVAKIA
The 1631 Czech songbook already had 3 canticles which were later put
into the Cithara of 1636, and Steyer's book of 1683 includes also one
canticle from the Amsterdam songbook by Jan Amos Komensky (Kancional, Amsterdam 1659).
As a comparison, here are identical data concerning now the first
Slovak Catholic songbook Cantus Catholici, which appeared in Levoca
m 1655 : 37
Total number of canticles in Slovak (not Latin)
Czech Protestant canticles (all in Slovak)
Canticles from 1636 Cithara Sanctorum
"
1653
"
New Canticles
227
88 (38%)
20
(10%)
3
56 (25%)
Thus the percentage of Protestant canticles in the Catholic songbooks of the first Counter-Reformation from 1588 to 1683 ( not including this latter collection) was approximately 38 % . If Rozenplut 's K ancional (1601), the only one which explicitly sought to exclude the Utraquist and Czech Brethren repertory , is left aside, the percentage increases
to 42 % . Later, the average percentage declines (from 1683 to 1764, for
twelve collections) but remains nonetheless at 30%. Inversely, from 1588
to 1683 (not including this one), the average percentage of novelties is
only 24 %, and from 1683 to 1764, it attains 36 %. 38
The hymnbook of 1601 by Rozenplut , which is very co mbative ,
and to a lesser extent that of 1622 by Hlohovsky , tried to create hymnology and had less recourse than their successors to Protestant texts. But
subsequently, and until 1660 , Catholic hymnbooks are characterized
by a progressive return to Protestant sources. After 1683, as Steyer so
amply demonstrates, Jesuit editors of hymnbooks ev in ce an astounding
capacity to absorb texts from multifarious origins. Even the most
" heretical" texts, as we have seen, could be admitted as long as they
did not attack the Church or the Catholic doctrines themselves .
Moreove r , in the 17th and 18th centuries, little hymnbooks without
musical notation and destined to a more popular public, retained a much
more conservative, static repertoire than the great official songbooks (like
Steyer, Holan , Bozan and Konias 's songbooks). Such is the case of the
Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year), a series of little books having roots in
the second halfofthe 16th century (and therefore Utraquist) and continuing until the 19th century (in the 1652 ed ition , as we saw, there were
�SLOVAKIA
45
13 1 P rotes tan t canticles out of 171 !). For there were two parallel tracks
in the produ ction of C atholic hy mnbooks : first , there was that of big
volumes m eant fo r the Pa rish K antor and most directly controlled by
the C hurch . Second , outside the official k an cionaly , was the production of little volumes or anonym ous booklets in which particular hymnologic tradition s of the 15th and 16th century Czech R eform survived .
This very important point proves that can ticles actually sung in Bohemia
du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries went way beyond the choice, albeit
large, p roposed b y the anth ologies of the Counter-Reform a tion : vernacul ar religiou s so ngs continued to fl ourish , sha ping sensibility in a
way relatively independent of the context of re-Catholicization. Obviously
the production of these booklets did not escape the ecclesiastical and civil
censorship . But in Bohemia, in the context of a triumphal but indeed
still ve ry ill-rooted and badl y organized Catholicism , the canticle underwent the sa.{Tle fate as other in gred ients of wha t is called the " popular
Baroqu e": its purity of origin was of little importance, provided that
it m obili zed lay piety.
3) Places and uses of th e canticle
But how and where was the Catholic canticl e supposed to mobilize
thi s lay piety? Like its P rotes tant counterpart, the Catholic h ymnbook
was fi rst and fo rem ost a coll ection of Church songs intended for the u se
of P arish K an to ff (Cantors) and brotherhoods (mostly , for instance, socalled literack a bratrstva). Of course, in the C a tholic Church , the canticl e was no longe r at the heart of the H oly Service. Its role was to double the liturgy to stimul ate popula r participation and ardor, and in so
doin g it d oubtless, in cidentall y, played also a significant role in m aintenance of the Czech lan gu age du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries . It was
also employed in catechization , in mi ssionary contexts, and in diverse
situat ions of d omestic or comm uni ty devotion s and praye rs. Th at will
be m y fi rst conclu sion .
T he second one I should like to point out is tha t from the thematic
point of view, beginnin g with Steyer in 1683, there is a verita ble eruption of personal piety in can ticles. 39 Thus, alongside the traditional themes
and the son gs for the litu rgical year, there appear canti cles " to combat
a nxiety," " to bear one's cross," on " m an 's love for God " and som eti mes "even if H ell does not ex ist ," on "submi ssion to Divin e will ,"
" pat ience in cri ses," and so on , all evokin g contemporary Germ an
�46
SLOVAKIA
Pietism and manifesting great similarity with the collection of Evangelical
emigres.
Of course, it cannot be proved that all the canticles proposed by
the songbooks were actually sung in community or in church . In particular, these last ones I just referred to seem rather to have been m eant
for personal meditation . But I do hope to have provided a sense of the
deep richness of Catholic Czech hymnology as well as of its fundamental ambivalence. The very success of the Catholic canticle was based
upon this ambivalence, and upon its roots in a tradition of popular liturgy
of Protestant origin (i.e . Utraquist or Brethren) origin. It thus became
a privileged means of mass indoctrination for the Counter-Reformation ,
contributing to the reconversion of Bohemia to Catholicism.
NOTES
' From 1670 ca to the end of the 17th century records kept in the Prague Archiepiscopal archives indicate only a very small number of heretics by pari sh . For instance,
curates' answers (Relationes, R esponsae) to a 1677 questionnaire often do not know
notoriou s or public heretics (heretici aperti) (see Statnf usti'ednf archiv, APA I , B
11/7 - B 13/4). I would like to suggest that the same conception of heresy was changing during the process of conversion . Ca 1700 , Viscars' visitations often suspect hidden heretics, especiall y in East and North Bohemia (Ci rcles of Caslav and Chrudim).
Then around 17 25, some of the archbishopric Missionarii Ordinarii began to seek
out both heretics a nd books all over the country. The Archiepiscopal archives also
include various kinds of inquisition documents.
' However, these patents forbade the missionaries to personally imprison the accused
and transferred the judgement of heretics from ecclesiastical courts to civil courts .
In the same way , as of 1735 the functions of the "extra-ordinary" missionaries had
to be handed ove r to 14 secular priests ( rather th an the previous 12 J esuits) . See
Tomas Vaclav Bflek, R eform ace katolicka neboli obn ovenf naboienstvf k atolick eho
v Kralovstvf ceskem po bitve belohorske (Praha 1892), p. 269-271 , 293.
l Id., ibid.
4
See note 1 •
5
See T. V. Bflek, op. cit., p. 296.
• See T. V . Bflek, op. cit., p . 296, and Antonin Rezek, Dejiny prostonarodnfho hnutf
naboien sk eho v Cech ach , I (Praha 1887).
' Maximilian II only accepted this verball y in 1575 , and Rud olph II only ratified it,
with the famous Letter of Majesty , as of 1609.
' The composition of the nobility present in the Diet of 1575 was as fo llows : Old Utraquists, 2 Lords (pani), including the Grand Chamberlain Jan ofValdstejn, 3 Kni ghts
(rytffi); Neo-Utraquists , 4/ 5 of the attending nobility; Catholics, 1/8; Czech Brethren,
1/4. Figures are given by Jaroslav Panek, "Zapis o charakter ceske stavovske opozice
a snem roku 1575 ," Ceskoslovensky casopis historicky, XXVIII ( 1980), 6, 878-880 .
�SLOVAKIA
9
'
0
"
"
13
"
"
"
17
"
"
'
0
"
ll
47
See m y paper "The T welve Sons of Carnival," to be published in Fifteenth Century Studies (D etroit) .
The first expulsion orders issued against the Czech Brethren d a te from the rei gn of
Jiri of Podebrady, at the end of the 15th Centu ry . The last before White M ountain
was issued in 1602, seven yea rs before the Letter of M ajesty.
See the record s of the Archiepiscopal archives in Prague (APA I , B 11 /7 -B 13/4, for
instance); see also Frantisek Kras!, Arno.st hra be H arrach , kardinal sv. cirkve i'fmske
a kn fze arcibiskup prazsk y. Historick o- kritick e vypsan f nabozen sk ych pomeru v
Cechach od roku 1623- 1667 (Praha 1886), p . 134.
See J osef Polise nsky, T fi cetileta valk a a evropsk e krize 17. stoletf (Praha 1970), p .
59-60 .
In fac t , there a re no m ode rn es tim ates of the number of P ro tes tants in Bohemia.
H owever, see Zikm unt Win ter, Zivot cirkevn f v Cechach . Kulturn f historicky obraz
XV. a XVI . stoletf, I-II (Praha 1895-1 896) ; see also J osef J anacek , Gesk e dejin y .
D oba pfedbelohorska 1526-1 547 , l/ 1 (Praha, 2nd edition 197 1).
It must be rem embered that , aft er 1436, both Catholicism and Utraquism were state
religions in Bohemia whereas Lutheranism was not offi cially tolerated until 1609.
The tables conta ining the confessional breakdown of these 106 son gbooks are in my
D octoral disse rt ation : H ymnologia Bohemica. Cantinnaires tch equ es d e la ContreR eform e, 1588- 1764 , vol. I , p . 107, U nive rsite de Pa ri s - Ill , 1982.
These figures are based on Zdenek Tobolka andJiri H orak , Knihopis ceskych a slovensk ych tisk u od doby n ejstarsi at do k once 18. stoletf. .. II. T isk y z let 1501 -1800 (Praha
1939) etc, and Vaclav Pumprla , Soupis starych tisku ve fondech Statnf vedeck e knihovn y v Olom ouci. I . T isk y vydan e na uzem f Cech a Moravy v letech 1501-1 800 , 12
vols. (Olomouc 1974- 1979) .
Pfsni cky velm i pekn e a pi'fkladne na nedeln f C ten f do roka . T ez O Sva tych ze Ctenf
take z postn fch Epistol i ze C ten f pfsn e a na p osledy vseck y tuto p ofadn e V n ove
zpravney najdes. A znova tistene a opravene. V Plzni ujana Pekka. Leta M DCXXIX
dn e X III! Unora m esfce. 8°, 122p.
See the Pfedmluva k ctenafi (Preface to the reader) in the Pfsne Historick e (Historical
Songs) of 1595.
Lomnicky's songs can be found in the following songbooks: Sessius (K an cional, Prague
163 1), Sipai' (Cesk y D ekakord , Prague 1642) and its reprint by Golias (P ragu e 1659) ,
R osenmuller (Kancionalek historicky, Prague 1712), Steyer (K ancional cesk y , Prague,
1683 , 1687 , 1697, 1712, 172 7, 1764) , and Bozan (Slavfcek rajsky , H rad ec Kralove
1719).
Antonfn Skarka attributes this work to th e J esuit Alexander Vojt, at that time Su perior
a t St. C lem ent Coll ege . I n a ny case, d ue to his offi cia l positi on, V ojt would have
had to approve a nd supervise its publication , as well as th at of th e transl ati on of
Canisiu s's Parvus Ca cscchimus pu blished in 1584 by the sa me printer , Bu ryiin Valda .
Printed by Buryiin V a lda.
Otce Boze Vse m ohoud, j en z jsi nam dal clo vecenstvf, Syna sveho jedin eho . .. , acco rd ing to Jirecek, H ymnolog ia Bohemica (P ra ha 1878): 15th ce ntury, Tabor
so ngbook, on Corpu s Christi.
�48
SLOVAKIA
" Canticles for Advent: I K e cti, k ch vale Krista krale
Christm as: 6 Andelove, andelo ve Jsou zpfvali; Na.radii se Kristus Pan ; Na Bozf
Narozenf radujf se AnJele; Nasca] nam den vesely,z rodu kralo vsk eh o; ZnameneJ,
kfest'an vern y, Kristovo Vtelenf; ZvestuJem vam radost
Lent: 4 - Nebesky Pan , at'by dokazal k nam dobrocu svou velikou; 0 velika milost
Syna Boi fh o; Umucenf naseho Pana milostneho; PosloucheJte ialoby nebeskeho Otce
Easter: 6 Vstalt'Jest teto ch v11e ctn y Vykupitel nas; Uteseny nam den nastal; Vzkffsenf
Spasitele sveh o ch val k aidy clovek ; L eto chvfle teto vesele vydava; AJ ten siln y lev
udatny; V eselyt' nam den nastal
Ascension Day: 1 Boie Otce z velike milosti ucinils nam vice neili dosti
Pentecost: 2 VftaJ sladk y tesiteli, temnosti osvetiteli; Seslanf Du cha S vateh o
Holy Virgin: I Zdravas neJsveteJsf kralovno, milost i TroJice Svare osvfcena
Holy Ma ss: 3 Ana zemi budii /idem pokoJ (Gloria); Vefmez v B oha Orce Stvofitele
vseho (Credo); Vsemohoucf Stvofiteli, Orce Svaty (Sa nctus)
Before th e sermon : 2 Boie Otce, seslii nam nynf Du cha Svateho; Otce nas, mily
Pan e, deJi nam Du cha S vateh o
"Common ": 1 Pam atiIJ, clo vece, proc re Pan Buh stvofil
(For d eta ils and refe rences see m y Doctoral di ssertat ion, op. cit. , pp. 390-437).
" Canticles for : Advent: 2 Pas/an Jest ArchanJel k M arii Panne; Vesele zpfveJm e, Boha
Orce chvalme
Parish Patron Saint D ay: I Chvalmei nynf Boha sveho z posvecenf mfsta Jeho
Saints and Angels: I V moci moudrosti dobreh o chvalm ez Boha v Svatych Jeho
H oly Mass: I Boie Orce nas, Jeni Jsi na nebesfch
"Common ": I Pane Boie bud' pfi nas, kdyi budem e m ffti
(For deta ils and references, see ibid., Joe. cit .).
" Buh Vsemohoucf; Svaty Va.clave; Dnesn fh o dne vstal Stvofitel; VftaJ, m ily j ezu Kriste,
vftaJ, Synu z Pann y ciste
" Canticles for Advent: 5 Zaff pfeJasnou navstfvil Gabriel; Zdrava Bohem pozdravena,
rodicku blah oslavena; Zdrava bud p feslavna matko J ezfsova; Zdravas Pann o cista,
tys pfimluva Jista; Vyk vetla hill Aronova
Christmas : I Tff krali znam enali hvezdu
H oly Virgin: I O Maria, vsech ctn ostf zrcadlo neJkrassf
Saints and Angels: 3j ezu Kriste Vsem ohoucf(St. Andrew); Pochvalm ez Boha vecneho
(St. Nicholas); Vsickni Bohu ke cit, ch vale (S t . M a ry M agdalene)
H oly M ass: 3 A na zemi budii lidem pokoJ, dobra ville vsechnem (Gloria); VftaJ
vdecna, vftaJ vzactna, milosti z milosti dana (Eucharisi); Zdrav bud', mily jezu Kriste,
Jeni narozen z Panny ciste ( Eucharist)
After the serm on: 1 Poprosmez Svateho Du cha
D eath : 2 Boie Orce nas, k cobe se m odlfm e; Boie Orce nebesky, prosfmJa rve milosci
R ogacions, Pilgrimages: 3 H ospodin e uslys nas, spomeii na nas; - Orce Boie smiliIJ
se, o Boie; - Ve Jmeno Bozfm kraceJme
M orning: 7 D aru svetlych milosti; L askavy H ospodine, ch valfme Te v 1e10 hodine;
M ocny Boie, sveta spravce; Nocnf temnost se zm eiiuJe; Nut vsicknipovstavse z Jute;
Orce Svaty, tesiteli, vsech vernych osveticeli; VeJmenu Svaie TroJice k nebi zdvfham
hffsne ru ce
�SLOVAKIA
11
"
"
'
0
"
"
"
"
"
36
"
49
Before and after dinn er: 2 Dfky Panu lask avemu vzd ejm ei (aft e r dinn er); Stedry
darce vsech milostf (before dinn er)
"Common " : 1 B oie, kteryi z sve velike milosti
(For details a nd references see m y Doctoral di sse rta ti on , op . cit., pp . 390-43 7).
Canticl es of Lutheran ori gin da tin g prior to 1620 a re mu ch less frequ ent . This is
becau se th e rare anthologies con sidered to be " Lutheran " ran ge from 1576 to 1606,
and a re little diffe rent from the U traqui st son gbooks.
Although th e repertoire of C hri stm as canticles reta ins a perm an ent co re of I 5th and
16th century son gs , it is ren ewed in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The new repertory
a ppears with R oze nplu t's anth ology ( 1601 ) and is henceforth reinforced from one
collecti on to the nex t. The "Christmas canticle" catego ry is therefo re one of the most
mobile of all. The same is tru e, to a mu ch lesser degree, of Advent son gs. On th e
other ha nd , Easter ca nticl es a re mu ch more co nse rvati ve, despite the new elements
which appear in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The Ascen sion and Pentecos t ca tego ri es
a re ve ry traditi on al. In so far as Lent is co nce rned , thin gs are so mewh at different:
canticles of Utraqui st origin and so ngs from th e C zech Brethren predomin a te until
1650 . Mi chn a's son gbooks ( 1647 a nd 1661 ) m ark the beginn ing of a renovation in
th e theme of th e C ru cified Christ, whi ch is henceforth based upon a personal link
with th e sinner . This th eme is continu all y enl arged upon unti l th e beginnin g of th e
18th ce ntury. If one can believe th e ca nticles, in the later thi rd of th e 17th ce ntury
th e Czech Coun te r-R eform ation is "C hristological. " This te nden cy is also found
in pa mphl ets featurin g a n ave rage of 1 to 4 canti cles.
The numbe r of doc trin al canticl es re-used by Cath olic son gbooks now totals 14 (2
T en Co mm and m ents , 6 Pater , 2 canticles on th e Trin ity, 4 C red o).
But th e Czech tex t is older than 163 6 .
M atej V aclav Steye r , K an cion al cesk y, Praha 1683, 1687, 1697, 1712, 17 27 , 1764.
3 K y rie, 2 Gloria, 1 fo r th e Epi stle, 1 for th e G os pel, 2 C redo, 3 S an ctu s , in oth er
word s a total of 12 canticl es.
Antonin Konias, C itara Noveh o Zakona (The C ithara of the N ew T estament), Hradec
Kralove 1727 , 1738 , 1746, 1750, Pra ha 1752, no date / mi d 18th century/, Hradec
Kralove 1762, 1799 . So K oni as ' s m ain so n gbook was publi shed eight tim es between
1727 an d 1799.
For fu rth er in for ma ti ons on Father C hanovsky see my D octoral di ssertat ion (op . cit. ,
pp . 2 16-222 an d pp . 225-227).
J an Rozenplut z Svarcenbachu , K an cional , 4°, Olomouc 1601 ; Ji rik Hlohovsky, Pfs ne
k atolick e, 8°, O lomouc 1622; Pavel Sessius, K ancional , 4°, Praha 163 1; Anonymous,
K an cionalnfk , 8 ° , Praha 1639 ; Ji rik Sipai', Cesk y D ek ak ord , 4° , P raha 1642 ; Ludm ila Sipai'ova, P fs n e rocnf, 12° , Prah a 1652; Urb a n Goli as , Cesk y D ekak ord, 4° ,
P raha 1659.
O th er ed itions of Steye r' s son gboo k contained th e fo llowing number of canticles:
1687: 883 (P ro testant: 32%)
1727: 927 (P rotest a nt: 32 % )
1697: 896 (P rotestant: 32 % )
1764: 927 (Protesta nt: 32 %)
1712: 947 (Protestant: 31,5 % )
Figures calcu lated on th e bas is of J an Vi li kovsky's "Cantus Catholici, " Trn avsky
sbornik (Bratislava 1935) , pp 57-94. On the Levoca printi n g, see Jan Caplov ic,
�50
38
39
SLOVAKIA
Bibliogralia tla ci vyd an ych na Slovensku do roku 1700, Diel 1. (Martin: Matica slo·
venska , 1972), p. 364.
The· Catholic songbook can therefore be co mpared to contemporary Czech collec·
tions, the only difference being th e much high er proportion of songs borrowed from
the C ithara Sanctorum, which can be explained by their geogra phic proxi mit y. The
Steyer a nd Konias songbooks co nta in 35 (for 1687- 1764 editions) and 24 (for 1752
a nd furth er editions) canticles from the 1636 Cithara Sanctorum.
All of them are included in the so-called "common " or "general " canticles in Steyer's
songbook. In Bozan 's and K onias's songbooks, th ey have their own categories be·
sides "common " or "general" can ticles. Most of them insist on man ' s love for God .
Presented in Panel 99, " Devotional Literature in Seventeenth C entury Slovakia ," at
th e AAASS co nvention in W ashin gton , D.C. on 17 O ctober 1982 .
�
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
1982-83, Vol. 30
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 30 (No. 55-56), 1982-83.
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
1982-83
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
36
Counter-Reformation and
Early Czech Catholic
Kancionaly
in the Kingdom of Bohemia
(1588-1683)
Marie- Elizabeth Ducreux
I) THE BACKGROUND
It is surely unnecessary here to go deeply into the hi story of th e
Counter Reformation in the Czech Kingdom , so intima tely linked in
m y mind to its integration into the H apsburg Monarchy . In any case,
exploring this history in detail is obviously beyond the scope of this paper ,
but to situate the context of my subj ect, I shall begin by sketching its
general outline and suggesting a periodization.
Four phases can be di stin gui shed in th e elaboration and application of the policy of co nversion . Th e first period, extending from th e
arrival ofthejesuits in Prague (1556) to the d efeat at White M ountain
(Nov. 8 , 1620), set the stage for what followed. The second period , from
1621 to the reign of Leopold I , witnessed active attempts to implement
the poli cy of con ve rsion . This includes the Thirty Years' War, which
seve rely h ampered effort s to convert the rural areas, a nd the milesto ne
of 1650 , whi ch marked the energetic resurgence of the civil powers and
th e archbishopric in supervi sing the population . Then , under L eopold
I , followed a period of relative respite. Bohemia was then supposedl y
Catholic, although proof ex ists of the persistence of m a ny non-C atholi cs, eve n in the ranks of the nobility. For inst ance, h ym nologist Vaclav
Kleych (who was not an aristocrat) , born at Lazany near Litom ysl in
1682 , who emigrated with all his family to Zittau at the beginning of
the 18th century . Finally the fourth period, from 1705 to 1780 , witnessed
the tightening of rep ression and a search for heretics all over Bohem ia. 1
The judicial regulation of Joseph I ( 1705-1 711) made punishable by death
the peddlin g of heretical books, preaching, and suspicious assembli es.
SLOVAKIA
37
The death penalty was confirmed by Charles VI ( 1711-1740) several
times, with at least five patents from March 15, 1721 to February 4,
1 724. 2 He reinforced existing antiheretical legislation with a publication on Jan. 29, 1726, which was confirmed at least twenty-two times
until 1770, i.e. a lso during the reign of Maria Theresa. 3 In this system
of laws, heresy was punished by forced labor and, in case of relapse,
the galleys, exile and death . This was, of course, also the time of the
well-known bookburning - and, more often, book confiscation and
rectification . 4 The patent of October 13, 1781 put an end to the repression by accepting - with reservations - the Lutheran, Calvinist and
Greek Catholic confessions . But only 45,000 persons 5 publically proclaimed their adherence to these two Protestant denominations, and the
adherents of popular sects (for example that of the "Lambs,'' Berankove)
continued long after to be persecuted by being press-ganged into the
army . 6
We shall be concerned here with only the first two periods of the
Counter Reformation . They co nstitute the background for the emergency of a Catholic hymnology in Czech.
II) POLITICS AND RELIGION FROM THE END OF THE 16TH
CENTURY TO 1620
From the end of the 16th century to White Mountain, the Czech
Counter-Reformation lacked the means to carry out its program, even
though the Hapsburgs had made Catholicism one of the principal tools
of their politics in Bohemia . The Diet was torn apart by the religious
conflict. After 1575 and the elaboration of the Confessio Bohemica, 1 the
Sub Utraque party acquired increasing importance . 8 The events leading
up to the de finitive d estruction of religious coexistence in 1618, after
it had finally been won in 1609 , are too well known to be gone into here.
Despite this profound upheaval , part of the intellectual elite of Prague
remained open to the ideas of religious tolerance. 9 In general, the towns
and cities of Bohemia were mainly Neo-Utraquist (ci:-ypto-Lutheran),
with the exception of Catholic Plzeii and some others. In the countrysid e, the great majority of the clergy seems also to have been NeoUtraquist; but it must be admitted that very little is known about the
realities of rural religious life in 16th century Bohemia. Despite proceedings against them, 10 the Czech Brethren were well established in
ce rtain areas, especially in Moravia.
38
SLOVAKIA
Throughout Bohemia, where the archbishopric ' s seat remained vacant from 14 71 to 1561 ( the year of the enthronization of Brus of
Mohelnice), the structures of the Catholic Church were in deep disarray. The lack of priests was so severe that it made itself felt until at least
the last third of the 17th century. 11 Therefore, religious and missionary
orders, especially the Jesuits , had a lot to do to fill the vacuum.
Catholicism in Moravia seems to have been more resistant , for at
least the episcopal seat in Olomouc never went empty. But the towns
were mostly Lutheran, even as their patrician elite was perhaps more
Germanized than elsewhere . Sects abounded: in the 16th century, as
is well known, Moravia had become the refuge for all the heretics of
Europe. 12 The bastions of the Czech Brethren were there, especially in
the lands of the Zerotfns , where they printed many of their books in
the second half of the century, including the famous Kralice Bible
(1579-1593) . Since the beginning of the 16th century the Moravian Diet
had counted freedom of religion among its acquired privileges.
In the last third of the 16th century, as a party of Catholic activists
and Hapsburg faithfuls was reconstituted among the great lords in the
Diet of Bohemia (Zdenek and Ladislav of Lobkovic , Vilem Slavata, J aroslav Martinie, Vilem of Rozmberk and so on), Jesuits frequently had
~issions on the estates of the nobility which had been won over by the
new style of the Counter-Reformation. But this still remained a sporadic
phenomenon, affecting only individuals.
In the last analysis, although the figures are not entirely trustworthy,
the population of the Czech Kingdom around 1620 was at least 75 %
non-Catholic; the figure of 90% has also been advanced and seems to
be reliable for Bohemia (without Moravia) . 13 It was a hybrid " Protestantism," deeply affected by the popular sects. Unfortunately, space does
not permit me to dwell upon the extremely particular case of Czech Protestantism as it developed after the period of Hussitism . 14
III) CZECH CATHOLIC HYMNOLOGY
Tfanovskfs Cithara Sanctorum (Lyre of the Saints, 1636, Levoca)
represented an entirely successful attempt to renew and unify the
evangelical repertoire of both the Slovak and the Czech Protestants expelled from the kingdom of Bohemia after White Mountain.
Nevertheless, Tfanovsky had also delved into the rich traditions
of the Utraquists, the Brethren and even the Czech Lutherans , whose
SLOVAKIA
39
first printed songbooks went back to 1501 , Pfsnicky (Little Songs , Praha
1501 , editor Jan Severyn z Kapi'. Hory, a Czech Brethren songbook).
206 canticles in the 1636 edition, or 50 % , came from the abundant repertoire of his Czech predecessors . Thus even though Tfanovsky's efforts
were innovative and in many respects uniqu e in contemporary Czech
and Slovak Protestant hymnology, they were rooted in a rich past and
inserted within a hymnological continuum.
Could the same have been true for Czech Catholic hymnology? Did
it possess Catholic models anterior to the Counter-Reformation? If not,
what was its relationship to the repertoires of the Utraquists , the Brethren, and even Tfanovsky? Finally, why did the Counter- Reformation
so consistently resort to songbooks in the vernacular throughout the 17th
and 18th centuries? All these questions will guide the following investigation.
1) Quantification of Catholic canticles and anthologies from 1580 to the
end of the 18th century
First, to give an idea of the imposing dimensions of Czech Catholic
hymnology , I would like to provide a few figures. The Utraquists, Czech
Brethren and Czech Lutherans published at least 106 different collections of canticles in Czech between 1501 and 1620. 15 Between 1580 and
1800, 85 editions of Catholic anthologies appeared. This latter figure
is minimal and partial, for with a few but significant exceptions, it includes only titles beginning with Pfsne, Pfsnicky, Kancional, Kancionalnfk and Kancionalek (Songs, Little Songs, Songbook , Little Songbook). 16
The sheer quantity of canticles involved is overwhelming: 24 of these
anthologies are over 500 pages long, 21 of them are over 400 pages long,
and some of their number contain almost 1,000 canticles (e .g. Steyer's
songbooks).
A few more data before we proceed: I myself have gone through
and analyzed 29 of the most important collections . Taken together, they
contain around 10 ,000 can tides . There is considerable overlap , and as
it emerges from these 29 anthologies, some 2,330 canticles actually circulated in 17th and 18th ce ntury Bohemia and Morav ia. Included in
this figure are 1,950 canticl es which first appeared between 1580 and
the end of the 18th century. Ifl stick to the temporal limits ofmy paper,
that is from 1588 to 1683, the fourteen pertin ent coll ections together
40
SLOVAKIA
contain 1,941 canticles including 1,128 novelties, or 58 % of the 1,950
new canticles catalogued up to 1798.
2) Catholic coJlections of hymns from the beginning of the Counter-Reformation to 1683 and their relationship to Protestant Czech hymnol-
ogy
Before the beginning of the Counter-Reformation in Bohemia (circa
1555-1560), only one Catholic songbook existed in the face of the numerous anthologies of the Brethren, Utraquists and Lutherans. Published
anonymously in Pizer\ in 1529, both its title, Pfsnicky velmi pekne a
pffkladne na nedelnf ctenf do roka (Very pretty and exemplary songs
on the Sunday Gospels of the year)' 7 and its contents are reminiscent
of the contemporaneous publications of the Utraquist Mfrinsky (in 1522,
1531 , then 1567, 1577 and 1590).
In 1550 and 1595, the poet - or rather versifier - Simon Lomnicky z Budce published his Pfsne na Evangelia (Songs on the Gospels
of the year, Praha 1580) containing 115 new canticles, and his Pfsne
historicke (H istorical Songs, Praha 1595) containing 51 new canticles
versifying the lives of 51 Saints, for which he had delved into diverse
legendary sources, including the Legenda Aurea . But Lomnicky's
songbooks are not products of the Counter-Reformation. Their tone is
different, and their author did not belong to the circles of those seeking
the conversion of Bohemia. He was rather a provincial writer who took
pleasure in converting everything coming into his hands into songs, and
who belonged to the "learned middle classes," ifl am allowed to speak
in such a way . He was a school master, and in publishing two songbooks he was following late sixteenth-century fashion in urban milieux
which were essentially Utraquist. Furthermore, nothing indicates that
Lomnicky's collections were destined for the Church , for liturgical or
paraiiturgical use; on the contrary, their author himself conceived the
possibility of simple reading as well as singing. 18
These three songbooks, of which two were anterior to the first hymnological efforts of the Counter-Reformation , could well have served
as models for the editors of Catholic songbooks . But in fact neither the
1529 anthology nor the Pfsne na Evangelia of 1580 (with the exception
of two canticles) left any traces , while Lomnicky ' s Pfsne historicke were
widely used as canticles on the Saints in 1631, 1642, 1659 and then in
1712 and 1719 . 19
SLOVAKIA
41
The first real songbook of the Counter-Reformation emerged only
in 1588 in Prague, under the aegis of the Jesuits of St. Clement College . 20
Containing 91 canticles, it was entitled Pfsne nave, kratke naucenf
kfestanskeho v sobe obsahujfcf, sjinymi nekterymi na vajrocnf slavnosti
i k vsidnf potfebe pfidanymi, pro Mladez a sprostnejsf lid, v nave
vydane .. . (New songs containing a brief instruction in the Christian religion , with others for the feast d ays of the year and daily requirements,
newly published for the young and ignorant. .. , Praha 1588) . 21 The first
twenty canticles adapted P eter Canisius's Parvus Catechismus and preserved its original order. The rest were divided into canticles for the
feast s of the liturgical year, including the Virgin Mary and the Saints;
occasion al canticles; and canticles for public and personal devotion, i.e.
for mass , before and after the sermon, for the Parish patron Sa int's day
(po svfcenf) , before and after meals , for morning and evening, Rogation d ays and pilgrimages; so-called "general " or "common" canticles
or perhaps canticles " for the laity " (obecnf); and canticles about death
(sometimes - but not always - funeral canticles) . The two big categories, the Liturgical Year and public and private needs , are the classic
categories for all Catholic collections of hymns .
Among the 71 canticles remaining after the catechism in the 1588
songbook, there are 34 Protestant canticles ( one of Hussite origin, 21 27
of Utraquist origin, 23 and 6 from the Czech Brethren 14 ), four earlier
canticl es from the 12th to the 15th centuries, 25 and 33 novelties, almost
all of which concern public and private devotional needs. 26 P aradoxically ,
at least in appearance, a little more than 65 % of the canticles co ncernin g the liturgical year a re of Protestant origin (25 out of 38), with special
em phasis on Christmas, Easter , Lent , Ascension D ay, P entecost and
Adven t. The recycling of songs used by contemporary Protestants is considerable and very interesting indeed , for four out of eight canticles for
the m ass are from the Utraquists (Gloria , Cred o, Sanctus), or from the
Czech Brethren (Kyrie M agn e Deus).
Coincidences of thi s kind are frequ ent in the Catholic hymnology
of the Counter- R efo rmation . All the collection s of hymns retain a high
proportion of canticles of Utraquist or Czech Brethren origin until the
end of the 18th century . 11 These Protestant canticles belon g to the unchan ged repertory of the Liturgical Year , especially Ascension D ay and
Pentecost, both very rigid categories with nearl y unchan gin g repertory ,
but also to the more or less movin g contents of categories like Christ-
42
SLOVAKIA
mas , Lent, Easter and Advent. 28 As for canticles for occasions of public
and private devotional needs , the proportion varies from songbook to
songbook, but recourse to Protestant canticles anterior to 1620 is a constant . Sometimes, it seems even to be incredible: for instance, the J esuit
Steyer went so far as to incorporate 45 psalms of the Czech Brother Jirfk
StrejcintohisKancional cesky( 1683 , then 1687 , 1697 , 171 2, 1727 and
1764), without changing a single word from the 1587 edition . Among
the essential prayers - those we call '' doctrinal ,'' that is the Pater, Ave,
Credo, Ten Commandments and so on - all the son gbooks include
canticles of Protestant origin. A songbook of 1652, Pfsne rocnf (Songs
for the Year, published by Ludmila Sipafova, printer Jirik Sipar's widow)
and the 6 editions of Steyer ' s songbook even contain a Czech version
of Luther's Credo, M y vsickni veffme v jednoho Boh a (Wir glauben
all' an einen Gott), 29 reprinting it perhaps from the Cithara Sanctorum
of 1636. 30 By the same token , up to 1683 , i.e. the first edition ofSteyer's
songbook 31 but later also, whenever an anthology presents the heading
"for the holy mass " it contains texts of Protestant origin (that is 6 out
of 8 anthologies from 1588 until 1683) . 32 This remained the rule until
the end of the 18th century, except in Kania.s 's songbooks.ll
I have chosen to spend a rather long time writing about these Pfsne
na ve (New Songs) of 1588, because they exemplify the orientations of
early Catholic hymnology. Indeed, putting aside the three songbooks
of the poet-musician Adam Michna z Otradovic (1600-1676 ?), i.e. Ceska
marianska muzika (Czech Marian Music, Praha 1647), Loutna ceska
(Czech Lute, Praha 1653) and Svatorocnf muzika (M u sic for the Feasts
of the Year, Praha 1661), whose 197 canticles included 195 (or perhaps
only 194) written by the poet himself in a very baroque and mystical
lyricism, and also excludin g j eslicky (Little Cribs, Praha 1658) of the
J esuit Bedrich Bride!, all the subsequent Catholic hymnbooks from 1601
to 1683 proceed accordin g to the sam e plan, with similar contents.
So let us see now what exactly were these hymnbooks. In 160 1 appeared the K an cional of R ozenplut (355 canticles in Czech), and in 1622
the Pisne katolicke (Catholi c Songs) of Hlohovsky (234 canticles in
Czech). Both were published at Olomouc , and both were official hymnbooks of the diocese of Moravia, with the approval of Cardinal Dietrichstein. I n Bohemia there appeared in 163 1 the Kancional (Songbook) of
the Prague printer Pavel Sessius (formerly the Protestant printer of
Prague University, who converted) with 325 canticles; in 1639 a little,
43
SLOVAKIA
anonymou s songbook, K an cionalnfk , due to the J esu its ofKlatovy College and perhaps to Father Albrecht Chanovsky, 34 with 121 canticles ;
in 1642 the Cesky D ekakord (Czech Decacorde) of the printer Jirfk Sipar
(400 can ticles); then in 1652 the Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year) by his
widow Ludmila Sipafova ( 171 canticles) . 35 In 1659 the Cesky Dekakord
of 1642 was reprinted by Urban Golias, still in Prague. The first edition of Steyer' s K ancional cesky (Czech Songbook) , also known as
"sva tovacla ysk y" (St. W enceslas's songbook) , dates from 1683, as we
already saw, with 828 canticles. 36 For the sake of completeness, a 1618
Postilla by the J esuit Vojtech Scipio Berlicka should be mentioned as
containing canticles on the yearly gospels which appeared also in the
collections of 163 1, 1642 and Steyer. All in all, without Berlicka , that
brings us to nine anthologies, counting one reedition (in 1659), from
1588 to 1683 .
Now, to finish with the relations between Czech Catholic and Protestant hymnologies, here are some percentages of Protestant and new
canticles in these nine Catholic collections:
Songbooks
Canticles
(in all)
1588
1601
1622
1631
1639
1642
(1659)*
1652
1683
91
355
234
325
121
400
(400)
171
828
Protestant
Canticles
34
46
54
103
61
145
(145
131
280
37 %
13 %
23%
32 %
50 %
36%
36 %)
77 %
34%
New Canticles
53
261
81
46
4
4
(0
8
328
58 %
73,5 %
34 %
14 %
3%
1%
0)
5%
40 %
• R eediti on of 1642 Cesk y dekacord b y Urban Golias.
Some of the Czech Catholic collections also had canticles from the Cithara
Sanctorum:
collection of 1639
1642
1653
1683
"
2
7
6
34
canticles from 1636 Cithara
canticles
"
canticles
''
canticles from 1636 and 1653 Cithara
44
SLOVAKIA
The 1631 Czech songbook already had 3 canticles which were later put
into the Cithara of 1636, and Steyer's book of 1683 includes also one
canticle from the Amsterdam songbook by Jan Amos Komensky (Kancional, Amsterdam 1659).
As a comparison, here are identical data concerning now the first
Slovak Catholic songbook Cantus Catholici, which appeared in Levoca
m 1655 : 37
Total number of canticles in Slovak (not Latin)
Czech Protestant canticles (all in Slovak)
Canticles from 1636 Cithara Sanctorum
"
1653
"
New Canticles
227
88 (38%)
20
(10%)
3
56 (25%)
Thus the percentage of Protestant canticles in the Catholic songbooks of the first Counter-Reformation from 1588 to 1683 ( not including this latter collection) was approximately 38 % . If Rozenplut 's K ancional (1601), the only one which explicitly sought to exclude the Utraquist and Czech Brethren repertory , is left aside, the percentage increases
to 42 % . Later, the average percentage declines (from 1683 to 1764, for
twelve collections) but remains nonetheless at 30%. Inversely, from 1588
to 1683 (not including this one), the average percentage of novelties is
only 24 %, and from 1683 to 1764, it attains 36 %. 38
The hymnbook of 1601 by Rozenplut , which is very co mbative ,
and to a lesser extent that of 1622 by Hlohovsky , tried to create hymnology and had less recourse than their successors to Protestant texts. But
subsequently, and until 1660 , Catholic hymnbooks are characterized
by a progressive return to Protestant sources. After 1683, as Steyer so
amply demonstrates, Jesuit editors of hymnbooks ev in ce an astounding
capacity to absorb texts from multifarious origins. Even the most
" heretical" texts, as we have seen, could be admitted as long as they
did not attack the Church or the Catholic doctrines themselves .
Moreove r , in the 17th and 18th centuries, little hymnbooks without
musical notation and destined to a more popular public, retained a much
more conservative, static repertoire than the great official songbooks (like
Steyer, Holan , Bozan and Konias 's songbooks). Such is the case of the
Pfsne rocnf (Songs of the Year), a series of little books having roots in
the second halfofthe 16th century (and therefore Utraquist) and continuing until the 19th century (in the 1652 ed ition , as we saw, there were
SLOVAKIA
45
13 1 P rotes tan t canticles out of 171 !). For there were two parallel tracks
in the produ ction of C atholic hy mnbooks : first , there was that of big
volumes m eant fo r the Pa rish K antor and most directly controlled by
the C hurch . Second , outside the official k an cionaly , was the production of little volumes or anonym ous booklets in which particular hymnologic tradition s of the 15th and 16th century Czech R eform survived .
This very important point proves that can ticles actually sung in Bohemia
du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries went way beyond the choice, albeit
large, p roposed b y the anth ologies of the Counter-Reform a tion : vernacul ar religiou s so ngs continued to fl ourish , sha ping sensibility in a
way relatively independent of the context of re-Catholicization. Obviously
the production of these booklets did not escape the ecclesiastical and civil
censorship . But in Bohemia, in the context of a triumphal but indeed
still ve ry ill-rooted and badl y organized Catholicism , the canticle underwent the sa.{Tle fate as other in gred ients of wha t is called the " popular
Baroqu e": its purity of origin was of little importance, provided that
it m obili zed lay piety.
3) Places and uses of th e canticle
But how and where was the Catholic canticl e supposed to mobilize
thi s lay piety? Like its P rotes tant counterpart, the Catholic h ymnbook
was fi rst and fo rem ost a coll ection of Church songs intended for the u se
of P arish K an to ff (Cantors) and brotherhoods (mostly , for instance, socalled literack a bratrstva). Of course, in the C a tholic Church , the canticl e was no longe r at the heart of the H oly Service. Its role was to double the liturgy to stimul ate popula r participation and ardor, and in so
doin g it d oubtless, in cidentall y, played also a significant role in m aintenance of the Czech lan gu age du rin g the 17th and 18th centuries . It was
also employed in catechization , in mi ssionary contexts, and in diverse
situat ions of d omestic or comm uni ty devotion s and praye rs. Th at will
be m y fi rst conclu sion .
T he second one I should like to point out is tha t from the thematic
point of view, beginnin g with Steyer in 1683, there is a verita ble eruption of personal piety in can ticles. 39 Thus, alongside the traditional themes
and the son gs for the litu rgical year, there appear canti cles " to combat
a nxiety," " to bear one's cross," on " m an 's love for God " and som eti mes "even if H ell does not ex ist ," on "submi ssion to Divin e will ,"
" pat ience in cri ses," and so on , all evokin g contemporary Germ an
46
SLOVAKIA
Pietism and manifesting great similarity with the collection of Evangelical
emigres.
Of course, it cannot be proved that all the canticles proposed by
the songbooks were actually sung in community or in church . In particular, these last ones I just referred to seem rather to have been m eant
for personal meditation . But I do hope to have provided a sense of the
deep richness of Catholic Czech hymnology as well as of its fundamental ambivalence. The very success of the Catholic canticle was based
upon this ambivalence, and upon its roots in a tradition of popular liturgy
of Protestant origin (i.e . Utraquist or Brethren) origin. It thus became
a privileged means of mass indoctrination for the Counter-Reformation ,
contributing to the reconversion of Bohemia to Catholicism.
NOTES
' From 1670 ca to the end of the 17th century records kept in the Prague Archiepiscopal archives indicate only a very small number of heretics by pari sh . For instance,
curates' answers (Relationes, R esponsae) to a 1677 questionnaire often do not know
notoriou s or public heretics (heretici aperti) (see Statnf usti'ednf archiv, APA I , B
11/7 - B 13/4). I would like to suggest that the same conception of heresy was changing during the process of conversion . Ca 1700 , Viscars' visitations often suspect hidden heretics, especiall y in East and North Bohemia (Ci rcles of Caslav and Chrudim).
Then around 17 25, some of the archbishopric Missionarii Ordinarii began to seek
out both heretics a nd books all over the country. The Archiepiscopal archives also
include various kinds of inquisition documents.
' However, these patents forbade the missionaries to personally imprison the accused
and transferred the judgement of heretics from ecclesiastical courts to civil courts .
In the same way , as of 1735 the functions of the "extra-ordinary" missionaries had
to be handed ove r to 14 secular priests ( rather th an the previous 12 J esuits) . See
Tomas Vaclav Bflek, R eform ace katolicka neboli obn ovenf naboienstvf k atolick eho
v Kralovstvf ceskem po bitve belohorske (Praha 1892), p. 269-271 , 293.
l Id., ibid.
4
See note 1 •
5
See T. V. Bflek, op. cit., p. 296.
• See T. V . Bflek, op. cit., p . 296, and Antonin Rezek, Dejiny prostonarodnfho hnutf
naboien sk eho v Cech ach , I (Praha 1887).
' Maximilian II only accepted this verball y in 1575 , and Rud olph II only ratified it,
with the famous Letter of Majesty , as of 1609.
' The composition of the nobility present in the Diet of 1575 was as fo llows : Old Utraquists, 2 Lords (pani), including the Grand Chamberlain Jan ofValdstejn, 3 Kni ghts
(rytffi); Neo-Utraquists , 4/ 5 of the attending nobility; Catholics, 1/8; Czech Brethren,
1/4. Figures are given by Jaroslav Panek, "Zapis o charakter ceske stavovske opozice
a snem roku 1575 ," Ceskoslovensky casopis historicky, XXVIII ( 1980), 6, 878-880 .
SLOVAKIA
9
'
0
"
"
13
"
"
"
17
"
"
'
0
"
ll
47
See m y paper "The T welve Sons of Carnival," to be published in Fifteenth Century Studies (D etroit) .
The first expulsion orders issued against the Czech Brethren d a te from the rei gn of
Jiri of Podebrady, at the end of the 15th Centu ry . The last before White M ountain
was issued in 1602, seven yea rs before the Letter of M ajesty.
See the record s of the Archiepiscopal archives in Prague (APA I , B 11 /7 -B 13/4, for
instance); see also Frantisek Kras!, Arno.st hra be H arrach , kardinal sv. cirkve i'fmske
a kn fze arcibiskup prazsk y. Historick o- kritick e vypsan f nabozen sk ych pomeru v
Cechach od roku 1623- 1667 (Praha 1886), p . 134.
See J osef Polise nsky, T fi cetileta valk a a evropsk e krize 17. stoletf (Praha 1970), p .
59-60 .
In fac t , there a re no m ode rn es tim ates of the number of P ro tes tants in Bohemia.
H owever, see Zikm unt Win ter, Zivot cirkevn f v Cechach . Kulturn f historicky obraz
XV. a XVI . stoletf, I-II (Praha 1895-1 896) ; see also J osef J anacek , Gesk e dejin y .
D oba pfedbelohorska 1526-1 547 , l/ 1 (Praha, 2nd edition 197 1).
It must be rem embered that , aft er 1436, both Catholicism and Utraquism were state
religions in Bohemia whereas Lutheranism was not offi cially tolerated until 1609.
The tables conta ining the confessional breakdown of these 106 son gbooks are in my
D octoral disse rt ation : H ymnologia Bohemica. Cantinnaires tch equ es d e la ContreR eform e, 1588- 1764 , vol. I , p . 107, U nive rsite de Pa ri s - Ill , 1982.
These figures are based on Zdenek Tobolka andJiri H orak , Knihopis ceskych a slovensk ych tisk u od doby n ejstarsi at do k once 18. stoletf. .. II. T isk y z let 1501 -1800 (Praha
1939) etc, and Vaclav Pumprla , Soupis starych tisku ve fondech Statnf vedeck e knihovn y v Olom ouci. I . T isk y vydan e na uzem f Cech a Moravy v letech 1501-1 800 , 12
vols. (Olomouc 1974- 1979) .
Pfsni cky velm i pekn e a pi'fkladne na nedeln f C ten f do roka . T ez O Sva tych ze Ctenf
take z postn fch Epistol i ze C ten f pfsn e a na p osledy vseck y tuto p ofadn e V n ove
zpravney najdes. A znova tistene a opravene. V Plzni ujana Pekka. Leta M DCXXIX
dn e X III! Unora m esfce. 8°, 122p.
See the Pfedmluva k ctenafi (Preface to the reader) in the Pfsne Historick e (Historical
Songs) of 1595.
Lomnicky's songs can be found in the following songbooks: Sessius (K an cional, Prague
163 1), Sipai' (Cesk y D ekakord , Prague 1642) and its reprint by Golias (P ragu e 1659) ,
R osenmuller (Kancionalek historicky, Prague 1712), Steyer (K ancional cesk y , Prague,
1683 , 1687 , 1697, 1712, 172 7, 1764) , and Bozan (Slavfcek rajsky , H rad ec Kralove
1719).
Antonfn Skarka attributes this work to th e J esuit Alexander Vojt, at that time Su perior
a t St. C lem ent Coll ege . I n a ny case, d ue to his offi cia l positi on, V ojt would have
had to approve a nd supervise its publication , as well as th at of th e transl ati on of
Canisiu s's Parvus Ca cscchimus pu blished in 1584 by the sa me printer , Bu ryiin Valda .
Printed by Buryiin V a lda.
Otce Boze Vse m ohoud, j en z jsi nam dal clo vecenstvf, Syna sveho jedin eho . .. , acco rd ing to Jirecek, H ymnolog ia Bohemica (P ra ha 1878): 15th ce ntury, Tabor
so ngbook, on Corpu s Christi.
48
SLOVAKIA
" Canticles for Advent: I K e cti, k ch vale Krista krale
Christm as: 6 Andelove, andelo ve Jsou zpfvali; Na.radii se Kristus Pan ; Na Bozf
Narozenf radujf se AnJele; Nasca] nam den vesely,z rodu kralo vsk eh o; ZnameneJ,
kfest'an vern y, Kristovo Vtelenf; ZvestuJem vam radost
Lent: 4 - Nebesky Pan , at'by dokazal k nam dobrocu svou velikou; 0 velika milost
Syna Boi fh o; Umucenf naseho Pana milostneho; PosloucheJte ialoby nebeskeho Otce
Easter: 6 Vstalt'Jest teto ch v11e ctn y Vykupitel nas; Uteseny nam den nastal; Vzkffsenf
Spasitele sveh o ch val k aidy clovek ; L eto chvfle teto vesele vydava; AJ ten siln y lev
udatny; V eselyt' nam den nastal
Ascension Day: 1 Boie Otce z velike milosti ucinils nam vice neili dosti
Pentecost: 2 VftaJ sladk y tesiteli, temnosti osvetiteli; Seslanf Du cha S vateh o
Holy Virgin: I Zdravas neJsveteJsf kralovno, milost i TroJice Svare osvfcena
Holy Ma ss: 3 Ana zemi budii /idem pokoJ (Gloria); Vefmez v B oha Orce Stvofitele
vseho (Credo); Vsemohoucf Stvofiteli, Orce Svaty (Sa nctus)
Before th e sermon : 2 Boie Otce, seslii nam nynf Du cha Svateho; Otce nas, mily
Pan e, deJi nam Du cha S vateh o
"Common ": 1 Pam atiIJ, clo vece, proc re Pan Buh stvofil
(For d eta ils and refe rences see m y Doctoral di ssertat ion, op. cit. , pp. 390-437).
" Canticles for : Advent: 2 Pas/an Jest ArchanJel k M arii Panne; Vesele zpfveJm e, Boha
Orce chvalme
Parish Patron Saint D ay: I Chvalmei nynf Boha sveho z posvecenf mfsta Jeho
Saints and Angels: I V moci moudrosti dobreh o chvalm ez Boha v Svatych Jeho
H oly Mass: I Boie Orce nas, Jeni Jsi na nebesfch
"Common ": I Pane Boie bud' pfi nas, kdyi budem e m ffti
(For deta ils and references, see ibid., Joe. cit .).
" Buh Vsemohoucf; Svaty Va.clave; Dnesn fh o dne vstal Stvofitel; VftaJ, m ily j ezu Kriste,
vftaJ, Synu z Pann y ciste
" Canticles for Advent: 5 Zaff pfeJasnou navstfvil Gabriel; Zdrava Bohem pozdravena,
rodicku blah oslavena; Zdrava bud p feslavna matko J ezfsova; Zdravas Pann o cista,
tys pfimluva Jista; Vyk vetla hill Aronova
Christmas : I Tff krali znam enali hvezdu
H oly Virgin: I O Maria, vsech ctn ostf zrcadlo neJkrassf
Saints and Angels: 3j ezu Kriste Vsem ohoucf(St. Andrew); Pochvalm ez Boha vecneho
(St. Nicholas); Vsickni Bohu ke cit, ch vale (S t . M a ry M agdalene)
H oly M ass: 3 A na zemi budii lidem pokoJ, dobra ville vsechnem (Gloria); VftaJ
vdecna, vftaJ vzactna, milosti z milosti dana (Eucharisi); Zdrav bud', mily jezu Kriste,
Jeni narozen z Panny ciste ( Eucharist)
After the serm on: 1 Poprosmez Svateho Du cha
D eath : 2 Boie Orce nas, k cobe se m odlfm e; Boie Orce nebesky, prosfmJa rve milosci
R ogacions, Pilgrimages: 3 H ospodin e uslys nas, spomeii na nas; - Orce Boie smiliIJ
se, o Boie; - Ve Jmeno Bozfm kraceJme
M orning: 7 D aru svetlych milosti; L askavy H ospodine, ch valfme Te v 1e10 hodine;
M ocny Boie, sveta spravce; Nocnf temnost se zm eiiuJe; Nut vsicknipovstavse z Jute;
Orce Svaty, tesiteli, vsech vernych osveticeli; VeJmenu Svaie TroJice k nebi zdvfham
hffsne ru ce
SLOVAKIA
11
"
"
'
0
"
"
"
"
"
36
"
49
Before and after dinn er: 2 Dfky Panu lask avemu vzd ejm ei (aft e r dinn er); Stedry
darce vsech milostf (before dinn er)
"Common " : 1 B oie, kteryi z sve velike milosti
(For details a nd references see m y Doctoral di sse rta ti on , op . cit., pp . 390-43 7).
Canticl es of Lutheran ori gin da tin g prior to 1620 a re mu ch less frequ ent . This is
becau se th e rare anthologies con sidered to be " Lutheran " ran ge from 1576 to 1606,
and a re little diffe rent from the U traqui st son gbooks.
Although th e repertoire of C hri stm as canticles reta ins a perm an ent co re of I 5th and
16th century son gs , it is ren ewed in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The new repertory
a ppears with R oze nplu t's anth ology ( 1601 ) and is henceforth reinforced from one
collecti on to the nex t. The "Christmas canticle" catego ry is therefo re one of the most
mobile of all. The same is tru e, to a mu ch lesser degree, of Advent son gs. On th e
other ha nd , Easter ca nticl es a re mu ch more co nse rvati ve, despite the new elements
which appear in the 17th and 18th centuri es. The Ascen sion and Pentecos t ca tego ri es
a re ve ry traditi on al. In so far as Lent is co nce rned , thin gs are so mewh at different:
canticles of Utraqui st origin and so ngs from th e C zech Brethren predomin a te until
1650 . Mi chn a's son gbooks ( 1647 a nd 1661 ) m ark the beginn ing of a renovation in
th e theme of th e C ru cified Christ, whi ch is henceforth based upon a personal link
with th e sinner . This th eme is continu all y enl arged upon unti l th e beginnin g of th e
18th ce ntury. If one can believe th e ca nticles, in the later thi rd of th e 17th ce ntury
th e Czech Coun te r-R eform ation is "C hristological. " This te nden cy is also found
in pa mphl ets featurin g a n ave rage of 1 to 4 canti cles.
The numbe r of doc trin al canticl es re-used by Cath olic son gbooks now totals 14 (2
T en Co mm and m ents , 6 Pater , 2 canticles on th e Trin ity, 4 C red o).
But th e Czech tex t is older than 163 6 .
M atej V aclav Steye r , K an cion al cesk y, Praha 1683, 1687, 1697, 1712, 17 27 , 1764.
3 K y rie, 2 Gloria, 1 fo r th e Epi stle, 1 for th e G os pel, 2 C redo, 3 S an ctu s , in oth er
word s a total of 12 canticl es.
Antonin Konias, C itara Noveh o Zakona (The C ithara of the N ew T estament), Hradec
Kralove 1727 , 1738 , 1746, 1750, Pra ha 1752, no date / mi d 18th century/, Hradec
Kralove 1762, 1799 . So K oni as ' s m ain so n gbook was publi shed eight tim es between
1727 an d 1799.
For fu rth er in for ma ti ons on Father C hanovsky see my D octoral di ssertat ion (op . cit. ,
pp . 2 16-222 an d pp . 225-227).
J an Rozenplut z Svarcenbachu , K an cional , 4°, Olomouc 1601 ; Ji rik Hlohovsky, Pfs ne
k atolick e, 8°, O lomouc 1622; Pavel Sessius, K ancional , 4°, Praha 163 1; Anonymous,
K an cionalnfk , 8 ° , Praha 1639 ; Ji rik Sipai', Cesk y D ek ak ord , 4° , P raha 1642 ; Ludm ila Sipai'ova, P fs n e rocnf, 12° , Prah a 1652; Urb a n Goli as , Cesk y D ekak ord, 4° ,
P raha 1659.
O th er ed itions of Steye r' s son gboo k contained th e fo llowing number of canticles:
1687: 883 (P ro testant: 32%)
1727: 927 (P rotest a nt: 32 % )
1697: 896 (P rotestant: 32 % )
1764: 927 (Protesta nt: 32 %)
1712: 947 (Protestant: 31,5 % )
Figures calcu lated on th e bas is of J an Vi li kovsky's "Cantus Catholici, " Trn avsky
sbornik (Bratislava 1935) , pp 57-94. On the Levoca printi n g, see Jan Caplov ic,
50
38
39
SLOVAKIA
Bibliogralia tla ci vyd an ych na Slovensku do roku 1700, Diel 1. (Martin: Matica slo·
venska , 1972), p. 364.
The· Catholic songbook can therefore be co mpared to contemporary Czech collec·
tions, the only difference being th e much high er proportion of songs borrowed from
the C ithara Sanctorum, which can be explained by their geogra phic proxi mit y. The
Steyer a nd Konias songbooks co nta in 35 (for 1687- 1764 editions) and 24 (for 1752
a nd furth er editions) canticles from the 1636 Cithara Sanctorum.
All of them are included in the so-called "common " or "general " canticles in Steyer's
songbook. In Bozan 's and K onias's songbooks, th ey have their own categories be·
sides "common " or "general" can ticles. Most of them insist on man ' s love for God .
Presented in Panel 99, " Devotional Literature in Seventeenth C entury Slovakia ," at
th e AAASS co nvention in W ashin gton , D.C. on 17 O ctober 1982 .
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
Counter-Reformation and Early Czech Catholic Kancionály in the Kingdom of Bohemia (1588-1683)
Description
An account of the resource
Marie-Elizabeth Ducreux
Slovakia, Vol. 30 (No. 55-56), 1982-83
pp. 36-50
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ducreux, Marie-Elizabeth
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1982-83
LCNAF
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/a82b96779fc5c05abaf1f3ffcb4e80b0.pdf
1a1ed88603749b8b9ef7a5c67a745482
PDF Text
Text
72
SLOVAKIA
Cultural Revival of American
And Canadian Slovaks
Jozef Pa u co, Ph.D.
I.
During the past ten years, American and Canadian
Slovaks are living a cultural revival. There are many
instances to indicate this. Above all, they received support
from many intellectuals who emigrated from Slovakia after
the second world war. A firm collaboration was created
in the cultural field, primarily through the Slovak League
of America, the Canadian Slovak League, and the Slovak
Institute in Cleveland-Rome. The 1100 centennial of the
arrival of SS. Cyril and Methodius to Slovakia, which was
celebrated auspiciously by the free Slovaks, inspired many
scientific and cultural workers and awakened an interest
in the past and present culture among a great number.
Finally, a wave of national and cultural rebirth swept over
American soil, in all aspects.
During the first years of revival, preparation was quite
slow, but since 1960 there was a complete flourishing in
practically all educational and scientific disciplines. When
at first an attempt was made to discuss cultural revival
it was doubtful as to its success. The results were amazing
because the third and fourth generation of American
Slovaks did not yet sink in the sea of anonymity. This
appears from the fact that American and Canadian Slovaks
not only read but are active in Slovak life and activities.
Scholarships are available sponsored by practically
every Slovak organization in America. It is not extraordinary for students to receive awards for outstanding
work. If a student seeks for ethnical news where scholarships are published, it is a sign of his Slovak interest.
Of course all applicants must belong to the organization
concerned. Amidst approximately 450,000 organized American Slovaks rnmrly 1/ 3 belong to a youth branch. 1
�SLOVAKIA
73
II.
Slovak cultural educators published and sold a great
number of books about Slovakia and its people and that
not only in Slovak but also in English and to a certain
extent French. Two goals were aimed at: 1) to bring
Slovakia to the youngest Americans of Slovak extraction;
2) to inform the non-Slovak public with objective information which was, until recently, rare, .because only those
spoke and wrote about Slovaks, who through various
reasons were not favorable towards and did not recognize
the Slovaks as a nation. In this respect it must be admitted
that Slovak knowledge and publicity took a step forward.
HISTORICAL WORKS
Several noteworthy volumes dealing with the history
of the Slovak nation, incidently the American and Canadian
Slovaks, were published. Professor Gilbert L. Oddo is the
author of the first complete English history of the Slovak
people in which he partially despicts the history of American Slovaks.2 The work was published in three editions
and is still in demand by Slovak as well as American
educators.
Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum published a remarkable book3 in which he portrays important incidents of
the Slovak people. Professor Jozef A. Mikus devoted his
well documented treatise to the events from 1918 to 1950.4
Professor Frantisek Vnuk wrote a detailed account of the
evolvement of Slovakia from autonomy to independent
statehood.5
These works form the basic orientation of Slovak
history. The supplement in Slovak Studies, Slovakia, and
Jednota Annual Furdek, 6 provides the reader with a great
deal of material, which in America concentrates and objectively casts light on Slovakian past. The hi~tory of
American and Canadian Slovaks is grasped as well. The
complete history in English is found in Canada. It was
written on the basis of a dissertation and strictly according
to scientific form by Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum. 7
Canada and ethnic critics accepted this work with highest
honors.
�74
SLOVAKIA
The First Catholic Slovak Union published a detailed
history about its organization.8 Even though it concerns
the history of one organization, this book contains such
material touching upon all phases of American Slovaks
in-as-much as the First Catholic Slovak Union played an
exceptionally significant role in their lives.
A history of the Slovak League of America was published in English. 9 To this work we must add a meaningful
chapter about the Pittsburgh Pact written by Peter P.
Hletko. 10 Both publications offer the students o! American
Slovak life adequate research material for the study of
attitudes towards Slovakia. Practically every American
Slovak organization has a chronicle review in its calendars
or memoirs. Even the American Slovak parishes brief
chronicles or histories of their parishes, at first in Slovak,
later bi-lingual, and finally just English. In the United
States and later in Canada, Slovak religious orders played
and are playing an important role. The history of all the
Slovak religious orders was compiled by Professor Francis
Hrusovsky. 11 The accomplishment was of high quality and
well documented. The congregation of the Sisters of SS.
Cyril and Methodius which began in America in 1909 has
its own history; 12 so do the Slovak Franciscan Fathers.13
Both works were written by members of the respective
religious orders.
In addition, it is well to mention a miriad of books
or periodicals containing biographies of leading American
Slovaks particularly of pioneer days. The greater number
were printed in Slovak.14
These and other works as well as those of the Slovak
Institute and other cultural Slovak-American Institutes
developed an interest in students of Slovak origin, about
the past of the Slovak nation, its culture and politics. Upon
this basis many academic thesis developed. The author
of this article receives at least five inquiries annually for
suggestions of topics regarding Slovak life. The Sisters
of SS. Cyril and Methodius wrote more than twenty thesis
many of which undergo severe departmental criticism. 15
Particular emphasis is placed upon the historical era
of SS. Cyril and Methodius. To attain this goal Slovak
Studies aided greatly by publishing many technical con-
�SLOVAKIA
75
tribution in one volume. 16 A well known historian of the
Cyrilo-Methodian era, Michal Lacko, wrote the biography
of the Apostles and the Slavonic nations, in general. 17 Sister
M. Martina Tybor wrote the Junior and Senior edition of
SS. Cyril and Methodius, who are the patrons of her
congregation.18 Most 1963 presented an expanded appraisal
of the SS. Cyril and Methodius traditions among Slovaks.
The history of the persecution of the church under
communism was very well written by Father Teodorik
J. Zubek, 0. F. M. in a documentary volume and other
opportune studies.19 Sister Cecilia revealed the unbearable
conditions, as she beheld and lived through them under
the Communist regime. 20 Further attempts were made to
enlighten this tragic period of the church, hierarchy, priesthood, religious orders, and the people of God. 21
In western Europe and South America free Slovaks
published books in other languages, principally German ,
French, Italian and Spanish in which they dealt with the
Slovak tragedy after 1945 as well as specific problems
which painfully were incorporated in the history of the
Slovak nation. In this regard the most valuable works
were edited by Bishop Paul Hnilica, Msgr. Stefan Nahalka,
Msgr. Jozef Tomko, Rev. Stanislav :C>urica and Rev. Michal
Lacko in Italy; Rev. Vojtech Bucko, Dr. Ferdinand :C>urcansky and Kristof Greiner in West Germany; P. G. Dobis
in Austria; Dr. Arved Grebert in Switzerland; Dr. Stefan
Glejdura in Spain; Dr. Stanislav Meciar, Dr. Ernest zatko
and Alojz Macek in Argentina. 22
LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE
While the history of the Slovak nation and AmericanCanadian Slovaks have a sufficient representation in English, the history of Slovak Literature and language awaits
further elaboration. Basic studies emanated in single, particularly cited annuals or individual articles. Most attention
to those themes was devoted by Professor Jozef M.
Kirschbaum, Msgr. Jan Rekem , and professor Frantisek
Vnuk. While Dr. Kirschbaum and Dr. Rekem occupied
themselves with individual periods of Slovak literature and
development of the language of the past, Vnuk concentrated
upon strengthening Slovak literature. 23
�76
SLOVAKIA
Language studies of a practical nature are properly
represented. Modern textbooks in Slovak language were
compiled by Mother M. Emerencia, SS.C.M., S. E. Bue,
Filip A. Hrobak and Konus. 24 Among the best dictionaries
are those of Hrobak and Konus.25
NEWSPAPERS AND ALMANACS
Editors and co-workers of American and Canadian
Slovak newspapers in Slovak and in the past few years
in English are returning to the problem concerned with
preservation of national consciousness, cultural, ethnical
awareness, enlightening the public with various phases of
Slovak life. Representative voices of the third generation
of Slovaks in the news methods and articles are not lacking.
Emphasis, however, is placed upon the preservation of
Slovak cultural inheritance. In this regard the Jednota,
Katolicky Sokol, Narodne Noviny, zivena and Kanadsk?}
Slovak are performing a great work in the English language. The technical and representative review Most,
Literdrny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike, and other newspapers are returning to the all-Slovak problems exclusively
in the Slovak language.26
Literarny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike and Slovak
Studies published an outlook upon the events of the
cultural activities of Slovak writers, leaders, poets, artists,
and news editors. The reports are not complete, but they
are sufficient evidence to assure the unprejudiced reader
that in the revival of Slovak cultural life in America are
intellectuals who do not want to stifle the development
of Americanization, but they do not want to speed it up .
They strive to evolve in this field as much as other ethnic
groups. It is not coincidental that in the preparation of
ethnic cultural centers, American Slovaks wish to enkindle
appropriate roles equal to their number and missions. 27
In the United States and Canada, after the Second
Vatican Council, Slovak liturgy is heard in practically every
Slovak Roman Catholic parish. Even in churches of Lutheran denomination, the liturgy is Slovak. As we shall
see in next chapter the sale of prayer books in the Slovak
language is widespread.
At Slovak picnics, which are held by the hundreds,
�SLOVAKIA
77
every summer, in the United States and Canada, Slovak
music and songs are heard. In like manner, these are heard
at weddings, even to the third and fourth generation. Slovak
songs and music binds and deepens Slovak consciousness
more than enything else. Slovak records are being made
in practically every city where Slovaks live and at least
one musician versed in Slovak folk songs and dances is
found.
In the past few years professional Slovak singing and
dance groups were organized. The leading ones are in
Toronto and Montreal, followed by Detroit, Chicago, and
New York.
At conventions of American-Slovak and Canadian-Slovak organizations the Slovak language is still used, even
though less than the English. Official reports and minutes
are written bi-lingually in spite of the fact that the pioneer
generation of Slovak immigrants, especially in America,
bas no representation at the conventions.
III
Another indication of cultural awakening among American and Canadian Slovaks is the sale of books. During
the past five years, 113,755 Slovak books and 450,000 pamphlets were sold in North America. This number includes
61,215 scientific, popular science, and novels; 65,000
pamphlets; 52,540 religious books and 385,000 religious
pamphlets. The number of English books about the Slovaks
31,248; Slovak-English and English-Slovak dictionaries and
textbooks sold amounted to 14,195.
Altogether during the past five years 159,198 books
in English or Slovak about Slovaks were sold, in addition
to 450,000 pamphlets.
The greatest number of books were sold by the First
Catholic Slovak Union: 49,008. The greatest number of
religious books, 32,000, were sold by the Slovak Franciscan
Fathers.
Books were sold by the Slovak Institute of SS. Cyril
and Methodius, Slovak Jesuit Fathers, Sisters of St. Dominic
(Oxford, Mich.), Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, and
�78
SLOVAKIA
other smaller publishers, namely Slovak v Amerike, Slovenskd Obrana, Rev. Frantisek Fuga and others.28
During the past five years 5,200 maps of Slovakia29
were sold and 45,400 Slovak records were distributed. 30
IV
It is difficult to estim8.te how many Slovaks live in
America and what per cent of American inhabitants consist
of Slovak immigrants and their descendants. It is generally
admitted that the people of ethnic groups number not less
than 30,000,000.
How many Americans are of Slovak ancestry?
The statistics of the Slovak Academy of Science in
Bratislava report that up to 1921 when mass emigration
ceased, 867,720 Slovaks emigrated to America. 31 It is true
that some of these retlirned to their homeland. However,
approximately 500,000 remained in America. Today there
are three generations of Slovak origin in the United States.
If we calculated that each family has at least four children,
then emphasising that three million Slovaks live in America
is a conservative number.
The question is, to what extent do these American
citizens of Slovak ancestry feel their Slovak heritage. We
can judge this through the aid of organizations and newspapers. Slovak-American organizations have more than
450,000 members; newspapers around 150,000 subscribers.
This does not include various parish societies and clubs
of all sects. There are over 400 Slovak parishes. All organized American-Slovaks with their families create at least
2,000,000 citizens who can be included to a greater or lesser
extent as conscious Slovaks.
There are about 70,000 Slovaks in Canada.32 Since
practically all Slovak emigrees came to Canada after the
first world war, we do not exaggerate when we emphasize
that the Slovak spirit lives on not only in the first but also
in the second and third generation of Canadian Slovaks.
FOOTNOTES
1) Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, XX, Ne. 43,
pp. 105-121; XXI, No. 44, pp. 109-144.
�SLOVAKIA
79
2) Gilbert L. Oddo, Slovakia and Its People, New York: Robert Speller
and Sons, 1960.
3) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central
Europe, New York: Robert Speller and Sons, 1960.
4) Joseph A. Mikus, Slovakia-A Political History, Milwaukee, Wis. :
Marquette University Press, 1964. The same work is in French: La
Slovaquie dans le drame de L 'Europe, Paris: Les Iles d'or, 1955.
5) F. Vnuk, Slovakia's Six Eventful Months (October 1938-March 1939) .
Rome: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1964. He devoted much
attention to Communistic politics. The following work is very important: Historical Outline of the Communist Party of Slovakia,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1968. Another important work
is that of F rantisek Vnuk, Neuveritel'ne sprisahanie: vojenske a
politicke akcie proti Slovenskej republike v roku 1944 (English
resume), Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1964.
6) Slovak Studies, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 19611967, VII Volumes. Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of
America, 1951-1971, XXI Volumes. Jednota Annual Furdek, Middletown, Pa.: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1962-1971, X Vol.
7) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, Toronto, Canada: Canadian
Ethnic Press Association of Ontario, Toronto, Canada, 1967.
8) Jozef Pauco, Ph.D., 75 rokov Prvej Katolickej Slovenskej Jednoty,
Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1965.
9) Joseph Pauco, Ph.D., (Ed.) 60 Years of the Slovak League of
America, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1967.
10) Peter P. IDetko, M.D., The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact,
Slovakia, XVIII, No. 41, pp. 5-54.
11) Frantisek Hru~ovsky, Ph.D., Slovenske rehole v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute at the abbey of St. Andrew-Svorad,
1955.
12) Mother M. Emerentia Petrasek, Brief History of the Congregation
of the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, Danville, Pa. , 1959.
13) Richard Portasik, O.F.M., Slovak Franciscans in America, History
of the Most Holy Savior Commissariate, 1926-1966, Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Franciscan Fathers, 1966.
14) Here are for instance: Jozef Pauco, Stefan Furdek a slovenske
prist'ahovalectvo, Middletown, Pa., J ednota, 1955. Jozef Pauco,
MatitS Jankola, knaz a narodovec, Danville, Pa., Congregation of
the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, 1959. A host of other
contributions by the same author about the Slovak pioneers in
America in the newspaper JEDNOTA, Middletown, Pa., The annual
Furdek contributed English articles about the Slovak peoples in
almost every edition.
�SLOVAKIA
80
15) The well known are: Sister M. Consuela Gregorovich, Contribution
of Rev. Matthew Jankola to Slovak Education in the United States,
1944. Sister M. Delphine Opet, SS.C.M., Political Views of Dudovit
Stur, Slovakia, XXI, No. 44, pp. 20-78. S. E. Bue, Slovak Nationalism,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1960. M. G. Woytko,
Slovakia's Road to Statehood, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications,
1956.
16) Slovak Studies, Vol. III, Cyrilomethodiana, Rome, Italy, 1963.
17) M. Lacko, The Life of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Rome: Slovak
Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1963. Second Edition, 1970.
Here is an additionally important work: Smrzik, The Glagolitic
or Roman-Slavonic Liturgy, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute, 1959.
18) Sister Martina Tybor, Saints Cyril and Methodius, Milwaukee, Wis .,
Bruce Publishing Co., Senior and Junior edition.
19) Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M., S.T.D., The Church of Silence in Slovakia, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications, 1956.: Slovak BishopsMartyrs of Christ, Toronto, Ontario, Canadian Slovak League, 1963.;
Slovak Clergy in History and Culture, Middletown, Pa., First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
20) Sister Cecilia, The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia, New York, New
York, Farrar, Straus and Young, First Printing, 1954.
21) For example: Jozef Pauco, Unconquerables, New York, Vantage
Press, 1958.; Christian Slovakia under Communism, Valparaiso ,
Indiana, Slovak Catholic Federation of America, 1953.
22) More accurate facts in the Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike,
"Predstavitelia slovenskej kulturnej tvorby," 1967, pp. 113-252 and
Slovak Studies, Vol. VII, Bibliography, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute,
Cleveland-Rome, 1967.
23)
J.M. Kirschbaum, nudovit Stur and His Place in the Slav-tc World,
Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1953.: Pavel Jozef Safarik and
His Contribution to Slavic Studies, Cleveland-Winnipeg, Slavistica
No. 43, 1962. Literature of the Cyrilo-Methodian Period and Slova,.
kia, Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1964.; Anton Bernolak, the
First Codifier of the Slovak Language, Winnipeg-Cleveland, Ohio:
Slavistica No. 52, 1964. Jan Kollar-Slovak Poet of Panslavism,
Winnipeg-Toronto: Slavistica No. LVI, 1966. J. Rekem, The Origin
and Development of the Slovak Language, Middletown, Pa.: Jednota,
1962. Slovak Litcratiire and National Consciousness Before Anton
Bernolak (1762-1813), Cleveland, Ohio, Slovak Institute, 1965.
Frantisek Vnuk, Sedemnast' neurodnych rokov (excerpts from the
history of Slovak literature, 1945-1962) , Middletown, Pa.; Slovak
v Amerike, English resume, 1965.
24) Mother M. Emerentia, Steps in Elementary Slovak, Hazleton, Pa.,
Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius, I, II, III, 1959.; Rev. Bonaventure S. Bue, O.F.M., Ph.D., Slovak Language Laboratory Course,
Cleveland, Ohio: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1968.; Philip A.
�SLOVAKIA
81
Hrobak, Slovak Lessons, Middletown, Pa., 1949.; Let's Learn Slovak,
Middletown, Pa., 1959.; Slovak for Beginners, Middletown, Pa., I,
IT, III, 1963.; J. Konus, Practical Slovak Grammar, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
1939. A good service was rendered in the work of Henrich Bartek,
Slovensky pravopis s gramatickymi pouckami a slovnikom, Whiting,
Ind., Rev. John Lach, 1956. A textbook in the Slovak language was
prepared also by Sister M. Gabriel, SS.C.M. and Stefan Blasko.
25) Hrobak's English-Slovak Dictionary, Middletown, Pa., 1944. Second
Printing, New York, N.Y.; Robert Speller and Sons, 1965. J. J.Konus,
Slov ensko-anglicky slovnik, Slovak-English Dictionary, Federation
of Slovak Catholics in America, 1930.; Slovak-English Dictionary,
Passaic, N. J.: Slovak Catholic Sokol, 1970.
26) Jednota, Middletown, Pa., Official Organ of the First Catholic Slovak
Union. Katolicky Sokol, Passaic, N. J., Official Organ of the Slovak
Catholic Sokol. Narodne Noviny, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ of
the National Slovak Society. Zivena, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ
of the 2ivena Beneficial Society. Kanadsky Slovak, Toronto, Ont.,
Canada, Official Organ of the Canadian Slovak League. Most, Cleveland, Ohio. Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike, Middletown,
Pa. Slovak v Amerike, Middletown, Pa. Details of Slovak newspapers
in America are presented by Konstantin Culen in:Slovenske casopisy v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
27) The Slovak League of America worked with American Slovaks
within 31 states regarding the bill S23 sponsored by U. S. Senator
Richard S. Schweiker (R.-Pa.).
28) The author of this paper personally ascertained the number of
books sold by various publishers.
29) The map was printed by the Slovak Institute, Cleveland.
30) Books, with the exception of dictionaries and textbooks, sent by
the Communist regime in Slovakia are sold in very small numbers.
However, the records made by the singing group SL'UK are in great
demand.
31) J. M. Kirschbaum, The Assimilation Process of American Slovaks,
Slovakia XII, No. 44, pp. 79-84.
32) J . M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, p. 4.
*
*
*
THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA represents an
overwhelming majority of organized Americans of Slovak
descent; actively affiliated with it are the large5t Slova k
traternals, religious organizations, Slovak Clubs and Slovak
civic organizations in the United States .
�
72
SLOVAKIA
Cultural Revival of American
And Canadian Slovaks
Jozef Pa u co, Ph.D.
I.
During the past ten years, American and Canadian
Slovaks are living a cultural revival. There are many
instances to indicate this. Above all, they received support
from many intellectuals who emigrated from Slovakia after
the second world war. A firm collaboration was created
in the cultural field, primarily through the Slovak League
of America, the Canadian Slovak League, and the Slovak
Institute in Cleveland-Rome. The 1100 centennial of the
arrival of SS. Cyril and Methodius to Slovakia, which was
celebrated auspiciously by the free Slovaks, inspired many
scientific and cultural workers and awakened an interest
in the past and present culture among a great number.
Finally, a wave of national and cultural rebirth swept over
American soil, in all aspects.
During the first years of revival, preparation was quite
slow, but since 1960 there was a complete flourishing in
practically all educational and scientific disciplines. When
at first an attempt was made to discuss cultural revival
it was doubtful as to its success. The results were amazing
because the third and fourth generation of American
Slovaks did not yet sink in the sea of anonymity. This
appears from the fact that American and Canadian Slovaks
not only read but are active in Slovak life and activities.
Scholarships are available sponsored by practically
every Slovak organization in America. It is not extraordinary for students to receive awards for outstanding
work. If a student seeks for ethnical news where scholarships are published, it is a sign of his Slovak interest.
Of course all applicants must belong to the organization
concerned. Amidst approximately 450,000 organized American Slovaks rnmrly 1/ 3 belong to a youth branch. 1
�SLOVAKIA
73
II.
Slovak cultural educators published and sold a great
number of books about Slovakia and its people and that
not only in Slovak but also in English and to a certain
extent French. Two goals were aimed at: 1) to bring
Slovakia to the youngest Americans of Slovak extraction;
2) to inform the non-Slovak public with objective information which was, until recently, rare, .because only those
spoke and wrote about Slovaks, who through various
reasons were not favorable towards and did not recognize
the Slovaks as a nation. In this respect it must be admitted
that Slovak knowledge and publicity took a step forward.
HISTORICAL WORKS
Several noteworthy volumes dealing with the history
of the Slovak nation, incidently the American and Canadian
Slovaks, were published. Professor Gilbert L. Oddo is the
author of the first complete English history of the Slovak
people in which he partially despicts the history of American Slovaks.2 The work was published in three editions
and is still in demand by Slovak as well as American
educators.
Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum published a remarkable book3 in which he portrays important incidents of
the Slovak people. Professor Jozef A. Mikus devoted his
well documented treatise to the events from 1918 to 1950.4
Professor Frantisek Vnuk wrote a detailed account of the
evolvement of Slovakia from autonomy to independent
statehood.5
These works form the basic orientation of Slovak
history. The supplement in Slovak Studies, Slovakia, and
Jednota Annual Furdek, 6 provides the reader with a great
deal of material, which in America concentrates and objectively casts light on Slovakian past. The hi~tory of
American and Canadian Slovaks is grasped as well. The
complete history in English is found in Canada. It was
written on the basis of a dissertation and strictly according
to scientific form by Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum. 7
Canada and ethnic critics accepted this work with highest
honors.
�74
SLOVAKIA
The First Catholic Slovak Union published a detailed
history about its organization.8 Even though it concerns
the history of one organization, this book contains such
material touching upon all phases of American Slovaks
in-as-much as the First Catholic Slovak Union played an
exceptionally significant role in their lives.
A history of the Slovak League of America was published in English. 9 To this work we must add a meaningful
chapter about the Pittsburgh Pact written by Peter P.
Hletko. 10 Both publications offer the students o! American
Slovak life adequate research material for the study of
attitudes towards Slovakia. Practically every American
Slovak organization has a chronicle review in its calendars
or memoirs. Even the American Slovak parishes brief
chronicles or histories of their parishes, at first in Slovak,
later bi-lingual, and finally just English. In the United
States and later in Canada, Slovak religious orders played
and are playing an important role. The history of all the
Slovak religious orders was compiled by Professor Francis
Hrusovsky. 11 The accomplishment was of high quality and
well documented. The congregation of the Sisters of SS.
Cyril and Methodius which began in America in 1909 has
its own history; 12 so do the Slovak Franciscan Fathers.13
Both works were written by members of the respective
religious orders.
In addition, it is well to mention a miriad of books
or periodicals containing biographies of leading American
Slovaks particularly of pioneer days. The greater number
were printed in Slovak.14
These and other works as well as those of the Slovak
Institute and other cultural Slovak-American Institutes
developed an interest in students of Slovak origin, about
the past of the Slovak nation, its culture and politics. Upon
this basis many academic thesis developed. The author
of this article receives at least five inquiries annually for
suggestions of topics regarding Slovak life. The Sisters
of SS. Cyril and Methodius wrote more than twenty thesis
many of which undergo severe departmental criticism. 15
Particular emphasis is placed upon the historical era
of SS. Cyril and Methodius. To attain this goal Slovak
Studies aided greatly by publishing many technical con-
�SLOVAKIA
75
tribution in one volume. 16 A well known historian of the
Cyrilo-Methodian era, Michal Lacko, wrote the biography
of the Apostles and the Slavonic nations, in general. 17 Sister
M. Martina Tybor wrote the Junior and Senior edition of
SS. Cyril and Methodius, who are the patrons of her
congregation.18 Most 1963 presented an expanded appraisal
of the SS. Cyril and Methodius traditions among Slovaks.
The history of the persecution of the church under
communism was very well written by Father Teodorik
J. Zubek, 0. F. M. in a documentary volume and other
opportune studies.19 Sister Cecilia revealed the unbearable
conditions, as she beheld and lived through them under
the Communist regime. 20 Further attempts were made to
enlighten this tragic period of the church, hierarchy, priesthood, religious orders, and the people of God. 21
In western Europe and South America free Slovaks
published books in other languages, principally German ,
French, Italian and Spanish in which they dealt with the
Slovak tragedy after 1945 as well as specific problems
which painfully were incorporated in the history of the
Slovak nation. In this regard the most valuable works
were edited by Bishop Paul Hnilica, Msgr. Stefan Nahalka,
Msgr. Jozef Tomko, Rev. Stanislav :C>urica and Rev. Michal
Lacko in Italy; Rev. Vojtech Bucko, Dr. Ferdinand :C>urcansky and Kristof Greiner in West Germany; P. G. Dobis
in Austria; Dr. Arved Grebert in Switzerland; Dr. Stefan
Glejdura in Spain; Dr. Stanislav Meciar, Dr. Ernest zatko
and Alojz Macek in Argentina. 22
LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE
While the history of the Slovak nation and AmericanCanadian Slovaks have a sufficient representation in English, the history of Slovak Literature and language awaits
further elaboration. Basic studies emanated in single, particularly cited annuals or individual articles. Most attention
to those themes was devoted by Professor Jozef M.
Kirschbaum, Msgr. Jan Rekem , and professor Frantisek
Vnuk. While Dr. Kirschbaum and Dr. Rekem occupied
themselves with individual periods of Slovak literature and
development of the language of the past, Vnuk concentrated
upon strengthening Slovak literature. 23
�76
SLOVAKIA
Language studies of a practical nature are properly
represented. Modern textbooks in Slovak language were
compiled by Mother M. Emerencia, SS.C.M., S. E. Bue,
Filip A. Hrobak and Konus. 24 Among the best dictionaries
are those of Hrobak and Konus.25
NEWSPAPERS AND ALMANACS
Editors and co-workers of American and Canadian
Slovak newspapers in Slovak and in the past few years
in English are returning to the problem concerned with
preservation of national consciousness, cultural, ethnical
awareness, enlightening the public with various phases of
Slovak life. Representative voices of the third generation
of Slovaks in the news methods and articles are not lacking.
Emphasis, however, is placed upon the preservation of
Slovak cultural inheritance. In this regard the Jednota,
Katolicky Sokol, Narodne Noviny, zivena and Kanadsk?}
Slovak are performing a great work in the English language. The technical and representative review Most,
Literdrny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike, and other newspapers are returning to the all-Slovak problems exclusively
in the Slovak language.26
Literarny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike and Slovak
Studies published an outlook upon the events of the
cultural activities of Slovak writers, leaders, poets, artists,
and news editors. The reports are not complete, but they
are sufficient evidence to assure the unprejudiced reader
that in the revival of Slovak cultural life in America are
intellectuals who do not want to stifle the development
of Americanization, but they do not want to speed it up .
They strive to evolve in this field as much as other ethnic
groups. It is not coincidental that in the preparation of
ethnic cultural centers, American Slovaks wish to enkindle
appropriate roles equal to their number and missions. 27
In the United States and Canada, after the Second
Vatican Council, Slovak liturgy is heard in practically every
Slovak Roman Catholic parish. Even in churches of Lutheran denomination, the liturgy is Slovak. As we shall
see in next chapter the sale of prayer books in the Slovak
language is widespread.
At Slovak picnics, which are held by the hundreds,
�SLOVAKIA
77
every summer, in the United States and Canada, Slovak
music and songs are heard. In like manner, these are heard
at weddings, even to the third and fourth generation. Slovak
songs and music binds and deepens Slovak consciousness
more than enything else. Slovak records are being made
in practically every city where Slovaks live and at least
one musician versed in Slovak folk songs and dances is
found.
In the past few years professional Slovak singing and
dance groups were organized. The leading ones are in
Toronto and Montreal, followed by Detroit, Chicago, and
New York.
At conventions of American-Slovak and Canadian-Slovak organizations the Slovak language is still used, even
though less than the English. Official reports and minutes
are written bi-lingually in spite of the fact that the pioneer
generation of Slovak immigrants, especially in America,
bas no representation at the conventions.
III
Another indication of cultural awakening among American and Canadian Slovaks is the sale of books. During
the past five years, 113,755 Slovak books and 450,000 pamphlets were sold in North America. This number includes
61,215 scientific, popular science, and novels; 65,000
pamphlets; 52,540 religious books and 385,000 religious
pamphlets. The number of English books about the Slovaks
31,248; Slovak-English and English-Slovak dictionaries and
textbooks sold amounted to 14,195.
Altogether during the past five years 159,198 books
in English or Slovak about Slovaks were sold, in addition
to 450,000 pamphlets.
The greatest number of books were sold by the First
Catholic Slovak Union: 49,008. The greatest number of
religious books, 32,000, were sold by the Slovak Franciscan
Fathers.
Books were sold by the Slovak Institute of SS. Cyril
and Methodius, Slovak Jesuit Fathers, Sisters of St. Dominic
(Oxford, Mich.), Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, and
�78
SLOVAKIA
other smaller publishers, namely Slovak v Amerike, Slovenskd Obrana, Rev. Frantisek Fuga and others.28
During the past five years 5,200 maps of Slovakia29
were sold and 45,400 Slovak records were distributed. 30
IV
It is difficult to estim8.te how many Slovaks live in
America and what per cent of American inhabitants consist
of Slovak immigrants and their descendants. It is generally
admitted that the people of ethnic groups number not less
than 30,000,000.
How many Americans are of Slovak ancestry?
The statistics of the Slovak Academy of Science in
Bratislava report that up to 1921 when mass emigration
ceased, 867,720 Slovaks emigrated to America. 31 It is true
that some of these retlirned to their homeland. However,
approximately 500,000 remained in America. Today there
are three generations of Slovak origin in the United States.
If we calculated that each family has at least four children,
then emphasising that three million Slovaks live in America
is a conservative number.
The question is, to what extent do these American
citizens of Slovak ancestry feel their Slovak heritage. We
can judge this through the aid of organizations and newspapers. Slovak-American organizations have more than
450,000 members; newspapers around 150,000 subscribers.
This does not include various parish societies and clubs
of all sects. There are over 400 Slovak parishes. All organized American-Slovaks with their families create at least
2,000,000 citizens who can be included to a greater or lesser
extent as conscious Slovaks.
There are about 70,000 Slovaks in Canada.32 Since
practically all Slovak emigrees came to Canada after the
first world war, we do not exaggerate when we emphasize
that the Slovak spirit lives on not only in the first but also
in the second and third generation of Canadian Slovaks.
FOOTNOTES
1) Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, XX, Ne. 43,
pp. 105-121; XXI, No. 44, pp. 109-144.
�SLOVAKIA
79
2) Gilbert L. Oddo, Slovakia and Its People, New York: Robert Speller
and Sons, 1960.
3) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central
Europe, New York: Robert Speller and Sons, 1960.
4) Joseph A. Mikus, Slovakia-A Political History, Milwaukee, Wis. :
Marquette University Press, 1964. The same work is in French: La
Slovaquie dans le drame de L 'Europe, Paris: Les Iles d'or, 1955.
5) F. Vnuk, Slovakia's Six Eventful Months (October 1938-March 1939) .
Rome: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1964. He devoted much
attention to Communistic politics. The following work is very important: Historical Outline of the Communist Party of Slovakia,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1968. Another important work
is that of F rantisek Vnuk, Neuveritel'ne sprisahanie: vojenske a
politicke akcie proti Slovenskej republike v roku 1944 (English
resume), Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1964.
6) Slovak Studies, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 19611967, VII Volumes. Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of
America, 1951-1971, XXI Volumes. Jednota Annual Furdek, Middletown, Pa.: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1962-1971, X Vol.
7) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, Toronto, Canada: Canadian
Ethnic Press Association of Ontario, Toronto, Canada, 1967.
8) Jozef Pauco, Ph.D., 75 rokov Prvej Katolickej Slovenskej Jednoty,
Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1965.
9) Joseph Pauco, Ph.D., (Ed.) 60 Years of the Slovak League of
America, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1967.
10) Peter P. IDetko, M.D., The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact,
Slovakia, XVIII, No. 41, pp. 5-54.
11) Frantisek Hru~ovsky, Ph.D., Slovenske rehole v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute at the abbey of St. Andrew-Svorad,
1955.
12) Mother M. Emerentia Petrasek, Brief History of the Congregation
of the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, Danville, Pa. , 1959.
13) Richard Portasik, O.F.M., Slovak Franciscans in America, History
of the Most Holy Savior Commissariate, 1926-1966, Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Franciscan Fathers, 1966.
14) Here are for instance: Jozef Pauco, Stefan Furdek a slovenske
prist'ahovalectvo, Middletown, Pa., J ednota, 1955. Jozef Pauco,
MatitS Jankola, knaz a narodovec, Danville, Pa., Congregation of
the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, 1959. A host of other
contributions by the same author about the Slovak pioneers in
America in the newspaper JEDNOTA, Middletown, Pa., The annual
Furdek contributed English articles about the Slovak peoples in
almost every edition.
�SLOVAKIA
80
15) The well known are: Sister M. Consuela Gregorovich, Contribution
of Rev. Matthew Jankola to Slovak Education in the United States,
1944. Sister M. Delphine Opet, SS.C.M., Political Views of Dudovit
Stur, Slovakia, XXI, No. 44, pp. 20-78. S. E. Bue, Slovak Nationalism,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1960. M. G. Woytko,
Slovakia's Road to Statehood, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications,
1956.
16) Slovak Studies, Vol. III, Cyrilomethodiana, Rome, Italy, 1963.
17) M. Lacko, The Life of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Rome: Slovak
Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1963. Second Edition, 1970.
Here is an additionally important work: Smrzik, The Glagolitic
or Roman-Slavonic Liturgy, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute, 1959.
18) Sister Martina Tybor, Saints Cyril and Methodius, Milwaukee, Wis .,
Bruce Publishing Co., Senior and Junior edition.
19) Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M., S.T.D., The Church of Silence in Slovakia, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications, 1956.: Slovak BishopsMartyrs of Christ, Toronto, Ontario, Canadian Slovak League, 1963.;
Slovak Clergy in History and Culture, Middletown, Pa., First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
20) Sister Cecilia, The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia, New York, New
York, Farrar, Straus and Young, First Printing, 1954.
21) For example: Jozef Pauco, Unconquerables, New York, Vantage
Press, 1958.; Christian Slovakia under Communism, Valparaiso ,
Indiana, Slovak Catholic Federation of America, 1953.
22) More accurate facts in the Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike,
"Predstavitelia slovenskej kulturnej tvorby," 1967, pp. 113-252 and
Slovak Studies, Vol. VII, Bibliography, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute,
Cleveland-Rome, 1967.
23)
J.M. Kirschbaum, nudovit Stur and His Place in the Slav-tc World,
Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1953.: Pavel Jozef Safarik and
His Contribution to Slavic Studies, Cleveland-Winnipeg, Slavistica
No. 43, 1962. Literature of the Cyrilo-Methodian Period and Slova,.
kia, Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1964.; Anton Bernolak, the
First Codifier of the Slovak Language, Winnipeg-Cleveland, Ohio:
Slavistica No. 52, 1964. Jan Kollar-Slovak Poet of Panslavism,
Winnipeg-Toronto: Slavistica No. LVI, 1966. J. Rekem, The Origin
and Development of the Slovak Language, Middletown, Pa.: Jednota,
1962. Slovak Litcratiire and National Consciousness Before Anton
Bernolak (1762-1813), Cleveland, Ohio, Slovak Institute, 1965.
Frantisek Vnuk, Sedemnast' neurodnych rokov (excerpts from the
history of Slovak literature, 1945-1962) , Middletown, Pa.; Slovak
v Amerike, English resume, 1965.
24) Mother M. Emerentia, Steps in Elementary Slovak, Hazleton, Pa.,
Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius, I, II, III, 1959.; Rev. Bonaventure S. Bue, O.F.M., Ph.D., Slovak Language Laboratory Course,
Cleveland, Ohio: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1968.; Philip A.
�SLOVAKIA
81
Hrobak, Slovak Lessons, Middletown, Pa., 1949.; Let's Learn Slovak,
Middletown, Pa., 1959.; Slovak for Beginners, Middletown, Pa., I,
IT, III, 1963.; J. Konus, Practical Slovak Grammar, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
1939. A good service was rendered in the work of Henrich Bartek,
Slovensky pravopis s gramatickymi pouckami a slovnikom, Whiting,
Ind., Rev. John Lach, 1956. A textbook in the Slovak language was
prepared also by Sister M. Gabriel, SS.C.M. and Stefan Blasko.
25) Hrobak's English-Slovak Dictionary, Middletown, Pa., 1944. Second
Printing, New York, N.Y.; Robert Speller and Sons, 1965. J. J.Konus,
Slov ensko-anglicky slovnik, Slovak-English Dictionary, Federation
of Slovak Catholics in America, 1930.; Slovak-English Dictionary,
Passaic, N. J.: Slovak Catholic Sokol, 1970.
26) Jednota, Middletown, Pa., Official Organ of the First Catholic Slovak
Union. Katolicky Sokol, Passaic, N. J., Official Organ of the Slovak
Catholic Sokol. Narodne Noviny, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ of
the National Slovak Society. Zivena, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ
of the 2ivena Beneficial Society. Kanadsky Slovak, Toronto, Ont.,
Canada, Official Organ of the Canadian Slovak League. Most, Cleveland, Ohio. Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike, Middletown,
Pa. Slovak v Amerike, Middletown, Pa. Details of Slovak newspapers
in America are presented by Konstantin Culen in:Slovenske casopisy v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
27) The Slovak League of America worked with American Slovaks
within 31 states regarding the bill S23 sponsored by U. S. Senator
Richard S. Schweiker (R.-Pa.).
28) The author of this paper personally ascertained the number of
books sold by various publishers.
29) The map was printed by the Slovak Institute, Cleveland.
30) Books, with the exception of dictionaries and textbooks, sent by
the Communist regime in Slovakia are sold in very small numbers.
However, the records made by the singing group SL'UK are in great
demand.
31) J. M. Kirschbaum, The Assimilation Process of American Slovaks,
Slovakia XII, No. 44, pp. 79-84.
32) J . M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, p. 4.
*
*
*
THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA represents an
overwhelming majority of organized Americans of Slovak
descent; actively affiliated with it are the large5t Slova k
traternals, religious organizations, Slovak Clubs and Slovak
civic organizations in the United States .
�
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
1973, Vol. 23
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 23 (No. 46), 1973.
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
1973
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
Cultural Revival of American
And Canadian Slovaks
Jozef Pa u co, Ph.D.
I.
During the past ten years, American and Canadian
Slovaks are living a cultural revival. There are many
instances to indicate this. Above all, they received support
from many intellectuals who emigrated from Slovakia after
the second world war. A firm collaboration was created
in the cultural field, primarily through the Slovak League
of America, the Canadian Slovak League, and the Slovak
Institute in Cleveland-Rome. The 1100 centennial of the
arrival of SS. Cyril and Methodius to Slovakia, which was
celebrated auspiciously by the free Slovaks, inspired many
scientific and cultural workers and awakened an interest
in the past and present culture among a great number.
Finally, a wave of national and cultural rebirth swept over
American soil, in all aspects.
During the first years of revival, preparation was quite
slow, but since 1960 there was a complete flourishing in
practically all educational and scientific disciplines. When
at first an attempt was made to discuss cultural revival
it was doubtful as to its success. The results were amazing
because the third and fourth generation of American
Slovaks did not yet sink in the sea of anonymity. This
appears from the fact that American and Canadian Slovaks
not only read but are active in Slovak life and activities.
Scholarships are available sponsored by practically
every Slovak organization in America. It is not extraordinary for students to receive awards for outstanding
work. If a student seeks for ethnical news where scholarships are published, it is a sign of his Slovak interest.
Of course all applicants must belong to the organization
concerned. Amidst approximately 450,000 organized American Slovaks rnmrly 1/ 3 belong to a youth branch. 1
SLOVAKIA
73
II.
Slovak cultural educators published and sold a great
number of books about Slovakia and its people and that
not only in Slovak but also in English and to a certain
extent French. Two goals were aimed at: 1) to bring
Slovakia to the youngest Americans of Slovak extraction;
2) to inform the non-Slovak public with objective information which was, until recently, rare, .because only those
spoke and wrote about Slovaks, who through various
reasons were not favorable towards and did not recognize
the Slovaks as a nation. In this respect it must be admitted
that Slovak knowledge and publicity took a step forward.
HISTORICAL WORKS
Several noteworthy volumes dealing with the history
of the Slovak nation, incidently the American and Canadian
Slovaks, were published. Professor Gilbert L. Oddo is the
author of the first complete English history of the Slovak
people in which he partially despicts the history of American Slovaks.2 The work was published in three editions
and is still in demand by Slovak as well as American
educators.
Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum published a remarkable book3 in which he portrays important incidents of
the Slovak people. Professor Jozef A. Mikus devoted his
well documented treatise to the events from 1918 to 1950.4
Professor Frantisek Vnuk wrote a detailed account of the
evolvement of Slovakia from autonomy to independent
statehood.5
These works form the basic orientation of Slovak
history. The supplement in Slovak Studies, Slovakia, and
Jednota Annual Furdek, 6 provides the reader with a great
deal of material, which in America concentrates and objectively casts light on Slovakian past. The hi~tory of
American and Canadian Slovaks is grasped as well. The
complete history in English is found in Canada. It was
written on the basis of a dissertation and strictly according
to scientific form by Professor Jozef M. Kirschbaum. 7
Canada and ethnic critics accepted this work with highest
honors.
74
SLOVAKIA
The First Catholic Slovak Union published a detailed
history about its organization.8 Even though it concerns
the history of one organization, this book contains such
material touching upon all phases of American Slovaks
in-as-much as the First Catholic Slovak Union played an
exceptionally significant role in their lives.
A history of the Slovak League of America was published in English. 9 To this work we must add a meaningful
chapter about the Pittsburgh Pact written by Peter P.
Hletko. 10 Both publications offer the students o! American
Slovak life adequate research material for the study of
attitudes towards Slovakia. Practically every American
Slovak organization has a chronicle review in its calendars
or memoirs. Even the American Slovak parishes brief
chronicles or histories of their parishes, at first in Slovak,
later bi-lingual, and finally just English. In the United
States and later in Canada, Slovak religious orders played
and are playing an important role. The history of all the
Slovak religious orders was compiled by Professor Francis
Hrusovsky. 11 The accomplishment was of high quality and
well documented. The congregation of the Sisters of SS.
Cyril and Methodius which began in America in 1909 has
its own history; 12 so do the Slovak Franciscan Fathers.13
Both works were written by members of the respective
religious orders.
In addition, it is well to mention a miriad of books
or periodicals containing biographies of leading American
Slovaks particularly of pioneer days. The greater number
were printed in Slovak.14
These and other works as well as those of the Slovak
Institute and other cultural Slovak-American Institutes
developed an interest in students of Slovak origin, about
the past of the Slovak nation, its culture and politics. Upon
this basis many academic thesis developed. The author
of this article receives at least five inquiries annually for
suggestions of topics regarding Slovak life. The Sisters
of SS. Cyril and Methodius wrote more than twenty thesis
many of which undergo severe departmental criticism. 15
Particular emphasis is placed upon the historical era
of SS. Cyril and Methodius. To attain this goal Slovak
Studies aided greatly by publishing many technical con-
SLOVAKIA
75
tribution in one volume. 16 A well known historian of the
Cyrilo-Methodian era, Michal Lacko, wrote the biography
of the Apostles and the Slavonic nations, in general. 17 Sister
M. Martina Tybor wrote the Junior and Senior edition of
SS. Cyril and Methodius, who are the patrons of her
congregation.18 Most 1963 presented an expanded appraisal
of the SS. Cyril and Methodius traditions among Slovaks.
The history of the persecution of the church under
communism was very well written by Father Teodorik
J. Zubek, 0. F. M. in a documentary volume and other
opportune studies.19 Sister Cecilia revealed the unbearable
conditions, as she beheld and lived through them under
the Communist regime. 20 Further attempts were made to
enlighten this tragic period of the church, hierarchy, priesthood, religious orders, and the people of God. 21
In western Europe and South America free Slovaks
published books in other languages, principally German ,
French, Italian and Spanish in which they dealt with the
Slovak tragedy after 1945 as well as specific problems
which painfully were incorporated in the history of the
Slovak nation. In this regard the most valuable works
were edited by Bishop Paul Hnilica, Msgr. Stefan Nahalka,
Msgr. Jozef Tomko, Rev. Stanislav :C>urica and Rev. Michal
Lacko in Italy; Rev. Vojtech Bucko, Dr. Ferdinand :C>urcansky and Kristof Greiner in West Germany; P. G. Dobis
in Austria; Dr. Arved Grebert in Switzerland; Dr. Stefan
Glejdura in Spain; Dr. Stanislav Meciar, Dr. Ernest zatko
and Alojz Macek in Argentina. 22
LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE
While the history of the Slovak nation and AmericanCanadian Slovaks have a sufficient representation in English, the history of Slovak Literature and language awaits
further elaboration. Basic studies emanated in single, particularly cited annuals or individual articles. Most attention
to those themes was devoted by Professor Jozef M.
Kirschbaum, Msgr. Jan Rekem , and professor Frantisek
Vnuk. While Dr. Kirschbaum and Dr. Rekem occupied
themselves with individual periods of Slovak literature and
development of the language of the past, Vnuk concentrated
upon strengthening Slovak literature. 23
76
SLOVAKIA
Language studies of a practical nature are properly
represented. Modern textbooks in Slovak language were
compiled by Mother M. Emerencia, SS.C.M., S. E. Bue,
Filip A. Hrobak and Konus. 24 Among the best dictionaries
are those of Hrobak and Konus.25
NEWSPAPERS AND ALMANACS
Editors and co-workers of American and Canadian
Slovak newspapers in Slovak and in the past few years
in English are returning to the problem concerned with
preservation of national consciousness, cultural, ethnical
awareness, enlightening the public with various phases of
Slovak life. Representative voices of the third generation
of Slovaks in the news methods and articles are not lacking.
Emphasis, however, is placed upon the preservation of
Slovak cultural inheritance. In this regard the Jednota,
Katolicky Sokol, Narodne Noviny, zivena and Kanadsk?}
Slovak are performing a great work in the English language. The technical and representative review Most,
Literdrny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike, and other newspapers are returning to the all-Slovak problems exclusively
in the Slovak language.26
Literarny Almanach, Slovak v Amerike and Slovak
Studies published an outlook upon the events of the
cultural activities of Slovak writers, leaders, poets, artists,
and news editors. The reports are not complete, but they
are sufficient evidence to assure the unprejudiced reader
that in the revival of Slovak cultural life in America are
intellectuals who do not want to stifle the development
of Americanization, but they do not want to speed it up .
They strive to evolve in this field as much as other ethnic
groups. It is not coincidental that in the preparation of
ethnic cultural centers, American Slovaks wish to enkindle
appropriate roles equal to their number and missions. 27
In the United States and Canada, after the Second
Vatican Council, Slovak liturgy is heard in practically every
Slovak Roman Catholic parish. Even in churches of Lutheran denomination, the liturgy is Slovak. As we shall
see in next chapter the sale of prayer books in the Slovak
language is widespread.
At Slovak picnics, which are held by the hundreds,
SLOVAKIA
77
every summer, in the United States and Canada, Slovak
music and songs are heard. In like manner, these are heard
at weddings, even to the third and fourth generation. Slovak
songs and music binds and deepens Slovak consciousness
more than enything else. Slovak records are being made
in practically every city where Slovaks live and at least
one musician versed in Slovak folk songs and dances is
found.
In the past few years professional Slovak singing and
dance groups were organized. The leading ones are in
Toronto and Montreal, followed by Detroit, Chicago, and
New York.
At conventions of American-Slovak and Canadian-Slovak organizations the Slovak language is still used, even
though less than the English. Official reports and minutes
are written bi-lingually in spite of the fact that the pioneer
generation of Slovak immigrants, especially in America,
bas no representation at the conventions.
III
Another indication of cultural awakening among American and Canadian Slovaks is the sale of books. During
the past five years, 113,755 Slovak books and 450,000 pamphlets were sold in North America. This number includes
61,215 scientific, popular science, and novels; 65,000
pamphlets; 52,540 religious books and 385,000 religious
pamphlets. The number of English books about the Slovaks
31,248; Slovak-English and English-Slovak dictionaries and
textbooks sold amounted to 14,195.
Altogether during the past five years 159,198 books
in English or Slovak about Slovaks were sold, in addition
to 450,000 pamphlets.
The greatest number of books were sold by the First
Catholic Slovak Union: 49,008. The greatest number of
religious books, 32,000, were sold by the Slovak Franciscan
Fathers.
Books were sold by the Slovak Institute of SS. Cyril
and Methodius, Slovak Jesuit Fathers, Sisters of St. Dominic
(Oxford, Mich.), Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, and
78
SLOVAKIA
other smaller publishers, namely Slovak v Amerike, Slovenskd Obrana, Rev. Frantisek Fuga and others.28
During the past five years 5,200 maps of Slovakia29
were sold and 45,400 Slovak records were distributed. 30
IV
It is difficult to estim8.te how many Slovaks live in
America and what per cent of American inhabitants consist
of Slovak immigrants and their descendants. It is generally
admitted that the people of ethnic groups number not less
than 30,000,000.
How many Americans are of Slovak ancestry?
The statistics of the Slovak Academy of Science in
Bratislava report that up to 1921 when mass emigration
ceased, 867,720 Slovaks emigrated to America. 31 It is true
that some of these retlirned to their homeland. However,
approximately 500,000 remained in America. Today there
are three generations of Slovak origin in the United States.
If we calculated that each family has at least four children,
then emphasising that three million Slovaks live in America
is a conservative number.
The question is, to what extent do these American
citizens of Slovak ancestry feel their Slovak heritage. We
can judge this through the aid of organizations and newspapers. Slovak-American organizations have more than
450,000 members; newspapers around 150,000 subscribers.
This does not include various parish societies and clubs
of all sects. There are over 400 Slovak parishes. All organized American-Slovaks with their families create at least
2,000,000 citizens who can be included to a greater or lesser
extent as conscious Slovaks.
There are about 70,000 Slovaks in Canada.32 Since
practically all Slovak emigrees came to Canada after the
first world war, we do not exaggerate when we emphasize
that the Slovak spirit lives on not only in the first but also
in the second and third generation of Canadian Slovaks.
FOOTNOTES
1) Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, XX, Ne. 43,
pp. 105-121; XXI, No. 44, pp. 109-144.
SLOVAKIA
79
2) Gilbert L. Oddo, Slovakia and Its People, New York: Robert Speller
and Sons, 1960.
3) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovakia: Nation at the Crossroads of Central
Europe, New York: Robert Speller and Sons, 1960.
4) Joseph A. Mikus, Slovakia-A Political History, Milwaukee, Wis. :
Marquette University Press, 1964. The same work is in French: La
Slovaquie dans le drame de L 'Europe, Paris: Les Iles d'or, 1955.
5) F. Vnuk, Slovakia's Six Eventful Months (October 1938-March 1939) .
Rome: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1964. He devoted much
attention to Communistic politics. The following work is very important: Historical Outline of the Communist Party of Slovakia,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1968. Another important work
is that of F rantisek Vnuk, Neuveritel'ne sprisahanie: vojenske a
politicke akcie proti Slovenskej republike v roku 1944 (English
resume), Middletown, Pa.: Slovak v Amerike, 1964.
6) Slovak Studies, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 19611967, VII Volumes. Slovakia, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of
America, 1951-1971, XXI Volumes. Jednota Annual Furdek, Middletown, Pa.: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1962-1971, X Vol.
7) J. M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, Toronto, Canada: Canadian
Ethnic Press Association of Ontario, Toronto, Canada, 1967.
8) Jozef Pauco, Ph.D., 75 rokov Prvej Katolickej Slovenskej Jednoty,
Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1965.
9) Joseph Pauco, Ph.D., (Ed.) 60 Years of the Slovak League of
America, Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1967.
10) Peter P. IDetko, M.D., The Slovaks and the Pittsburgh Pact,
Slovakia, XVIII, No. 41, pp. 5-54.
11) Frantisek Hru~ovsky, Ph.D., Slovenske rehole v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute at the abbey of St. Andrew-Svorad,
1955.
12) Mother M. Emerentia Petrasek, Brief History of the Congregation
of the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, Danville, Pa. , 1959.
13) Richard Portasik, O.F.M., Slovak Franciscans in America, History
of the Most Holy Savior Commissariate, 1926-1966, Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Franciscan Fathers, 1966.
14) Here are for instance: Jozef Pauco, Stefan Furdek a slovenske
prist'ahovalectvo, Middletown, Pa., J ednota, 1955. Jozef Pauco,
MatitS Jankola, knaz a narodovec, Danville, Pa., Congregation of
the Sisters of SS. Cyril and Methodius, 1959. A host of other
contributions by the same author about the Slovak pioneers in
America in the newspaper JEDNOTA, Middletown, Pa., The annual
Furdek contributed English articles about the Slovak peoples in
almost every edition.
SLOVAKIA
80
15) The well known are: Sister M. Consuela Gregorovich, Contribution
of Rev. Matthew Jankola to Slovak Education in the United States,
1944. Sister M. Delphine Opet, SS.C.M., Political Views of Dudovit
Stur, Slovakia, XXI, No. 44, pp. 20-78. S. E. Bue, Slovak Nationalism,
Middletown, Pa.: Slovak League of America, 1960. M. G. Woytko,
Slovakia's Road to Statehood, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications,
1956.
16) Slovak Studies, Vol. III, Cyrilomethodiana, Rome, Italy, 1963.
17) M. Lacko, The Life of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Rome: Slovak
Institute, Cleveland-Rome, 1963. Second Edition, 1970.
Here is an additionally important work: Smrzik, The Glagolitic
or Roman-Slavonic Liturgy, Cleveland, Ohio: Slovak Institute, 1959.
18) Sister Martina Tybor, Saints Cyril and Methodius, Milwaukee, Wis .,
Bruce Publishing Co., Senior and Junior edition.
19) Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M., S.T.D., The Church of Silence in Slovakia, Whiting, Indiana, Lach Publications, 1956.: Slovak BishopsMartyrs of Christ, Toronto, Ontario, Canadian Slovak League, 1963.;
Slovak Clergy in History and Culture, Middletown, Pa., First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
20) Sister Cecilia, The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia, New York, New
York, Farrar, Straus and Young, First Printing, 1954.
21) For example: Jozef Pauco, Unconquerables, New York, Vantage
Press, 1958.; Christian Slovakia under Communism, Valparaiso ,
Indiana, Slovak Catholic Federation of America, 1953.
22) More accurate facts in the Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike,
"Predstavitelia slovenskej kulturnej tvorby," 1967, pp. 113-252 and
Slovak Studies, Vol. VII, Bibliography, Rome, Italy: Slovak Institute,
Cleveland-Rome, 1967.
23)
J.M. Kirschbaum, nudovit Stur and His Place in the Slav-tc World,
Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1953.: Pavel Jozef Safarik and
His Contribution to Slavic Studies, Cleveland-Winnipeg, Slavistica
No. 43, 1962. Literature of the Cyrilo-Methodian Period and Slova,.
kia, Cleveland, Ohio.: Slovak Institute, 1964.; Anton Bernolak, the
First Codifier of the Slovak Language, Winnipeg-Cleveland, Ohio:
Slavistica No. 52, 1964. Jan Kollar-Slovak Poet of Panslavism,
Winnipeg-Toronto: Slavistica No. LVI, 1966. J. Rekem, The Origin
and Development of the Slovak Language, Middletown, Pa.: Jednota,
1962. Slovak Litcratiire and National Consciousness Before Anton
Bernolak (1762-1813), Cleveland, Ohio, Slovak Institute, 1965.
Frantisek Vnuk, Sedemnast' neurodnych rokov (excerpts from the
history of Slovak literature, 1945-1962) , Middletown, Pa.; Slovak
v Amerike, English resume, 1965.
24) Mother M. Emerentia, Steps in Elementary Slovak, Hazleton, Pa.,
Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius, I, II, III, 1959.; Rev. Bonaventure S. Bue, O.F.M., Ph.D., Slovak Language Laboratory Course,
Cleveland, Ohio: The First Catholic Slovak Union, 1968.; Philip A.
SLOVAKIA
81
Hrobak, Slovak Lessons, Middletown, Pa., 1949.; Let's Learn Slovak,
Middletown, Pa., 1959.; Slovak for Beginners, Middletown, Pa., I,
IT, III, 1963.; J. Konus, Practical Slovak Grammar, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
1939. A good service was rendered in the work of Henrich Bartek,
Slovensky pravopis s gramatickymi pouckami a slovnikom, Whiting,
Ind., Rev. John Lach, 1956. A textbook in the Slovak language was
prepared also by Sister M. Gabriel, SS.C.M. and Stefan Blasko.
25) Hrobak's English-Slovak Dictionary, Middletown, Pa., 1944. Second
Printing, New York, N.Y.; Robert Speller and Sons, 1965. J. J.Konus,
Slov ensko-anglicky slovnik, Slovak-English Dictionary, Federation
of Slovak Catholics in America, 1930.; Slovak-English Dictionary,
Passaic, N. J.: Slovak Catholic Sokol, 1970.
26) Jednota, Middletown, Pa., Official Organ of the First Catholic Slovak
Union. Katolicky Sokol, Passaic, N. J., Official Organ of the Slovak
Catholic Sokol. Narodne Noviny, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ of
the National Slovak Society. Zivena, Pittsburgh, Pa., Official Organ
of the 2ivena Beneficial Society. Kanadsky Slovak, Toronto, Ont.,
Canada, Official Organ of the Canadian Slovak League. Most, Cleveland, Ohio. Literarny Almanach Slovaka v Amerike, Middletown,
Pa. Slovak v Amerike, Middletown, Pa. Details of Slovak newspapers
in America are presented by Konstantin Culen in:Slovenske casopisy v Amerike, Cleveland, Ohio: First Catholic Slovak Union, 1970.
27) The Slovak League of America worked with American Slovaks
within 31 states regarding the bill S23 sponsored by U. S. Senator
Richard S. Schweiker (R.-Pa.).
28) The author of this paper personally ascertained the number of
books sold by various publishers.
29) The map was printed by the Slovak Institute, Cleveland.
30) Books, with the exception of dictionaries and textbooks, sent by
the Communist regime in Slovakia are sold in very small numbers.
However, the records made by the singing group SL'UK are in great
demand.
31) J. M. Kirschbaum, The Assimilation Process of American Slovaks,
Slovakia XII, No. 44, pp. 79-84.
32) J . M. Kirschbaum, Slovaks in Canada, p. 4.
*
*
*
THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA represents an
overwhelming majority of organized Americans of Slovak
descent; actively affiliated with it are the large5t Slova k
traternals, religious organizations, Slovak Clubs and Slovak
civic organizations in the United States .
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
Cultural Revival of American and Canadian Slovaks
Description
An account of the resource
Jozef Paučo, Ph.D.
Slovakia, Vol. 23 (No. 46), 1973
pp. 72-81
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Paučo, Jozef, 1914-1975
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1973
SNK
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/aad58eb703bc6e6ce687d8b8f3cfa0bf.pdf
7572f46d746b8a61cd64bbd04e172821
PDF Text
Text
40
SLOVAK]A
CZECH C.APITULATION TO COMMUNISM
The ease with which the communists came into absolute power
In Prague, with the assent of Dr. Beneš and tbe participation of Jan
Masaryk, surprised even many lnformed people in Europe and the
western world. Mucb had been written about the political maturity
of the Czecb nation, its loyaJty to democracy and western culture and,
therefore, many were willing to believe that Prague actually was a
bastion of western democracy. Some expected tbat it would be a
bridge between the East and tbe West. Otbers tbougbt tbat tbe
Czechs were called to perform an lmportant mlssion in the contemporary tense situation of tbe world.
But before the people of America and Europe had a chance to
rub their eyes after reading the reports about the crisis in Prague,
the bubble about the loyalty of the Czechs to democracy and the
story of their world m.ission burst. The Communists had no trouble
at all in taklng Prague. There was not a slngle person in tbe entlre
state of tbis "mature, democratic nation" to offer any notlceable
resistance to the communist putsch.
History had repeated itself. Ten years before tbere was not a
single Czech who dared to defend the independence of the Czech
nation and Beneš's "democratlc" state by flrlng even a single shot at
the nazls.
In tbe Czech nation there could not be found a Petkov or a
Maniu, and much less a Tiso, who preferred the gallows to nego•
tiating wltb communism and serving the communlsts.
And this fact probably stunned the western world more than it
did the people of centra! Europe, because the people of the former
were really taken in by Beneš's high-geard propaganda machine.
The European and American public was suddenly faced with the fact
that Dr. Beneš not only did not offer any resistance to the communist minority, but that he even gave the communlst putsch a legal
form and a democratic appearance. And lt was the same Dr. Edward
Beneš who had publlshed the book "Democracy 'ľoday and Tomorrow,"
wherein he portrayed himself as a piliar of European democracy!
Another well-known representative of "Czech democracy," Jan Masaryk, even accepted a posltion In the "people's democratic government" of tbe Russian gaulelter, Klement Gottwald.
The former French Foreign Minister, Georges Bidault, compared
what happened with such llghtning speed in Prague In 1948 with what
happened in 1938 in Munlch, when Dr. Edward Beneš, bis government and the whole Czech nation accepted without reslstance the
factual surrender of the Czechoslovak Republic to Hitler.
As far as the role of Dr. Beneš is concerned, there is without
debate a great simllarity between bis polltics of 1938 and 1948. And
especially the results were similar.
In 1938, Dr. Beneš not only surrendered unconstltutlonally a plece
of Czechoslovak terrltory to Germany, but also advised to make concesslons to the Germans, when threatened by bis own people and refuslng to collaborate with Hitler he fled to England. And so it was
even In 1945, when unconstltutlonally he surrendered Ruthenla to
Moscow and made concesslons to bolshevism.
�SLOVAKIA
41
But thls tíme, lf we do not want to talk about the cleverness of
Moscow, fate wanted Dr. Beneš to play the role of Dr. Hácha, who
in the spring of 1939 had to accept the German protectorate and sanction the end of the Czechoslovak Republlc after Beneš had fled.
Today practically no one doubts that Dr. Beneš formally surrendered
Bohemia and Slovakia into the hands of Moscow and bolshevlsm when
he surrendered the Government into the hands of Gottwald and the
Czech communists.
And Beneš did that without offering any reslstance. He did not
even attempt to defend fľeedom, democracy and Christian traditions.
There is in all this a bit of tragedy as far as the Czech nation
and even Beneš himself are concerned. But it was the logical consequence of the Czech politics of Dr. Beneš. Even the most clever
fraud and most deceitful player cannot get away all the time wlth his
frauds and deceptlon. A time comes when he gets caught and
rapped. And so it is even in politics.
Dr. Edward Beneš and a great part of the Czech politicians based
their interna! and foreign policies on intrigues on the assumption
that they could deceive their partner. T. G. Masaryk himself w rote
about this in his better years in "The Czech Problem," saying: "If
one Jooks at our public life a bit carefully, he shall see not only
weak beggary, but he shall a lso meet up with a particular type of
lntriguers. Intriguery !s poisoning our entire all!ed life, because
people who cannot be lions are becoming foxes, and those who cannot
be heroes are becoming lackeys and are helping themselves by mans
of Iackey intr!gue. And the ideal of these numerous people is
'politics'."
Dr. Beneš was a prototype of such a "politician." This is not
the opinion of Siovaks only. Lloyd George said as much in his book
"The Truth About the Peace Treaties" which he published in 1938:
" Of the many misfortunes that befell Austrla in the day of her
great calam!ty, one of the worst was that Czecho-Slovak!a was represented at the Peace Conference not by her wise leader, President
Masaryk but by an impulsive, clever but much Iess sagacious and
more short-sighted politician, who did not foresee tbat the more he
grasped, the Iess could he retain."
Today it would be undoubtedly in place to remark that Beneš's
pollcy was a great calamity not only for Austria, but also for the
so-called "Third" Czechoslovak Republic.
Dr. Edward Beneš always had a pian. To make certa!n that he
would rule over Slovakia, tbe Sudeteners and German property, he
flew to Moscow already in 1943 to negotlate a pact with Russla. Of
course, on the assumption that later on he could circumvent it and
break it - as he had done in the case or the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918,
at the Peace Conference in 1918 when he promised that Czechoslovakia would be a confederation, and in other lnstances as well.
Moscow, however, was wlse to Dr. Beneš. The little man with a
pian seemed to forget that he was deallng wlth the master in the art
or deceptlon and broken pacts. And so lt was that Dr. Beneš, because
or his extreme amb!tlon and imperiallstlc tendencies, brought the
Czech natlon to the brink of disaster twice with!n a decade.
But tbis t!me the catastrophic consequences of his polltlcs artect
not only the Czech natlon, but his capltulation to bolshevtsm has an
�42
SLOVAK.IA
lmmeasurable slgnlficance for the whole of Europe, and already today
is fatal for the Slovak natlon which today is without the servlces ot
Dr. Tiso to save it !rom bolshevism, as he once saved it trom nazlsm.
A handful of communists had llttle trouble In overpowering Slovakia
and subjecting it to its totalltarian dlctatorshlp only because they had
the support of Prague - the same Prague that had prevlously ordered
to kill, jali and deport the elite ot the Slovak nation and placed morally irresponsible and politically immature puppets Jn charge of Slovakia.
The Slovaks shall never forget the terrible and wanton destructlon of Slovak lives and property caused by the 1944 rebellion whlch
was planned by Beneš and hls followers and executed by the so-called
Czechoslovaks (Czech Slovaks ! ) and the communists.
lf proper steps are not taken In tíme, the results of the Czech
capitulation to bolshevism shall be just as immeasurable for Europe.
Czechoslovakia now is in fact a hive of communism and a most im•
portant air base of Moscow. Bohemla and Slovakla have great stra•
tegical signlficance even though mllitary techniques have changed.
And more so today than ever before, because Europe from the Czech
borders to the West is ruined, defenseless and disorganized. Bis•
marcťs "who rules Bohemla, rules Europe" did not !ose its signifi•
cance completely.
Of course some one could say - and Beneš's polltical followers
in exlle are repeatlng it almost lncessantly - that the Czech capltulatlon to bolshevlsm was caused by the over-all world situatlon. We
still remember that Czech propaganda tried to convlnce the world
after 1938 that the West had betrayed Czechoslovalda, even though
that country dld nothing to save itself.
But the song of bankrupt Czech polltlcians "we had to capltulate"
sounds a bit off key today. We have had Ume to consider what Beneii
and his tollowers had done, written and said slnce 1938. We know that
the Bene§ government rejected the Marshall Pian and that his representatlve in the United Natlons. Jan Papanek, always voted as the
USSR delegate did. Iťs all a matter of record.
In hls message to the Provislonal Natlonal Assembly, October 28,
1945, Dr. Beneš said: "We are the allles of the Soviet Union and
shall remaln faithful to that alllance . . . and we sha.ll pursue sin•
cerely the new Slav pollcy."
DNEŠEK (Today), Dr. Beneš's perlodical, wrote on July 17, 1947:
"The tundamental plllar of our foreign pollcy is our allled agreement
ot frlendshlp and mutual asslstance with the Soviet Union of Decem•
ber 12, 1943. In that year we had decided to adhere to the East. And,
therefore, even lf the present economlc war should become so acute
that we would not be able to get even one wagon of cotton from the
West, we shall stm remaln loyal to the East."
And Jan Masaryk, talklng about hls Moscow trip (Marshall Pian),
told a. correspondent of the London DAILY MAIL: "Any talk ot
threats or an ultlmatum agalnst Czecho-Slovakia ls sllly. We made
a declslon whlch I cannot but conslder the rlght one under the circumstances."
Saplentl aat l
�
40
SLOVAK]A
CZECH C.APITULATION TO COMMUNISM
The ease with which the communists came into absolute power
In Prague, with the assent of Dr. Beneš and tbe participation of Jan
Masaryk, surprised even many lnformed people in Europe and the
western world. Mucb had been written about the political maturity
of the Czecb nation, its loyaJty to democracy and western culture and,
therefore, many were willing to believe that Prague actually was a
bastion of western democracy. Some expected tbat it would be a
bridge between the East and tbe West. Otbers tbougbt tbat tbe
Czechs were called to perform an lmportant mlssion in the contemporary tense situation of tbe world.
But before the people of America and Europe had a chance to
rub their eyes after reading the reports about the crisis in Prague,
the bubble about the loyalty of the Czechs to democracy and the
story of their world m.ission burst. The Communists had no trouble
at all in taklng Prague. There was not a slngle person in tbe entlre
state of tbis "mature, democratic nation" to offer any notlceable
resistance to the communist putsch.
History had repeated itself. Ten years before tbere was not a
single Czech who dared to defend the independence of the Czech
nation and Beneš's "democratlc" state by flrlng even a single shot at
the nazls.
In tbe Czech nation there could not be found a Petkov or a
Maniu, and much less a Tiso, who preferred the gallows to nego•
tiating wltb communism and serving the communlsts.
And this fact probably stunned the western world more than it
did the people of centra! Europe, because the people of the former
were really taken in by Beneš's high-geard propaganda machine.
The European and American public was suddenly faced with the fact
that Dr. Beneš not only did not offer any resistance to the communist minority, but that he even gave the communlst putsch a legal
form and a democratic appearance. And lt was the same Dr. Edward
Beneš who had publlshed the book "Democracy 'ľoday and Tomorrow,"
wherein he portrayed himself as a piliar of European democracy!
Another well-known representative of "Czech democracy," Jan Masaryk, even accepted a posltion In the "people's democratic government" of tbe Russian gaulelter, Klement Gottwald.
The former French Foreign Minister, Georges Bidault, compared
what happened with such llghtning speed in Prague In 1948 with what
happened in 1938 in Munlch, when Dr. Edward Beneš, bis government and the whole Czech nation accepted without reslstance the
factual surrender of the Czechoslovak Republic to Hitler.
As far as the role of Dr. Beneš is concerned, there is without
debate a great simllarity between bis polltics of 1938 and 1948. And
especially the results were similar.
In 1938, Dr. Beneš not only surrendered unconstltutlonally a plece
of Czechoslovak terrltory to Germany, but also advised to make concesslons to the Germans, when threatened by bis own people and refuslng to collaborate with Hitler he fled to England. And so it was
even In 1945, when unconstltutlonally he surrendered Ruthenla to
Moscow and made concesslons to bolshevism.
�SLOVAKIA
41
But thls tíme, lf we do not want to talk about the cleverness of
Moscow, fate wanted Dr. Beneš to play the role of Dr. Hácha, who
in the spring of 1939 had to accept the German protectorate and sanction the end of the Czechoslovak Republlc after Beneš had fled.
Today practically no one doubts that Dr. Beneš formally surrendered
Bohemia and Slovakia into the hands of Moscow and bolshevlsm when
he surrendered the Government into the hands of Gottwald and the
Czech communists.
And Beneš did that without offering any reslstance. He did not
even attempt to defend fľeedom, democracy and Christian traditions.
There is in all this a bit of tragedy as far as the Czech nation
and even Beneš himself are concerned. But it was the logical consequence of the Czech politics of Dr. Beneš. Even the most clever
fraud and most deceitful player cannot get away all the time wlth his
frauds and deceptlon. A time comes when he gets caught and
rapped. And so it is even in politics.
Dr. Edward Beneš and a great part of the Czech politicians based
their interna! and foreign policies on intrigues on the assumption
that they could deceive their partner. T. G. Masaryk himself w rote
about this in his better years in "The Czech Problem," saying: "If
one Jooks at our public life a bit carefully, he shall see not only
weak beggary, but he shall a lso meet up with a particular type of
lntriguers. Intriguery !s poisoning our entire all!ed life, because
people who cannot be lions are becoming foxes, and those who cannot
be heroes are becoming lackeys and are helping themselves by mans
of Iackey intr!gue. And the ideal of these numerous people is
'politics'."
Dr. Beneš was a prototype of such a "politician." This is not
the opinion of Siovaks only. Lloyd George said as much in his book
"The Truth About the Peace Treaties" which he published in 1938:
" Of the many misfortunes that befell Austrla in the day of her
great calam!ty, one of the worst was that Czecho-Slovak!a was represented at the Peace Conference not by her wise leader, President
Masaryk but by an impulsive, clever but much Iess sagacious and
more short-sighted politician, who did not foresee tbat the more he
grasped, the Iess could he retain."
Today it would be undoubtedly in place to remark that Beneš's
pollcy was a great calamity not only for Austria, but also for the
so-called "Third" Czechoslovak Republic.
Dr. Edward Beneš always had a pian. To make certa!n that he
would rule over Slovakia, tbe Sudeteners and German property, he
flew to Moscow already in 1943 to negotlate a pact with Russla. Of
course, on the assumption that later on he could circumvent it and
break it - as he had done in the case or the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918,
at the Peace Conference in 1918 when he promised that Czechoslovakia would be a confederation, and in other lnstances as well.
Moscow, however, was wlse to Dr. Beneš. The little man with a
pian seemed to forget that he was deallng wlth the master in the art
or deceptlon and broken pacts. And so lt was that Dr. Beneš, because
or his extreme amb!tlon and imperiallstlc tendencies, brought the
Czech natlon to the brink of disaster twice with!n a decade.
But tbis t!me the catastrophic consequences of his polltlcs artect
not only the Czech natlon, but his capltulation to bolshevtsm has an
�42
SLOVAK.IA
lmmeasurable slgnlficance for the whole of Europe, and already today
is fatal for the Slovak natlon which today is without the servlces ot
Dr. Tiso to save it !rom bolshevism, as he once saved it trom nazlsm.
A handful of communists had llttle trouble In overpowering Slovakia
and subjecting it to its totalltarian dlctatorshlp only because they had
the support of Prague - the same Prague that had prevlously ordered
to kill, jali and deport the elite ot the Slovak nation and placed morally irresponsible and politically immature puppets Jn charge of Slovakia.
The Slovaks shall never forget the terrible and wanton destructlon of Slovak lives and property caused by the 1944 rebellion whlch
was planned by Beneš and hls followers and executed by the so-called
Czechoslovaks (Czech Slovaks ! ) and the communists.
lf proper steps are not taken In tíme, the results of the Czech
capitulation to bolshevism shall be just as immeasurable for Europe.
Czechoslovakia now is in fact a hive of communism and a most im•
portant air base of Moscow. Bohemla and Slovakla have great stra•
tegical signlficance even though mllitary techniques have changed.
And more so today than ever before, because Europe from the Czech
borders to the West is ruined, defenseless and disorganized. Bis•
marcťs "who rules Bohemla, rules Europe" did not !ose its signifi•
cance completely.
Of course some one could say - and Beneš's polltical followers
in exlle are repeatlng it almost lncessantly - that the Czech capltulatlon to bolshevlsm was caused by the over-all world situatlon. We
still remember that Czech propaganda tried to convlnce the world
after 1938 that the West had betrayed Czechoslovalda, even though
that country dld nothing to save itself.
But the song of bankrupt Czech polltlcians "we had to capltulate"
sounds a bit off key today. We have had Ume to consider what Beneii
and his tollowers had done, written and said slnce 1938. We know that
the Bene§ government rejected the Marshall Pian and that his representatlve in the United Natlons. Jan Papanek, always voted as the
USSR delegate did. Iťs all a matter of record.
In hls message to the Provislonal Natlonal Assembly, October 28,
1945, Dr. Beneš said: "We are the allles of the Soviet Union and
shall remaln faithful to that alllance . . . and we sha.ll pursue sin•
cerely the new Slav pollcy."
DNEŠEK (Today), Dr. Beneš's perlodical, wrote on July 17, 1947:
"The tundamental plllar of our foreign pollcy is our allled agreement
ot frlendshlp and mutual asslstance with the Soviet Union of Decem•
ber 12, 1943. In that year we had decided to adhere to the East. And,
therefore, even lf the present economlc war should become so acute
that we would not be able to get even one wagon of cotton from the
West, we shall stm remaln loyal to the East."
And Jan Masaryk, talklng about hls Moscow trip (Marshall Pian),
told a. correspondent of the London DAILY MAIL: "Any talk ot
threats or an ultlmatum agalnst Czecho-Slovakia ls sllly. We made
a declslon whlch I cannot but conslder the rlght one under the circumstances."
Saplentl aat l
�
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
40
SLOVAK]A
CZECH C.APITULATION TO COMMUNISM
The ease with which the communists came into absolute power
In Prague, with the assent of Dr. Beneš and tbe participation of Jan
Masaryk, surprised even many lnformed people in Europe and the
western world. Mucb had been written about the political maturity
of the Czecb nation, its loyaJty to democracy and western culture and,
therefore, many were willing to believe that Prague actually was a
bastion of western democracy. Some expected tbat it would be a
bridge between the East and tbe West. Otbers tbougbt tbat tbe
Czechs were called to perform an lmportant mlssion in the contemporary tense situation of tbe world.
But before the people of America and Europe had a chance to
rub their eyes after reading the reports about the crisis in Prague,
the bubble about the loyalty of the Czechs to democracy and the
story of their world m.ission burst. The Communists had no trouble
at all in taklng Prague. There was not a slngle person in tbe entlre
state of tbis "mature, democratic nation" to offer any notlceable
resistance to the communist putsch.
History had repeated itself. Ten years before tbere was not a
single Czech who dared to defend the independence of the Czech
nation and Beneš's "democratlc" state by flrlng even a single shot at
the nazls.
In tbe Czech nation there could not be found a Petkov or a
Maniu, and much less a Tiso, who preferred the gallows to nego•
tiating wltb communism and serving the communlsts.
And this fact probably stunned the western world more than it
did the people of centra! Europe, because the people of the former
were really taken in by Beneš's high-geard propaganda machine.
The European and American public was suddenly faced with the fact
that Dr. Beneš not only did not offer any resistance to the communist minority, but that he even gave the communlst putsch a legal
form and a democratic appearance. And lt was the same Dr. Edward
Beneš who had publlshed the book "Democracy 'ľoday and Tomorrow,"
wherein he portrayed himself as a piliar of European democracy!
Another well-known representative of "Czech democracy," Jan Masaryk, even accepted a posltion In the "people's democratic government" of tbe Russian gaulelter, Klement Gottwald.
The former French Foreign Minister, Georges Bidault, compared
what happened with such llghtning speed in Prague In 1948 with what
happened in 1938 in Munlch, when Dr. Edward Beneš, bis government and the whole Czech nation accepted without reslstance the
factual surrender of the Czechoslovak Republic to Hitler.
As far as the role of Dr. Beneš is concerned, there is without
debate a great simllarity between bis polltics of 1938 and 1948. And
especially the results were similar.
In 1938, Dr. Beneš not only surrendered unconstltutlonally a plece
of Czechoslovak terrltory to Germany, but also advised to make concesslons to the Germans, when threatened by bis own people and refuslng to collaborate with Hitler he fled to England. And so it was
even In 1945, when unconstltutlonally he surrendered Ruthenla to
Moscow and made concesslons to bolshevism.
SLOVAKIA
41
But thls tíme, lf we do not want to talk about the cleverness of
Moscow, fate wanted Dr. Beneš to play the role of Dr. Hácha, who
in the spring of 1939 had to accept the German protectorate and sanction the end of the Czechoslovak Republlc after Beneš had fled.
Today practically no one doubts that Dr. Beneš formally surrendered
Bohemia and Slovakia into the hands of Moscow and bolshevlsm when
he surrendered the Government into the hands of Gottwald and the
Czech communists.
And Beneš did that without offering any reslstance. He did not
even attempt to defend fľeedom, democracy and Christian traditions.
There is in all this a bit of tragedy as far as the Czech nation
and even Beneš himself are concerned. But it was the logical consequence of the Czech politics of Dr. Beneš. Even the most clever
fraud and most deceitful player cannot get away all the time wlth his
frauds and deceptlon. A time comes when he gets caught and
rapped. And so it is even in politics.
Dr. Edward Beneš and a great part of the Czech politicians based
their interna! and foreign policies on intrigues on the assumption
that they could deceive their partner. T. G. Masaryk himself w rote
about this in his better years in "The Czech Problem," saying: "If
one Jooks at our public life a bit carefully, he shall see not only
weak beggary, but he shall a lso meet up with a particular type of
lntriguers. Intriguery !s poisoning our entire all!ed life, because
people who cannot be lions are becoming foxes, and those who cannot
be heroes are becoming lackeys and are helping themselves by mans
of Iackey intr!gue. And the ideal of these numerous people is
'politics'."
Dr. Beneš was a prototype of such a "politician." This is not
the opinion of Siovaks only. Lloyd George said as much in his book
"The Truth About the Peace Treaties" which he published in 1938:
" Of the many misfortunes that befell Austrla in the day of her
great calam!ty, one of the worst was that Czecho-Slovak!a was represented at the Peace Conference not by her wise leader, President
Masaryk but by an impulsive, clever but much Iess sagacious and
more short-sighted politician, who did not foresee tbat the more he
grasped, the Iess could he retain."
Today it would be undoubtedly in place to remark that Beneš's
pollcy was a great calamity not only for Austria, but also for the
so-called "Third" Czechoslovak Republic.
Dr. Edward Beneš always had a pian. To make certa!n that he
would rule over Slovakia, tbe Sudeteners and German property, he
flew to Moscow already in 1943 to negotlate a pact with Russla. Of
course, on the assumption that later on he could circumvent it and
break it - as he had done in the case or the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918,
at the Peace Conference in 1918 when he promised that Czechoslovakia would be a confederation, and in other lnstances as well.
Moscow, however, was wlse to Dr. Beneš. The little man with a
pian seemed to forget that he was deallng wlth the master in the art
or deceptlon and broken pacts. And so lt was that Dr. Beneš, because
or his extreme amb!tlon and imperiallstlc tendencies, brought the
Czech natlon to the brink of disaster twice with!n a decade.
But tbis t!me the catastrophic consequences of his polltlcs artect
not only the Czech natlon, but his capltulation to bolshevtsm has an
42
SLOVAK.IA
lmmeasurable slgnlficance for the whole of Europe, and already today
is fatal for the Slovak natlon which today is without the servlces ot
Dr. Tiso to save it !rom bolshevism, as he once saved it trom nazlsm.
A handful of communists had llttle trouble In overpowering Slovakia
and subjecting it to its totalltarian dlctatorshlp only because they had
the support of Prague - the same Prague that had prevlously ordered
to kill, jali and deport the elite ot the Slovak nation and placed morally irresponsible and politically immature puppets Jn charge of Slovakia.
The Slovaks shall never forget the terrible and wanton destructlon of Slovak lives and property caused by the 1944 rebellion whlch
was planned by Beneš and hls followers and executed by the so-called
Czechoslovaks (Czech Slovaks ! ) and the communists.
lf proper steps are not taken In tíme, the results of the Czech
capitulation to bolshevism shall be just as immeasurable for Europe.
Czechoslovakia now is in fact a hive of communism and a most im•
portant air base of Moscow. Bohemla and Slovakla have great stra•
tegical signlficance even though mllitary techniques have changed.
And more so today than ever before, because Europe from the Czech
borders to the West is ruined, defenseless and disorganized. Bis•
marcťs "who rules Bohemla, rules Europe" did not !ose its signifi•
cance completely.
Of course some one could say - and Beneš's polltical followers
in exlle are repeatlng it almost lncessantly - that the Czech capltulatlon to bolshevlsm was caused by the over-all world situatlon. We
still remember that Czech propaganda tried to convlnce the world
after 1938 that the West had betrayed Czechoslovalda, even though
that country dld nothing to save itself.
But the song of bankrupt Czech polltlcians "we had to capltulate"
sounds a bit off key today. We have had Ume to consider what Beneii
and his tollowers had done, written and said slnce 1938. We know that
the Bene§ government rejected the Marshall Pian and that his representatlve in the United Natlons. Jan Papanek, always voted as the
USSR delegate did. Iťs all a matter of record.
In hls message to the Provislonal Natlonal Assembly, October 28,
1945, Dr. Beneš said: "We are the allles of the Soviet Union and
shall remaln faithful to that alllance . . . and we sha.ll pursue sin•
cerely the new Slav pollcy."
DNEŠEK (Today), Dr. Beneš's perlodical, wrote on July 17, 1947:
"The tundamental plllar of our foreign pollcy is our allled agreement
ot frlendshlp and mutual asslstance with the Soviet Union of Decem•
ber 12, 1943. In that year we had decided to adhere to the East. And,
therefore, even lf the present economlc war should become so acute
that we would not be able to get even one wagon of cotton from the
West, we shall stm remaln loyal to the East."
And Jan Masaryk, talklng about hls Moscow trip (Marshall Pian),
told a. correspondent of the London DAILY MAIL: "Any talk ot
threats or an ultlmatum agalnst Czecho-Slovakia ls sllly. We made
a declslon whlch I cannot but conslder the rlght one under the circumstances."
Saplentl aat l
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
Czech Capitulation to Communism
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1), May 1951
pp. 40-42
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
May 1951
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6588459817e56258aac0fa3c887ef501.pdf
9948f8cbe996bd48112c43a072ff5208
PDF Text
Text
SWVAKIA
91
CZECH COMMUNISM AND SWVAK RESENTMENT
Impressions from Czecho-Slovakia
From a Correspondent
Travelling in Czecho-Slovakia, I found a good deal altered in a year: that Czecho-Slovakia in 1961 was more relaxed than in 1960; that people were paying less attention to official pronouncements; that they were venturing
some timid criticism; that they were more ready to exchange views with visitors from the West. They still dislike Poles, considering them "dangerous rebels," but again
it seems that in Czecho-Polish relations there is more ease
than a few years ago, and that some of the thorny problems of traffic across the frontiers ( especially in the region
of the Tatra Mountains) have been solved.
The ferocity of Czech press announcements about
Berlin is really astounding. Even the E . German press
eannot be surpassed in the force of their artifically con,cocted chauvinism. Czech papers are full to the brim of
stol"ies about Berlin and an atmosphere of crisis is worked
up by those preposterous Czech papers, which offer a
strong contrast with Polish papers, still rather restrained
in their comments. The Czech official policy demands a
" quick solution" of the problem; they are all for an immediate signing of the Peace Treaty with DDR.. For the
first time in years one discovers in those papers a really
warlike attitude: almost a Martian one, if it were not
ordered from above. For the average Czech is not at all
inclined to risk any adventure. Berlin or no Berlin: they
are not for sabre rattling. They are quite happy in selling guns, and very good guns at that, to Cuba and Egypt,
and Iraq, and many countries around the globe ( China included). But they abhor war.
Czech arms seem to be produced at overtime speed and
in enormous quantities. I was told by an engineer in Brno
that the Skoda works are producing more now than during the German rule in Bohemia. "The quality is probably lower," he explained, "but the quantity is huge. We
send arms to China on an enormous scale. We supply Cuba
and Egypt and the whole of the Middle East. And Africa.
This is our chief export today." Czech cars - Skoda and
�92
SLOVAKIA
Tatra - are exported not only to the satellite countries
and to Russia but also to the Middle East. So are Czech
aircraft, or, rather, Russian aircraft manufactured or assembled in Czecho-Slovakia.
Bohemia is a huge milit.ary fact,ory, a schooling centre
for foreign communists, and . an assembly place for Communists from Asia and Africa. In Prague one is always
meeting delegations from Asia and Africa, from South
America and from Cuba; there are young Communists who
attend special schools and courses. Czecho-Slovakia more particularly Bohemia - knows how to exploit its
central position and the fact that long before the war there
was a well-established Communist Party; the present-day
officiai' organ, Rude .Pri.,·o, has been appearing for many
years and Czech Communists survived much better than
the Polish variety: Most of them escaped purges; actually,
purges before the war were extremely mild and did not
touch the core of the Party ( as they did in Poland and in
other East European countries).
So the Czechs are selling their arms and their ideology
to foreign countries with great zeal and ingenuity. They
want to export, they want to trade, they want to receive
tourists. Marianske Lazne and Karlove Vary, the former
Marienbad and Karsbad, are almost flourishing again,
together with that wonderful Slovak spa, Piest:any, probably the watering place most effective against rheumatism and arthritis Europe can offer. In Karlove Vary
thousands of French, German, English, Russian and Belgian tourists are much in evidence. And the Czechs are
willing to do anything to attract foreigners. They are doing this much better than the Poles: but they have more
to offer to the outside world - a string of world-famous
spas, lovely mountains (the Tatra range) and one of the
finest towns in Europe, Prague, untouched by the ravages of war.
But what strikes an observt,r who has been to Slovakia after a long absence is the steady dislike, through so
many political changes, the Slovaks have for the Czechs.
The enmity of the Slovaks vis-a-vis the C7.echs is now
great.er than before the war. They openly accuse the
Czechs of a "policy of grab and plunder" which does not
seem entirely to tally with facts as Slovakia appears to
�SLOVAKIA
93
be a much more prosperous country than before the war.
Factories and workshops pop up in most unlikely places,
some of them hidden among the forests and in the picturesque valleys. Slovakia reminds one of the Tyrol and
the mountainous provinces of Austria which, after the
war, have been subjected to industrialization with the result that Austria has now achieved a much better balance between industry and agriculture.
But a rider should be added here: while in the Western
provinces of Austria the newly created industries - some
built to make post-war Austria independent of the Eastern provinces then under Russian occupation - belonged
to the domain of light industries, the same is not true of
Slovakia. In the Vah Valley and in other places Slovak
industries belong without doubt to the heavy category. In
the over-all Russian plan for industrialization of satellites,
Slovakia was assigned a quite important place. Some of
the factories work for war industry, some of the heavy
industry plants are well hidden in forests and woods or
among the undulating slopes of the Fatra and other mountain ranges. They are thoroughly camouflaged in case of
war, and their importance must not be underrated. There
are, I learned, several aircraft factories in the Fatra rerion, and the country is dotted - that one can tell even
during a car journey across Slovakia - with airfields and
runways. Slovakia has been made into a military camp.
This Slovakia resents bitterly. "As if they had not
enough in their Skoda works and what-not," I heard in
Banska Bystrica. "Why did they come to us and make our
lovely countryside hateful and ugly! Our mountains and
hills, our valleys and forests, are changing beyond .recognition. Smoke, and din and noise everywhere."
The Slovaks feel they are being exploited both by
Russians and by Czechs. ''The Czechs want to take from
us all the food and best positions," I was told in Lubochna,
the lovely watering place on the River Vah. ''They haven't
leamed anything from the past. They are at their tricks
again. We hate them like poison."
The feeling of intense dislike towards the "oppressor
Czechs" and "exploiting Russians" prevails in the toWDS,
villages and hamlets of Slovakia. The Slovak Communists
are as vociferous in their criticism of their <n.ech comrades
�94
SLOVAKIA
as any peasant in a village inn. They resent the "omnipresence of the Czech element" and the "arrogant attitude of
those people from Prague." Before the war this dislikewas not so strongly colored; it was toned down in places
like Bratislava and in the region of the Tatra. In the Tatra
region, in the Tatranska Lomnica and other places ( where
the Hungarians have left their pre-first World War splendid
sanatoria and residences), the enmity towards the "Czech
overlords" speaks in an undisguised voice.
It is a tragedy, but the new Czecho-Slovakia (a twopartite country, for it has lost its third "canton," Subcarpathian Ruthenia, as well as its unofficial fourth, Sudetenland, as the Germans were driven from there almost to a
man) has not succeeded in satisfactorily reshaping the
country and uniting it with bonds of loyalty and genuine
collaboration. The differences between Slovaks and Czechs
have become accentuated; in all problems where the Czechs
say "white," the Slovaks say "black." And so, for instance,
in the matter of the Berlin crisis the Czechs are more or
less behind their official policy: They are voicing very
stridently the view that "West Berlin should be liquidated."
The Slovaks assert that there is no reason for such a move
and that East Germans are oppressed by their regime ...
-
THE TABLET, London, Sept. 23, 1961.
Learn Slova!k, the key language to all Slav languages, the easy way. You can do it in several months
if you use the newest book by P. A. Hrobak.
LET'S LEARN SWVAK
Recomended for ·b oth the young and the old. The
book contains 64 lessons on 200 pages and is bound in
a hard ,p aper cover. You can get a copy by sending
Two Dollars ($2.00) to:
P.A.HROBAK
Jednota Printery
Middletown, PA .
•
�
SWVAKIA
91
CZECH COMMUNISM AND SWVAK RESENTMENT
Impressions from Czecho-Slovakia
From a Correspondent
Travelling in Czecho-Slovakia, I found a good deal altered in a year: that Czecho-Slovakia in 1961 was more relaxed than in 1960; that people were paying less attention to official pronouncements; that they were venturing
some timid criticism; that they were more ready to exchange views with visitors from the West. They still dislike Poles, considering them "dangerous rebels," but again
it seems that in Czecho-Polish relations there is more ease
than a few years ago, and that some of the thorny problems of traffic across the frontiers ( especially in the region
of the Tatra Mountains) have been solved.
The ferocity of Czech press announcements about
Berlin is really astounding. Even the E . German press
eannot be surpassed in the force of their artifically con,cocted chauvinism. Czech papers are full to the brim of
stol"ies about Berlin and an atmosphere of crisis is worked
up by those preposterous Czech papers, which offer a
strong contrast with Polish papers, still rather restrained
in their comments. The Czech official policy demands a
" quick solution" of the problem; they are all for an immediate signing of the Peace Treaty with DDR.. For the
first time in years one discovers in those papers a really
warlike attitude: almost a Martian one, if it were not
ordered from above. For the average Czech is not at all
inclined to risk any adventure. Berlin or no Berlin: they
are not for sabre rattling. They are quite happy in selling guns, and very good guns at that, to Cuba and Egypt,
and Iraq, and many countries around the globe ( China included). But they abhor war.
Czech arms seem to be produced at overtime speed and
in enormous quantities. I was told by an engineer in Brno
that the Skoda works are producing more now than during the German rule in Bohemia. "The quality is probably lower," he explained, "but the quantity is huge. We
send arms to China on an enormous scale. We supply Cuba
and Egypt and the whole of the Middle East. And Africa.
This is our chief export today." Czech cars - Skoda and
�92
SLOVAKIA
Tatra - are exported not only to the satellite countries
and to Russia but also to the Middle East. So are Czech
aircraft, or, rather, Russian aircraft manufactured or assembled in Czecho-Slovakia.
Bohemia is a huge milit.ary fact,ory, a schooling centre
for foreign communists, and . an assembly place for Communists from Asia and Africa. In Prague one is always
meeting delegations from Asia and Africa, from South
America and from Cuba; there are young Communists who
attend special schools and courses. Czecho-Slovakia more particularly Bohemia - knows how to exploit its
central position and the fact that long before the war there
was a well-established Communist Party; the present-day
officiai' organ, Rude .Pri.,·o, has been appearing for many
years and Czech Communists survived much better than
the Polish variety: Most of them escaped purges; actually,
purges before the war were extremely mild and did not
touch the core of the Party ( as they did in Poland and in
other East European countries).
So the Czechs are selling their arms and their ideology
to foreign countries with great zeal and ingenuity. They
want to export, they want to trade, they want to receive
tourists. Marianske Lazne and Karlove Vary, the former
Marienbad and Karsbad, are almost flourishing again,
together with that wonderful Slovak spa, Piest:any, probably the watering place most effective against rheumatism and arthritis Europe can offer. In Karlove Vary
thousands of French, German, English, Russian and Belgian tourists are much in evidence. And the Czechs are
willing to do anything to attract foreigners. They are doing this much better than the Poles: but they have more
to offer to the outside world - a string of world-famous
spas, lovely mountains (the Tatra range) and one of the
finest towns in Europe, Prague, untouched by the ravages of war.
But what strikes an observt,r who has been to Slovakia after a long absence is the steady dislike, through so
many political changes, the Slovaks have for the Czechs.
The enmity of the Slovaks vis-a-vis the C7.echs is now
great.er than before the war. They openly accuse the
Czechs of a "policy of grab and plunder" which does not
seem entirely to tally with facts as Slovakia appears to
�SLOVAKIA
93
be a much more prosperous country than before the war.
Factories and workshops pop up in most unlikely places,
some of them hidden among the forests and in the picturesque valleys. Slovakia reminds one of the Tyrol and
the mountainous provinces of Austria which, after the
war, have been subjected to industrialization with the result that Austria has now achieved a much better balance between industry and agriculture.
But a rider should be added here: while in the Western
provinces of Austria the newly created industries - some
built to make post-war Austria independent of the Eastern provinces then under Russian occupation - belonged
to the domain of light industries, the same is not true of
Slovakia. In the Vah Valley and in other places Slovak
industries belong without doubt to the heavy category. In
the over-all Russian plan for industrialization of satellites,
Slovakia was assigned a quite important place. Some of
the factories work for war industry, some of the heavy
industry plants are well hidden in forests and woods or
among the undulating slopes of the Fatra and other mountain ranges. They are thoroughly camouflaged in case of
war, and their importance must not be underrated. There
are, I learned, several aircraft factories in the Fatra rerion, and the country is dotted - that one can tell even
during a car journey across Slovakia - with airfields and
runways. Slovakia has been made into a military camp.
This Slovakia resents bitterly. "As if they had not
enough in their Skoda works and what-not," I heard in
Banska Bystrica. "Why did they come to us and make our
lovely countryside hateful and ugly! Our mountains and
hills, our valleys and forests, are changing beyond .recognition. Smoke, and din and noise everywhere."
The Slovaks feel they are being exploited both by
Russians and by Czechs. ''The Czechs want to take from
us all the food and best positions," I was told in Lubochna,
the lovely watering place on the River Vah. ''They haven't
leamed anything from the past. They are at their tricks
again. We hate them like poison."
The feeling of intense dislike towards the "oppressor
Czechs" and "exploiting Russians" prevails in the toWDS,
villages and hamlets of Slovakia. The Slovak Communists
are as vociferous in their criticism of their <n.ech comrades
�94
SLOVAKIA
as any peasant in a village inn. They resent the "omnipresence of the Czech element" and the "arrogant attitude of
those people from Prague." Before the war this dislikewas not so strongly colored; it was toned down in places
like Bratislava and in the region of the Tatra. In the Tatra
region, in the Tatranska Lomnica and other places ( where
the Hungarians have left their pre-first World War splendid
sanatoria and residences), the enmity towards the "Czech
overlords" speaks in an undisguised voice.
It is a tragedy, but the new Czecho-Slovakia (a twopartite country, for it has lost its third "canton," Subcarpathian Ruthenia, as well as its unofficial fourth, Sudetenland, as the Germans were driven from there almost to a
man) has not succeeded in satisfactorily reshaping the
country and uniting it with bonds of loyalty and genuine
collaboration. The differences between Slovaks and Czechs
have become accentuated; in all problems where the Czechs
say "white," the Slovaks say "black." And so, for instance,
in the matter of the Berlin crisis the Czechs are more or
less behind their official policy: They are voicing very
stridently the view that "West Berlin should be liquidated."
The Slovaks assert that there is no reason for such a move
and that East Germans are oppressed by their regime ...
-
THE TABLET, London, Sept. 23, 1961.
Learn Slova!k, the key language to all Slav languages, the easy way. You can do it in several months
if you use the newest book by P. A. Hrobak.
LET'S LEARN SWVAK
Recomended for ·b oth the young and the old. The
book contains 64 lessons on 200 pages and is bound in
a hard ,p aper cover. You can get a copy by sending
Two Dollars ($2.00) to:
P.A.HROBAK
Jednota Printery
Middletown, PA .
•
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
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
SWVAKIA
91
CZECH COMMUNISM AND SWVAK RESENTMENT
Impressions from Czecho-Slovakia
From a Correspondent
Travelling in Czecho-Slovakia, I found a good deal altered in a year: that Czecho-Slovakia in 1961 was more relaxed than in 1960; that people were paying less attention to official pronouncements; that they were venturing
some timid criticism; that they were more ready to exchange views with visitors from the West. They still dislike Poles, considering them "dangerous rebels," but again
it seems that in Czecho-Polish relations there is more ease
than a few years ago, and that some of the thorny problems of traffic across the frontiers ( especially in the region
of the Tatra Mountains) have been solved.
The ferocity of Czech press announcements about
Berlin is really astounding. Even the E . German press
eannot be surpassed in the force of their artifically con,cocted chauvinism. Czech papers are full to the brim of
stol"ies about Berlin and an atmosphere of crisis is worked
up by those preposterous Czech papers, which offer a
strong contrast with Polish papers, still rather restrained
in their comments. The Czech official policy demands a
" quick solution" of the problem; they are all for an immediate signing of the Peace Treaty with DDR.. For the
first time in years one discovers in those papers a really
warlike attitude: almost a Martian one, if it were not
ordered from above. For the average Czech is not at all
inclined to risk any adventure. Berlin or no Berlin: they
are not for sabre rattling. They are quite happy in selling guns, and very good guns at that, to Cuba and Egypt,
and Iraq, and many countries around the globe ( China included). But they abhor war.
Czech arms seem to be produced at overtime speed and
in enormous quantities. I was told by an engineer in Brno
that the Skoda works are producing more now than during the German rule in Bohemia. "The quality is probably lower," he explained, "but the quantity is huge. We
send arms to China on an enormous scale. We supply Cuba
and Egypt and the whole of the Middle East. And Africa.
This is our chief export today." Czech cars - Skoda and
92
SLOVAKIA
Tatra - are exported not only to the satellite countries
and to Russia but also to the Middle East. So are Czech
aircraft, or, rather, Russian aircraft manufactured or assembled in Czecho-Slovakia.
Bohemia is a huge milit.ary fact,ory, a schooling centre
for foreign communists, and . an assembly place for Communists from Asia and Africa. In Prague one is always
meeting delegations from Asia and Africa, from South
America and from Cuba; there are young Communists who
attend special schools and courses. Czecho-Slovakia more particularly Bohemia - knows how to exploit its
central position and the fact that long before the war there
was a well-established Communist Party; the present-day
officiai' organ, Rude .Pri.,·o, has been appearing for many
years and Czech Communists survived much better than
the Polish variety: Most of them escaped purges; actually,
purges before the war were extremely mild and did not
touch the core of the Party ( as they did in Poland and in
other East European countries).
So the Czechs are selling their arms and their ideology
to foreign countries with great zeal and ingenuity. They
want to export, they want to trade, they want to receive
tourists. Marianske Lazne and Karlove Vary, the former
Marienbad and Karsbad, are almost flourishing again,
together with that wonderful Slovak spa, Piest:any, probably the watering place most effective against rheumatism and arthritis Europe can offer. In Karlove Vary
thousands of French, German, English, Russian and Belgian tourists are much in evidence. And the Czechs are
willing to do anything to attract foreigners. They are doing this much better than the Poles: but they have more
to offer to the outside world - a string of world-famous
spas, lovely mountains (the Tatra range) and one of the
finest towns in Europe, Prague, untouched by the ravages of war.
But what strikes an observt,r who has been to Slovakia after a long absence is the steady dislike, through so
many political changes, the Slovaks have for the Czechs.
The enmity of the Slovaks vis-a-vis the C7.echs is now
great.er than before the war. They openly accuse the
Czechs of a "policy of grab and plunder" which does not
seem entirely to tally with facts as Slovakia appears to
SLOVAKIA
93
be a much more prosperous country than before the war.
Factories and workshops pop up in most unlikely places,
some of them hidden among the forests and in the picturesque valleys. Slovakia reminds one of the Tyrol and
the mountainous provinces of Austria which, after the
war, have been subjected to industrialization with the result that Austria has now achieved a much better balance between industry and agriculture.
But a rider should be added here: while in the Western
provinces of Austria the newly created industries - some
built to make post-war Austria independent of the Eastern provinces then under Russian occupation - belonged
to the domain of light industries, the same is not true of
Slovakia. In the Vah Valley and in other places Slovak
industries belong without doubt to the heavy category. In
the over-all Russian plan for industrialization of satellites,
Slovakia was assigned a quite important place. Some of
the factories work for war industry, some of the heavy
industry plants are well hidden in forests and woods or
among the undulating slopes of the Fatra and other mountain ranges. They are thoroughly camouflaged in case of
war, and their importance must not be underrated. There
are, I learned, several aircraft factories in the Fatra rerion, and the country is dotted - that one can tell even
during a car journey across Slovakia - with airfields and
runways. Slovakia has been made into a military camp.
This Slovakia resents bitterly. "As if they had not
enough in their Skoda works and what-not," I heard in
Banska Bystrica. "Why did they come to us and make our
lovely countryside hateful and ugly! Our mountains and
hills, our valleys and forests, are changing beyond .recognition. Smoke, and din and noise everywhere."
The Slovaks feel they are being exploited both by
Russians and by Czechs. ''The Czechs want to take from
us all the food and best positions," I was told in Lubochna,
the lovely watering place on the River Vah. ''They haven't
leamed anything from the past. They are at their tricks
again. We hate them like poison."
The feeling of intense dislike towards the "oppressor
Czechs" and "exploiting Russians" prevails in the toWDS,
villages and hamlets of Slovakia. The Slovak Communists
are as vociferous in their criticism of their <n.ech comrades
94
SLOVAKIA
as any peasant in a village inn. They resent the "omnipresence of the Czech element" and the "arrogant attitude of
those people from Prague." Before the war this dislikewas not so strongly colored; it was toned down in places
like Bratislava and in the region of the Tatra. In the Tatra
region, in the Tatranska Lomnica and other places ( where
the Hungarians have left their pre-first World War splendid
sanatoria and residences), the enmity towards the "Czech
overlords" speaks in an undisguised voice.
It is a tragedy, but the new Czecho-Slovakia (a twopartite country, for it has lost its third "canton," Subcarpathian Ruthenia, as well as its unofficial fourth, Sudetenland, as the Germans were driven from there almost to a
man) has not succeeded in satisfactorily reshaping the
country and uniting it with bonds of loyalty and genuine
collaboration. The differences between Slovaks and Czechs
have become accentuated; in all problems where the Czechs
say "white," the Slovaks say "black." And so, for instance,
in the matter of the Berlin crisis the Czechs are more or
less behind their official policy: They are voicing very
stridently the view that "West Berlin should be liquidated."
The Slovaks assert that there is no reason for such a move
and that East Germans are oppressed by their regime ...
-
THE TABLET, London, Sept. 23, 1961.
Learn Slova!k, the key language to all Slav languages, the easy way. You can do it in several months
if you use the newest book by P. A. Hrobak.
LET'S LEARN SWVAK
Recomended for ·b oth the young and the old. The
book contains 64 lessons on 200 pages and is bound in
a hard ,p aper cover. You can get a copy by sending
Two Dollars ($2.00) to:
P.A.HROBAK
Jednota Printery
Middletown, PA .
•
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Czech Communism and Slovak Resentment: Impressions from Czecho-Slovakia
Description
An account of the resource
From a Correspondent
Slovakia, Vol. 13, No. 1 (36), March 1963
pp. 91-94
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 1963
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/908f44da0194235f10ad22b09cb45e21.pdf
261c0cee0aaae307821756177eabdb83
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
35
OZEOH DOUBLE-DEALING
PRINCE ADOLF ZU SCHWARZENBERG
(This ls a reprint of the article published in the July, 1949, issue
[Vo!. III, No. 1, pp. 20-22] of the "'New Englh1h Review Ma,ga,zine."
The author heads one of the oldest familles in Bohemia and his ta.mily
played an importa.n1 role in Bohemia's ootional life. The Prince is
unquestionably qualitied to speak about th.e intrigues of Ma-saryk and
Beneš and their undemocratic and un-Christlan pol!cies. This expo-sé
ot Czech hypocrisy should be read by all Amerlcans. - Ed.)
During and after the Flrst World War the ma.in feature in Bohemla's pollcy was a tendency to back both sides at the same Ume, more
par,ticularly during rthe coutinuat!on of ho~tllitie-s. Bohemia. wa.s unt.11
1918 a part ot the Austro-Hungaria.n Monarchy, in whlch it formed a
provlnce under Ha,bsburg rule and at the same Ume a. Kingdom,
though enjoylng a very limrted a.utonomy; if !n<leed thl-s wa.s autonomy at all, for lt was by no mea.n-s self-government.
On the whole, the Czechs, who are and always hav,e been the ma·
Jority o! the inhabitants ot Bohemla and Mora.vla, d!spla.yed, even
during the First World War, in dome-stlc a!fairs a fair!y loyal attttude towards the Governme.nt In Vienna., though cthere were some stgnlfican,t excepitlons. For ex,ample, the 28th Regiment of Infantry wa.s
considered a.-s somewhat unrellable, and occa.slona.lly there were desertions to the enemy, which were more frequent tha.n in the other
Czech regtments, yet at horne the Czechs stressed thelr absolute
Joyalty to the Habsburg regimre and "'collabora.ted" wl!ling!y, more
particular!y where their pockets were a.ffected. Neverthe!ess, while
they aoted in th!s way within the black and yellow fľontier posts oť
th,e Habsburg Monarchy, they had very ,a,bJe ageuts outside beyond
the enemy Unes. In pru<ticular, there were T. G. Ma.sa.ryk, who acted
as pros,pect!ve President or a future Czechoslovakian Republlc, Edward
Beneš, and many others, who escaped beyond the front!ers and ~Ued
down abroad where. wlth the help of the !uture victors, they set up
a free autouomous provislonal government that was to come iruto e:,:istence after the defeat of the Centra! Powers.
What, however, would have happened lf the Centra! Powet'S had
emerged as vlctors? The answ,er ls more rthan slmple: Masaryk :ind
Co. would have dlsappeared lnto oblivlon, and the Ozechs, who had
stayed at ·home ,and had so marvelously pla.yed the rôle of loya.J subjects, would have proclalmed lnc-essa.ntly how fatth!ul they had alwaya
been to the Ha.bsburgs and to the Monarchy, ha.vlng lost rthousands,
or tens of thousands, of thelr best sons for the "Just Cause," and
how enormous thelr contributlons to vlctory had been. Nevertheless,
luck was not on the slde of the Centa! Powers. Iu consequence, from
October 1918, onwards, the Czechs withln the Monarchy had to change
qulckly to other tactlcs, transforming themselves llke chameleons, and
they were forced to a-ppear as, tnnocent vlctims who had been p~rsecuted by ,t he bruta.l Habsburg regime. The same people who fran•
tically roared "Hurmh" to greet the Emperor ~ e now not ashamed
to utter calumnlou!l words agaki.st hlm. " Hallelujah" and "Cruclfy
�36
SLOVAKIA
Him" are so close to each other, but it would appeaľ that "Crucify
Him" is much easier to shout.
It must be admitted that ,the Czechs played this new ľôle with
marvelous skill au<l admiľable flexibility. For Masaryk and hls col•
leagues it was now easy enough to create a Czechoslova:kian Rep11hlic,
hut to the very end Masaryk played a double galffie. When he was
dealing with Framoe and the Unbled States he produced a pian for a
Republic In Czechoslovakla, hut for Russia he put forward a Czech
kingdom, leaving open the question whether a Romanoff or somebody
e lse -should wear the crown of St. Wenceslaus, for so long as the Tsar
reigned In Russia the word republic did not sound g,ood. lncidentally,
Masaryk had promised lthe Slovaks autonomy as well as many other
acceptable privlleges. but these never materialized and serious difficulties la,ter arose owlng to this. Thus, even when the Czechs were
fightlng for indedimpence their double-dealing was proved.
This particular characteristic has been up to the present yielded
good results when it wa,s a question of dealing with the credulcu s.
The situation is the same now, and it will always remain the same,
so long as t-he victors •n a war in which Czechoslovakia is involved
do noi invesligate thoroughly the kind of people wlt•h whom they ,"\.re
dealing.
lt is an old and very cheap trlck to play in wiU1 both sid-es in
such great conflicts as the two World Wars, more particularly when
the outcome is not at all clear, a.t least to the people most concerned.
In the Secoud World War the situation was much the s11Jffie, and
there was a distinct analogy with what happened in rt;s predecessor.
From 1939 Ull'til 1946 Hacha functioned as President, first for the
mu'til<ated second Czechoslovak Republic and then during the Nruzl
occupation of the "Protectorate," therefore dlsplaying a fľiendly attitude, however invol11nta1;1y, towards the Hitler reglme. At the same
time Benes and his associates set up in London a government with
more or less open leanings to the left. If Hitler had won the war
Hacba would have become tbe great man of the day. However, HiUer
was def~ted, and Hacha, who had done his best to save bis country
from tbe borrors of war, and had played this part not unsuccessfully,
died i.n prison as au old and broken man, practically forgotten, while
Beneš emerged as the great man of the future and as President of
a reborn Czechoslovak Republic. Nevertheless, Beneš did not long
enjoy bis exalted position, for in Fellťllary 1948 the Communists, although a minority, seized power, a[ter .which Benes dlsappeaľed and
Gotliwald became President.
Even in normit,I times 1the double game of C1.ech policy caa be
seen quite clearly. As long as Ozechos!ovak!a adopted the rôle ot
dependence on the West, Beneš wa!< at the helm and from 1945 or.ward prepared the dellvery of his country to 'the Communists. All the
mlnls,teľ'S in bis CaLinet (there were about two dozen of them) worked
wlth their idolized Pres-ident, and In a most masterly f.ashion steered
thelr country into Communtsm, always boping ror a good job as a re•
ward for ťheir laudable work in the Bolshevist interest. Unfo11:u.nately
for them, however, thing.s ,took a different turn, for although Bene~
put up a token-resista.nce for 11. rew days against 1tbe overthrow or
democracy just to show a good face to the civilized world in the
�SLOVAKIA
37
West, it was a comparatively easy task to belp Communist Gottwald
lnto tbe Red saddle, thereby preventing a "civil war." From that fatal
day In February 1948 it could no longer he doub'ted rt.hat Czechoslovakla was a Communlst country, leaning away from democracy and
civill.zation, and progressing at full speed towards Red totalitarianlsm.
wbich by now wa,s firmly ,secure as "a peopWs democracy" by force
and terror.
When the gove111men't, with its outward appearance of democracy,
fell, Beneš and the member,s of his Oabin€-t had clearly accomplished
thelr task as laid down by the Kremliu, and from then on they were
no longer use,ful. Reallzing this they immediately "backed the other
horse," each in his own way. Beneš res!gned, and Go'ttwald replaced
him wlt.hout any diffioulty. All went smoothly, and Beneš did even
more for Communlsm: he died. Some of tbe former m!nisters tried to
escape across the frontier, but wel"e arrested; some, however, d!d
reach the American zone in Bava.ria, where they started to play the
part .of heroes and of defenders of democracy wbo had been forced to
fly from tbe peraecutions of the Communlsts. Needless to say they
behaved as lf they had always been ardent anti-Commu.nis'ts, here as
in reality tbey helped Communlsm wherever they could so Jong as
they were in office, and wlllingly or unwillingly pre-pared the overthrow of tlheir own regime. Thls they could have prevented with the
help of 'trhe army, which had remalned Joyal, and with a little couragc,
but courage is an unknown quality with the majorrty of the Czech
nation. In the West, howeveľ, J.itt1e is known about these "heroes,"
or the rôle whlob they are playing In their endeavor to oover up their
more tha.n doubtful past.
At this 'J)Oint, it may be useful to draw a parallel with Nazl Ger•
many. Any German one meets today will be sure to say that he bas
always been opposed to the Naz!s, and will describe how much he has
suffered a,t thelr hands, no matter whether he was In reality a Na.z!
or not. Probably Hitler himself would say tbe same thing if he were
still alive. It is the same in Italy where every It.allan ha~ been a partisan and fought against Mussolini, even lf he were in reality a Fascist. The same is the case wltb tlhe Czechs in e~ile. Take tbeir word
for what lt. is wortb, but never believe tbem at first sight. It is well
known that many Czechs had a very fine tíme under the Nazi occupation; they collabomted willingly and maide a lot of money. The rare
exceptions only served to prove the rule. Durlng the Presidency or
Beneš they wei,e more than ready to collaiborate with Moscow, but
wben this became impossible they gathe!'t:d In London, wbence they
have now mov.ed to Washilllgton, tľying to set up a government in
exile and hoping to be at the helm wben adversity oveľ'tak8-'l Com•
muni,sm. It is a game tbat has been played tíme and again, and the
names of these emigres witb a doubtful pa'St make ,no difference;
what makes a dlfčerence is whether or not they are 1·eliable.
In attempting to answer this question lt can be safely stated that
those wbo worked with and for Beneš until February 1948, wben Cze
choslovakla'-s future became linked wltb Communlsm, are a 'Priori unreliable, wbereas those wbo were persecuted by Beneš and bis ,system
and broke with it before Febuary 1948 are mostly reliable men who
sbould be supportecl. It would be a great mlstake to trust emigres
�38
SLOVAKIA
w.ho are not reliable, and it is surely our duty to lea..rn from the mistakes in this reS'l)eCt whi~h have been made in the .past. It must a!so
be remembered tJhat the. Communists, who a1-e always much more
actlve and quicker than tíheir democratic opponents in the West, have
innumerable agent,; or their own among Czeol1 emigres. Western democracy should be wamed in tlme before it is too late.
•
•
• •
A NOTE ON TISO, HORTHY AND BENES
E. L. DELANEY
Admfral Hoľ,thy, Regen1t of Hungary, alleged collaborllltor with
Germany and castlgated as a "Fasc,i st" by our Reds and "plnks,"
was given sanctuary by our Mil1tary Government in Bavaria a..fter
the end of hoSltlU.ties, and rightly so. Had he been returned t o BudapeBt, he would have been execu<ted by the Communisit rabble. .
But President Josef TisÔ in the adjoining state of Slovakia, even
less a collaborator with Germany than Horthy but who was án implacable foe of Communism, also fled into Bavaria and what he
thought was the sanctuary of the Americans. He was imprisoncd,
mlstreated, manhandled and then delivered to the Reds by our Milit ary Government to be hanged by them in Bratislava.
Duri-ng Lhe war, Presddent Tlso had delegated members of his
own official family to provide the best care and hospl:tal!za1tl.on if
necessary for the Amerlcan and Brltish flyers who were shot down
or who made foreed Jandlngs in his counitry.
Other Amerlcans were given sanctuary there, thls wrlter being one
who knew Dr. Josef Tlso personally and who received such sanctuary.
It was alleged by the mouthpieces of Moscow that Tiso was guilty
of treasonaib1e actions when, for the flrst Ume in nine hundred years,
he and his co-workere gained independence and "a better Ufe" for the
Slovak people. "Self-determination" was what they had been told was
their right, and now they were belng told it was their wrong. Wrong
because, long before the beginning of the war, thelr president had a(•·
cepted the protection of Berlin agalnst outside aggression. The aggression of tihe Soviiet. That was hls sin.
But note the utlter i•nconslsitency and the convincing proof of col·
Juslon and connlvance with the Communist cllque on the parit of our
execut!ves and officdals.
Dr. Eduard Benes Journeyed to Moscow with the approval and
the ald of Frankl!n D. Roosevelt and there slgned with Josef Stálln
the death warran1. of ,the Czecb and Slovak peoples. He represented
nelther Czechs nor Slovaks at that t ime, altbough he had been president of their courutry and reslgned six years prevlously. He came
to Prague with ihe blesslng of Washlngiton and the dlgnllty of an ambassador trom here. The betrayal of the entire country of Czechoslovakia by Benes, Churchill and Rooaevelt, far out-Heroďs anything
Josef Tiso did to gain independence "and . a better life" for his
people during the six years of their Republic. More con.temp,ti.ble
duplieity on the part of any statesman could scarcely be lmagin1:,d.
(REPUBLICANISM versus STATISM, ECA Press, 1950, Los
Angeles, Catif.)
�
SLOVAKIA
35
OZEOH DOUBLE-DEALING
PRINCE ADOLF ZU SCHWARZENBERG
(This ls a reprint of the article published in the July, 1949, issue
[Vo!. III, No. 1, pp. 20-22] of the "'New Englh1h Review Ma,ga,zine."
The author heads one of the oldest familles in Bohemia and his ta.mily
played an importa.n1 role in Bohemia's ootional life. The Prince is
unquestionably qualitied to speak about th.e intrigues of Ma-saryk and
Beneš and their undemocratic and un-Christlan pol!cies. This expo-sé
ot Czech hypocrisy should be read by all Amerlcans. - Ed.)
During and after the Flrst World War the ma.in feature in Bohemla's pollcy was a tendency to back both sides at the same Ume, more
par,ticularly during rthe coutinuat!on of ho~tllitie-s. Bohemia. wa.s unt.11
1918 a part ot the Austro-Hungaria.n Monarchy, in whlch it formed a
provlnce under Ha,bsburg rule and at the same Ume a. Kingdom,
though enjoylng a very limrted a.utonomy; if !n<leed thl-s wa.s autonomy at all, for lt was by no mea.n-s self-government.
On the whole, the Czechs, who are and always hav,e been the ma·
Jority o! the inhabitants ot Bohemla and Mora.vla, d!spla.yed, even
during the First World War, in dome-stlc a!fairs a fair!y loyal attttude towards the Governme.nt In Vienna., though cthere were some stgnlfican,t excepitlons. For ex,ample, the 28th Regiment of Infantry wa.s
considered a.-s somewhat unrellable, and occa.slona.lly there were desertions to the enemy, which were more frequent tha.n in the other
Czech regtments, yet at horne the Czechs stressed thelr absolute
Joyalty to the Habsburg regimre and "'collabora.ted" wl!ling!y, more
particular!y where their pockets were a.ffected. Neverthe!ess, while
they aoted in th!s way within the black and yellow fľontier posts oť
th,e Habsburg Monarchy, they had very ,a,bJe ageuts outside beyond
the enemy Unes. In pru<ticular, there were T. G. Ma.sa.ryk, who acted
as pros,pect!ve President or a future Czechoslovakian Republlc, Edward
Beneš, and many others, who escaped beyond the front!ers and ~Ued
down abroad where. wlth the help of the !uture victors, they set up
a free autouomous provislonal government that was to come iruto e:,:istence after the defeat of the Centra! Powers.
What, however, would have happened lf the Centra! Powet'S had
emerged as vlctors? The answ,er ls more rthan slmple: Masaryk :ind
Co. would have dlsappeared lnto oblivlon, and the Ozechs, who had
stayed at ·home ,and had so marvelously pla.yed the rôle of loya.J subjects, would have proclalmed lnc-essa.ntly how fatth!ul they had alwaya
been to the Ha.bsburgs and to the Monarchy, ha.vlng lost rthousands,
or tens of thousands, of thelr best sons for the "Just Cause," and
how enormous thelr contributlons to vlctory had been. Nevertheless,
luck was not on the slde of the Centa! Powers. Iu consequence, from
October 1918, onwards, the Czechs withln the Monarchy had to change
qulckly to other tactlcs, transforming themselves llke chameleons, and
they were forced to a-ppear as, tnnocent vlctims who had been p~rsecuted by ,t he bruta.l Habsburg regime. The same people who fran•
tically roared "Hurmh" to greet the Emperor ~ e now not ashamed
to utter calumnlou!l words agaki.st hlm. " Hallelujah" and "Cruclfy
�36
SLOVAKIA
Him" are so close to each other, but it would appeaľ that "Crucify
Him" is much easier to shout.
It must be admitted that ,the Czechs played this new ľôle with
marvelous skill au<l admiľable flexibility. For Masaryk and hls col•
leagues it was now easy enough to create a Czechoslova:kian Rep11hlic,
hut to the very end Masaryk played a double galffie. When he was
dealing with Framoe and the Unbled States he produced a pian for a
Republic In Czechoslovakla, hut for Russia he put forward a Czech
kingdom, leaving open the question whether a Romanoff or somebody
e lse -should wear the crown of St. Wenceslaus, for so long as the Tsar
reigned In Russia the word republic did not sound g,ood. lncidentally,
Masaryk had promised lthe Slovaks autonomy as well as many other
acceptable privlleges. but these never materialized and serious difficulties la,ter arose owlng to this. Thus, even when the Czechs were
fightlng for indedimpence their double-dealing was proved.
This particular characteristic has been up to the present yielded
good results when it wa,s a question of dealing with the credulcu s.
The situation is the same now, and it will always remain the same,
so long as t-he victors •n a war in which Czechoslovakia is involved
do noi invesligate thoroughly the kind of people wlt•h whom they ,"\.re
dealing.
lt is an old and very cheap trlck to play in wiU1 both sid-es in
such great conflicts as the two World Wars, more particularly when
the outcome is not at all clear, a.t least to the people most concerned.
In the Secoud World War the situation was much the s11Jffie, and
there was a distinct analogy with what happened in rt;s predecessor.
From 1939 Ull'til 1946 Hacha functioned as President, first for the
mu'til<ated second Czechoslovak Republic and then during the Nruzl
occupation of the "Protectorate," therefore dlsplaying a fľiendly attitude, however invol11nta1;1y, towards the Hitler reglme. At the same
time Benes and his associates set up in London a government with
more or less open leanings to the left. If Hitler had won the war
Hacba would have become tbe great man of the day. However, HiUer
was def~ted, and Hacha, who had done his best to save bis country
from tbe borrors of war, and had played this part not unsuccessfully,
died i.n prison as au old and broken man, practically forgotten, while
Beneš emerged as the great man of the future and as President of
a reborn Czechoslovak Republic. Nevertheless, Beneš did not long
enjoy bis exalted position, for in Fellťllary 1948 the Communists, although a minority, seized power, a[ter .which Benes dlsappeaľed and
Gotliwald became President.
Even in normit,I times 1the double game of C1.ech policy caa be
seen quite clearly. As long as Ozechos!ovak!a adopted the rôle ot
dependence on the West, Beneš wa!< at the helm and from 1945 or.ward prepared the dellvery of his country to 'the Communists. All the
mlnls,teľ'S in bis CaLinet (there were about two dozen of them) worked
wlth their idolized Pres-ident, and In a most masterly f.ashion steered
thelr country into Communtsm, always boping ror a good job as a re•
ward for ťheir laudable work in the Bolshevist interest. Unfo11:u.nately
for them, however, thing.s ,took a different turn, for although Bene~
put up a token-resista.nce for 11. rew days against 1tbe overthrow or
democracy just to show a good face to the civilized world in the
�SLOVAKIA
37
West, it was a comparatively easy task to belp Communist Gottwald
lnto tbe Red saddle, thereby preventing a "civil war." From that fatal
day In February 1948 it could no longer he doub'ted rt.hat Czechoslovakla was a Communlst country, leaning away from democracy and
civill.zation, and progressing at full speed towards Red totalitarianlsm.
wbich by now wa,s firmly ,secure as "a peopWs democracy" by force
and terror.
When the gove111men't, with its outward appearance of democracy,
fell, Beneš and the member,s of his Oabin€-t had clearly accomplished
thelr task as laid down by the Kremliu, and from then on they were
no longer use,ful. Reallzing this they immediately "backed the other
horse," each in his own way. Beneš res!gned, and Go'ttwald replaced
him wlt.hout any diffioulty. All went smoothly, and Beneš did even
more for Communlsm: he died. Some of tbe former m!nisters tried to
escape across the frontier, but wel"e arrested; some, however, d!d
reach the American zone in Bava.ria, where they started to play the
part .of heroes and of defenders of democracy wbo had been forced to
fly from tbe peraecutions of the Communlsts. Needless to say they
behaved as lf they had always been ardent anti-Commu.nis'ts, here as
in reality tbey helped Communlsm wherever they could so Jong as
they were in office, and wlllingly or unwillingly pre-pared the overthrow of tlheir own regime. Thls they could have prevented with the
help of 'trhe army, which had remalned Joyal, and with a little couragc,
but courage is an unknown quality with the majorrty of the Czech
nation. In the West, howeveľ, J.itt1e is known about these "heroes,"
or the rôle whlob they are playing In their endeavor to oover up their
more tha.n doubtful past.
At this 'J)Oint, it may be useful to draw a parallel with Nazl Ger•
many. Any German one meets today will be sure to say that he bas
always been opposed to the Naz!s, and will describe how much he has
suffered a,t thelr hands, no matter whether he was In reality a Na.z!
or not. Probably Hitler himself would say tbe same thing if he were
still alive. It is the same in Italy where every It.allan ha~ been a partisan and fought against Mussolini, even lf he were in reality a Fascist. The same is the case wltb tlhe Czechs in e~ile. Take tbeir word
for what lt. is wortb, but never believe tbem at first sight. It is well
known that many Czechs had a very fine tíme under the Nazi occupation; they collabomted willingly and maide a lot of money. The rare
exceptions only served to prove the rule. Durlng the Presidency or
Beneš they wei,e more than ready to collaiborate with Moscow, but
wben this became impossible they gathe!'t:d In London, wbence they
have now mov.ed to Washilllgton, tľying to set up a government in
exile and hoping to be at the helm wben adversity oveľ'tak8-'l Com•
muni,sm. It is a game tbat has been played tíme and again, and the
names of these emigres witb a doubtful pa'St make ,no difference;
what makes a dlfčerence is whether or not they are 1·eliable.
In attempting to answer this question lt can be safely stated that
those wbo worked with and for Beneš until February 1948, wben Cze
choslovakla'-s future became linked wltb Communlsm, are a 'Priori unreliable, wbereas those wbo were persecuted by Beneš and bis ,system
and broke with it before Febuary 1948 are mostly reliable men who
sbould be supportecl. It would be a great mlstake to trust emigres
�38
SLOVAKIA
w.ho are not reliable, and it is surely our duty to lea..rn from the mistakes in this reS'l)eCt whi~h have been made in the .past. It must a!so
be remembered tJhat the. Communists, who a1-e always much more
actlve and quicker than tíheir democratic opponents in the West, have
innumerable agent,; or their own among Czeol1 emigres. Western democracy should be wamed in tlme before it is too late.
•
•
• •
A NOTE ON TISO, HORTHY AND BENES
E. L. DELANEY
Admfral Hoľ,thy, Regen1t of Hungary, alleged collaborllltor with
Germany and castlgated as a "Fasc,i st" by our Reds and "plnks,"
was given sanctuary by our Mil1tary Government in Bavaria a..fter
the end of hoSltlU.ties, and rightly so. Had he been returned t o BudapeBt, he would have been execu<ted by the Communisit rabble. .
But President Josef TisÔ in the adjoining state of Slovakia, even
less a collaborator with Germany than Horthy but who was án implacable foe of Communism, also fled into Bavaria and what he
thought was the sanctuary of the Americans. He was imprisoncd,
mlstreated, manhandled and then delivered to the Reds by our Milit ary Government to be hanged by them in Bratislava.
Duri-ng Lhe war, Presddent Tlso had delegated members of his
own official family to provide the best care and hospl:tal!za1tl.on if
necessary for the Amerlcan and Brltish flyers who were shot down
or who made foreed Jandlngs in his counitry.
Other Amerlcans were given sanctuary there, thls wrlter being one
who knew Dr. Josef Tlso personally and who received such sanctuary.
It was alleged by the mouthpieces of Moscow that Tiso was guilty
of treasonaib1e actions when, for the flrst Ume in nine hundred years,
he and his co-workere gained independence and "a better Ufe" for the
Slovak people. "Self-determination" was what they had been told was
their right, and now they were belng told it was their wrong. Wrong
because, long before the beginning of the war, thelr president had a(•·
cepted the protection of Berlin agalnst outside aggression. The aggression of tihe Soviiet. That was hls sin.
But note the utlter i•nconslsitency and the convincing proof of col·
Juslon and connlvance with the Communist cllque on the parit of our
execut!ves and officdals.
Dr. Eduard Benes Journeyed to Moscow with the approval and
the ald of Frankl!n D. Roosevelt and there slgned with Josef Stálln
the death warran1. of ,the Czecb and Slovak peoples. He represented
nelther Czechs nor Slovaks at that t ime, altbough he had been president of their courutry and reslgned six years prevlously. He came
to Prague with ihe blesslng of Washlngiton and the dlgnllty of an ambassador trom here. The betrayal of the entire country of Czechoslovakia by Benes, Churchill and Rooaevelt, far out-Heroďs anything
Josef Tiso did to gain independence "and . a better life" for his
people during the six years of their Republic. More con.temp,ti.ble
duplieity on the part of any statesman could scarcely be lmagin1:,d.
(REPUBLICANISM versus STATISM, ECA Press, 1950, Los
Angeles, Catif.)
�
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
35
OZEOH DOUBLE-DEALING
PRINCE ADOLF ZU SCHWARZENBERG
(This ls a reprint of the article published in the July, 1949, issue
[Vo!. III, No. 1, pp. 20-22] of the "'New Englh1h Review Ma,ga,zine."
The author heads one of the oldest familles in Bohemia and his ta.mily
played an importa.n1 role in Bohemia's ootional life. The Prince is
unquestionably qualitied to speak about th.e intrigues of Ma-saryk and
Beneš and their undemocratic and un-Christlan pol!cies. This expo-sé
ot Czech hypocrisy should be read by all Amerlcans. - Ed.)
During and after the Flrst World War the ma.in feature in Bohemla's pollcy was a tendency to back both sides at the same Ume, more
par,ticularly during rthe coutinuat!on of ho~tllitie-s. Bohemia. wa.s unt.11
1918 a part ot the Austro-Hungaria.n Monarchy, in whlch it formed a
provlnce under Ha,bsburg rule and at the same Ume a. Kingdom,
though enjoylng a very limrted a.utonomy; if !n<leed thl-s wa.s autonomy at all, for lt was by no mea.n-s self-government.
On the whole, the Czechs, who are and always hav,e been the ma·
Jority o! the inhabitants ot Bohemla and Mora.vla, d!spla.yed, even
during the First World War, in dome-stlc a!fairs a fair!y loyal attttude towards the Governme.nt In Vienna., though cthere were some stgnlfican,t excepitlons. For ex,ample, the 28th Regiment of Infantry wa.s
considered a.-s somewhat unrellable, and occa.slona.lly there were desertions to the enemy, which were more frequent tha.n in the other
Czech regtments, yet at horne the Czechs stressed thelr absolute
Joyalty to the Habsburg regimre and "'collabora.ted" wl!ling!y, more
particular!y where their pockets were a.ffected. Neverthe!ess, while
they aoted in th!s way within the black and yellow fľontier posts oť
th,e Habsburg Monarchy, they had very ,a,bJe ageuts outside beyond
the enemy Unes. In pru<ticular, there were T. G. Ma.sa.ryk, who acted
as pros,pect!ve President or a future Czechoslovakian Republlc, Edward
Beneš, and many others, who escaped beyond the front!ers and ~Ued
down abroad where. wlth the help of the !uture victors, they set up
a free autouomous provislonal government that was to come iruto e:,:istence after the defeat of the Centra! Powers.
What, however, would have happened lf the Centra! Powet'S had
emerged as vlctors? The answ,er ls more rthan slmple: Masaryk :ind
Co. would have dlsappeared lnto oblivlon, and the Ozechs, who had
stayed at ·home ,and had so marvelously pla.yed the rôle of loya.J subjects, would have proclalmed lnc-essa.ntly how fatth!ul they had alwaya
been to the Ha.bsburgs and to the Monarchy, ha.vlng lost rthousands,
or tens of thousands, of thelr best sons for the "Just Cause," and
how enormous thelr contributlons to vlctory had been. Nevertheless,
luck was not on the slde of the Centa! Powers. Iu consequence, from
October 1918, onwards, the Czechs withln the Monarchy had to change
qulckly to other tactlcs, transforming themselves llke chameleons, and
they were forced to a-ppear as, tnnocent vlctims who had been p~rsecuted by ,t he bruta.l Habsburg regime. The same people who fran•
tically roared "Hurmh" to greet the Emperor ~ e now not ashamed
to utter calumnlou!l words agaki.st hlm. " Hallelujah" and "Cruclfy
36
SLOVAKIA
Him" are so close to each other, but it would appeaľ that "Crucify
Him" is much easier to shout.
It must be admitted that ,the Czechs played this new ľôle with
marvelous skill au<l admiľable flexibility. For Masaryk and hls col•
leagues it was now easy enough to create a Czechoslova:kian Rep11hlic,
hut to the very end Masaryk played a double galffie. When he was
dealing with Framoe and the Unbled States he produced a pian for a
Republic In Czechoslovakla, hut for Russia he put forward a Czech
kingdom, leaving open the question whether a Romanoff or somebody
e lse -should wear the crown of St. Wenceslaus, for so long as the Tsar
reigned In Russia the word republic did not sound g,ood. lncidentally,
Masaryk had promised lthe Slovaks autonomy as well as many other
acceptable privlleges. but these never materialized and serious difficulties la,ter arose owlng to this. Thus, even when the Czechs were
fightlng for indedimpence their double-dealing was proved.
This particular characteristic has been up to the present yielded
good results when it wa,s a question of dealing with the credulcu s.
The situation is the same now, and it will always remain the same,
so long as t-he victors •n a war in which Czechoslovakia is involved
do noi invesligate thoroughly the kind of people wlt•h whom they ,"\.re
dealing.
lt is an old and very cheap trlck to play in wiU1 both sid-es in
such great conflicts as the two World Wars, more particularly when
the outcome is not at all clear, a.t least to the people most concerned.
In the Secoud World War the situation was much the s11Jffie, and
there was a distinct analogy with what happened in rt;s predecessor.
From 1939 Ull'til 1946 Hacha functioned as President, first for the
mu'til<ated second Czechoslovak Republic and then during the Nruzl
occupation of the "Protectorate," therefore dlsplaying a fľiendly attitude, however invol11nta1;1y, towards the Hitler reglme. At the same
time Benes and his associates set up in London a government with
more or less open leanings to the left. If Hitler had won the war
Hacba would have become tbe great man of the day. However, HiUer
was def~ted, and Hacha, who had done his best to save bis country
from tbe borrors of war, and had played this part not unsuccessfully,
died i.n prison as au old and broken man, practically forgotten, while
Beneš emerged as the great man of the future and as President of
a reborn Czechoslovak Republic. Nevertheless, Beneš did not long
enjoy bis exalted position, for in Fellťllary 1948 the Communists, although a minority, seized power, a[ter .which Benes dlsappeaľed and
Gotliwald became President.
Even in normit,I times 1the double game of C1.ech policy caa be
seen quite clearly. As long as Ozechos!ovak!a adopted the rôle ot
dependence on the West, Beneš wa!< at the helm and from 1945 or.ward prepared the dellvery of his country to 'the Communists. All the
mlnls,teľ'S in bis CaLinet (there were about two dozen of them) worked
wlth their idolized Pres-ident, and In a most masterly f.ashion steered
thelr country into Communtsm, always boping ror a good job as a re•
ward for ťheir laudable work in the Bolshevist interest. Unfo11:u.nately
for them, however, thing.s ,took a different turn, for although Bene~
put up a token-resista.nce for 11. rew days against 1tbe overthrow or
democracy just to show a good face to the civilized world in the
SLOVAKIA
37
West, it was a comparatively easy task to belp Communist Gottwald
lnto tbe Red saddle, thereby preventing a "civil war." From that fatal
day In February 1948 it could no longer he doub'ted rt.hat Czechoslovakla was a Communlst country, leaning away from democracy and
civill.zation, and progressing at full speed towards Red totalitarianlsm.
wbich by now wa,s firmly ,secure as "a peopWs democracy" by force
and terror.
When the gove111men't, with its outward appearance of democracy,
fell, Beneš and the member,s of his Oabin€-t had clearly accomplished
thelr task as laid down by the Kremliu, and from then on they were
no longer use,ful. Reallzing this they immediately "backed the other
horse," each in his own way. Beneš res!gned, and Go'ttwald replaced
him wlt.hout any diffioulty. All went smoothly, and Beneš did even
more for Communlsm: he died. Some of tbe former m!nisters tried to
escape across the frontier, but wel"e arrested; some, however, d!d
reach the American zone in Bava.ria, where they started to play the
part .of heroes and of defenders of democracy wbo had been forced to
fly from tbe peraecutions of the Communlsts. Needless to say they
behaved as lf they had always been ardent anti-Commu.nis'ts, here as
in reality tbey helped Communlsm wherever they could so Jong as
they were in office, and wlllingly or unwillingly pre-pared the overthrow of tlheir own regime. Thls they could have prevented with the
help of 'trhe army, which had remalned Joyal, and with a little couragc,
but courage is an unknown quality with the majorrty of the Czech
nation. In the West, howeveľ, J.itt1e is known about these "heroes,"
or the rôle whlob they are playing In their endeavor to oover up their
more tha.n doubtful past.
At this 'J)Oint, it may be useful to draw a parallel with Nazl Ger•
many. Any German one meets today will be sure to say that he bas
always been opposed to the Naz!s, and will describe how much he has
suffered a,t thelr hands, no matter whether he was In reality a Na.z!
or not. Probably Hitler himself would say tbe same thing if he were
still alive. It is the same in Italy where every It.allan ha~ been a partisan and fought against Mussolini, even lf he were in reality a Fascist. The same is the case wltb tlhe Czechs in e~ile. Take tbeir word
for what lt. is wortb, but never believe tbem at first sight. It is well
known that many Czechs had a very fine tíme under the Nazi occupation; they collabomted willingly and maide a lot of money. The rare
exceptions only served to prove the rule. Durlng the Presidency or
Beneš they wei,e more than ready to collaiborate with Moscow, but
wben this became impossible they gathe!'t:d In London, wbence they
have now mov.ed to Washilllgton, tľying to set up a government in
exile and hoping to be at the helm wben adversity oveľ'tak8-'l Com•
muni,sm. It is a game tbat has been played tíme and again, and the
names of these emigres witb a doubtful pa'St make ,no difference;
what makes a dlfčerence is whether or not they are 1·eliable.
In attempting to answer this question lt can be safely stated that
those wbo worked with and for Beneš until February 1948, wben Cze
choslovakla'-s future became linked wltb Communlsm, are a 'Priori unreliable, wbereas those wbo were persecuted by Beneš and bis ,system
and broke with it before Febuary 1948 are mostly reliable men who
sbould be supportecl. It would be a great mlstake to trust emigres
38
SLOVAKIA
w.ho are not reliable, and it is surely our duty to lea..rn from the mistakes in this reS'l)eCt whi~h have been made in the .past. It must a!so
be remembered tJhat the. Communists, who a1-e always much more
actlve and quicker than tíheir democratic opponents in the West, have
innumerable agent,; or their own among Czeol1 emigres. Western democracy should be wamed in tlme before it is too late.
•
•
• •
A NOTE ON TISO, HORTHY AND BENES
E. L. DELANEY
Admfral Hoľ,thy, Regen1t of Hungary, alleged collaborllltor with
Germany and castlgated as a "Fasc,i st" by our Reds and "plnks,"
was given sanctuary by our Mil1tary Government in Bavaria a..fter
the end of hoSltlU.ties, and rightly so. Had he been returned t o BudapeBt, he would have been execu<ted by the Communisit rabble. .
But President Josef TisÔ in the adjoining state of Slovakia, even
less a collaborator with Germany than Horthy but who was án implacable foe of Communism, also fled into Bavaria and what he
thought was the sanctuary of the Americans. He was imprisoncd,
mlstreated, manhandled and then delivered to the Reds by our Milit ary Government to be hanged by them in Bratislava.
Duri-ng Lhe war, Presddent Tlso had delegated members of his
own official family to provide the best care and hospl:tal!za1tl.on if
necessary for the Amerlcan and Brltish flyers who were shot down
or who made foreed Jandlngs in his counitry.
Other Amerlcans were given sanctuary there, thls wrlter being one
who knew Dr. Josef Tlso personally and who received such sanctuary.
It was alleged by the mouthpieces of Moscow that Tiso was guilty
of treasonaib1e actions when, for the flrst Ume in nine hundred years,
he and his co-workere gained independence and "a better Ufe" for the
Slovak people. "Self-determination" was what they had been told was
their right, and now they were belng told it was their wrong. Wrong
because, long before the beginning of the war, thelr president had a(•·
cepted the protection of Berlin agalnst outside aggression. The aggression of tihe Soviiet. That was hls sin.
But note the utlter i•nconslsitency and the convincing proof of col·
Juslon and connlvance with the Communist cllque on the parit of our
execut!ves and officdals.
Dr. Eduard Benes Journeyed to Moscow with the approval and
the ald of Frankl!n D. Roosevelt and there slgned with Josef Stálln
the death warran1. of ,the Czecb and Slovak peoples. He represented
nelther Czechs nor Slovaks at that t ime, altbough he had been president of their courutry and reslgned six years prevlously. He came
to Prague with ihe blesslng of Washlngiton and the dlgnllty of an ambassador trom here. The betrayal of the entire country of Czechoslovakia by Benes, Churchill and Rooaevelt, far out-Heroďs anything
Josef Tiso did to gain independence "and . a better life" for his
people during the six years of their Republic. More con.temp,ti.ble
duplieity on the part of any statesman could scarcely be lmagin1:,d.
(REPUBLICANISM versus STATISM, ECA Press, 1950, Los
Angeles, Catif.)
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
Czech Double-Dealing
Description
An account of the resource
Prince Adolf zu Schwarzenberg
Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2), December 1951
pp. 35-38
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Schwarzenberg, Adolf, 1890-1950
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1951
LCNAF
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/586cf8c56d88961f6a577dd62da5e0dc.pdf
11b2a87de41d7130d931b67c883c09b4
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
59
CZEOH GROUPS IN EXIl,E
Fritz Peter Babel
The history of Czecho-Slovak political groups in exile has unfortunately not yet been written. It would offer
the world at large a fascinating story with the suspense
and thrill of a good novel. There are actually three periods of exile: the first one from 1914 to 1918; the second
and third periods between 1938 and 1945, and from 1945
to 1948. These latter periods are harder to delineate since
they partially overlap.
Two aspects, often mutually independent, monopolize
the foreground: the actors in the drama, and the results
attained. Who, in 1914, would have dreamed that four years
later a Czecho~Slovak Republic would be among the vi.ctorious powers of the first world war? The titanic external
political success was attributable to the exploitation by a
few men of a number of favorable circumstances. At their
head stood Thomas G. Masaryk, professor of philosophy,
who - rightly or wrongly - is still today regarded as a
wise statesman, benevolent philosopher and outstanding
humanist. In the background, only known to the initiated,
was a versatile actor on the political stage, playing a vital
role. His name was Dr. Edward Benes.
Twenty years later, due to circumstances that cannot
be treated within the limited scope of this paper, the
Czecho-Slovak Republic collapsed. This collapse appeared
to be final, for the world at that time looked most critically upon the constructional defects of that State. Many
reports have been preserved from which it is clearly evident that in 1938 Czecho-Slovakia was regarded as impossible of reconstruction in its pre-Munich status, even if
Germany should lose the war.
The second period of Czecho-Slovak exile began at
this moral zero. At its head stood Dr. Benes, regarded by
many as politically bankrupt but, at the same time, regarded by an ever-growing number of followers as a tragic and the first victim of Adolf Hitler. In any event Dr.
�60
SLOVAKIA
Benes succeeded, by taking advantage of favorable circumstances, not only in restoring Czecho-Slovakia, but also in
making it an essentially Slavic State by the expulsion of
the Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars). The accoucheur of this "new" restored State was primarily Josef
Stalin, who let his bailiff Klement Gottwald, present the
bill in February 1948. Once again a Czecho-Slovak group ,
in exile seemingly succeeded in performing the impossible;
once again the existence of a single widely recognized person was a prerequisite for this development.
The third order of exile at no time couJd boast of a
person of such caliber, and for this reason it could book
no success at all. In fact, it remained to a large extent unknown. To be sure all the Czech, Slovak, and "Czechoslovak" politicians desire a Bohemian-Moravian-Slovakian
region !~berated from Communism, and to this end various
constitutional solutions have been proposed. At the same
time any uniformity of their political thinking is virtually
impossi'ble due to the Sudeten German question. More and
more Czechs and Slovaks have with the passage of time ,
come to the conclusion that this problem was not "settled"
by the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, but that it is
still awaiting a real solution. Nevertheless, again and again
voices may be heard to the contrary.
A so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," with
headquarters in the USA, which has been dissolved several
times only to be refounded again, advocates as part of its
official policy not only the approval of the expulsion of the
Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars), but it has
demanded of the Federal Republic of Germany that the act
of expulsion be recognized as "a definitively settled matter." That was the situation as expressed in a memorandum issued by the Council in the summer of 1960.
It is not within the scope and purpose of this paper
to refer to the numerous half truths and untruths the memorandum contains. It is likewise not the purpose to call
attention to the dangerous relationship between many of
its theses and Communist slogans. Since it is an important
condition of every fruitful controversy clearly to be aware
�SLOVAKIA
61
of the viewpoint of the philosophical and political opponent, a question from the above-mentioned memorandum
seems appropriate. After historic declarations and arguments in favor of the expulsion which is always referred
to as the "transfer" it says:
" ... The transfer was not considered to be an act of
retaliation but a contdbution to the security of CzechoSlovakia from the German Drang nach Ost.en and a contribution to the protection of European peace . . . In their
fight for return, the Sudeten Germans plead for recognition as a unique ethnic group. They forward this claim,
although in 1938 they coined the slogan 'Heim ins Reich~
inasmuch as they declared themselves to be an ethnic segment of the larger German nation. No doubt considerable
influence was lent to this Sudeten German claim by the
thought that the peace conference acceded the right of
self-determination solely to ethnic entirities and not to
fragments of a people living on the territory of forei,gn
States. By the demand for recognition as a special ethnic
group, they hope to acquire the right of self-determination. This demand differs in no way from those which the
Sudeten Germans pleaded for prior to the war. At that
time when the advice and complete support of Hitler was
granted them, the Sudeten Germans transferred the demand from that of autonomy and confederative reconstruction of Czecho-'Slovakia to one of separation of the border
regions from Czecho-Slovakia and annexation to the German Reich. Today they understand by self-determination
expressly the right to and power of disposition over that
portion of the Czechoslovak territory in which they, intermingled with the Czech population, were settled up to
the time of their deportation. After the experiences of
1938 that necessarily means, in the eyes of every "Czechoslovak," renewed destruction of Czecho-Slovakfa and the
annihilation of the Republic ... "
Thereupon follows a prediction for the future: " ... In
case it should come to annexing the Czecho-Slovak border
territory to Germany, Czecho-Slovakia would be economically and commercially just as mutilated as was the case
�62
SLOVAKIA
after Munich. The country's capacity to exist would be retarded and instead of being a contribution to free Europe
it would be ballast, should it be a!ble to maintain itself as
a State at all. Should the Sudeten Germans be allowed to
return and to constitute themselves in a federative union
in Czecho-Slovakia, 'lew nationality struggles, inseparable
from heavy social and especially internatnonal repercus- ,
sions, would flare up anew. The Sudeten Germans would
once again seek the aid of Germany against the Czechs
and the Slovaks, thus disturbing Czecho-Slovak relations
and becoming within Germany itself the support and lever
of undemocratic, pan-Germaniically oriented elements. The
troubled relations would mean a new threat to Czecho-Slovak independence. The satisfying of Sudeten German demands in this or that form would therefore be possible,
in the final analysis, only at the price of Czecho-Slovakia's
annihilation. One must also consider that in light of their
historical development and their experiences, State independence is an indispensa'ble prerequisite for the CzechoSlovaks' national existence and growth.
"For this very basic :reason it is a,bsolutely necessary
that the West make no further change in its approval of
the transfer and that it consider the Sudeten question settled. But for tactical reasons, too, the free world should
resist the demands of the Sudeten Germans. Any manner
of concessions would be interpreted by the Communist
government as a sacrifice of Czecho-Slovak national interests in favor of German interests and would be regarded as a new threat to the national eX!istence of the Czech
and Slovak peoples and would surely have a catastrophic
effect on the spirit of resistance to and fight a·g ainst
Communism in Czecho-Slovakia. It would compel the masses of Czechs and Slovaks to identify themselves with the
Communist government against which they now stand
resolutely opposed.
"It is of no less importance to free Czecho-Slovaks
than it is to the free world that Germany become a permanent member of the community of free peoples. This affiliation can only become effective and reliruble if Ger-
�SLOVAKIA
63
many recognizes the rights of other peoples, especially of
the peoples of Central Europe, to national independence
and sovereignty, and does not allow different groups be they from the ranks of the original population or from
the ranks of the expelled minorities - to impose a policy
on Germany which would, in its consequences, lead to a
negation of these rights. For then Germany would cut
itself off from the community of free peoples and instead
of being a co-determinant, would be a destroyer of the
Europe of the future. Since the return of the expellees
would have just such consequences, this means, in the case
of Czecho-Slovakia, that Germany should recognize the
expulsion of the Sudeten Germans as a definitive settlement.
"Such recognition will also serve as the firmest foundation for truly friendly relations between free Germany
and free Czechoslovakia. Czecho.JSlovakia desires nothing
more than to be an island of <!reative peace which introduces no tensions into the international order and gives no
occasion for quarrels but contributes to a non-violent
organization of the world."
There are also other opinions with regard to GermanCzech relations. They can, for obvious reasons, be worded
much more concisely. Here is the answer of the "Czech
Christian Democratic Movement in Exile" to the above
memorandum:
"It is our opinion that ,i t should be the highest political principle of the various refugee groups that they
resolve their own problems in a spirit of Christian understanding. The step taken by the 'Council of Free Czechoslovakia' seems to us to be determined by the opposite of
that principle. To defend the eX'pulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the western provinces of Czecho-Slovakia a measure which a self-aJppointed government of that
country executed in the year of 1945 - appears to us to
spell approval of the reprehensible deeds of the Bolshevists; it proves a lack of desire to subordinate one's own
petty feelings to the concept of a united and peaceful
Europe ... No European nation - above all no small na-
�SLOVAKIA
64
tion like ours - can find lasting peace in a divided Europe. Federalization is the only way to peace in Europe.
The Czechs could scarcely participate in such a federation
if they refused their German-speaking fellow-countrymen
the right to their homeland, thus bringing about lasting
tension between themselves and their big neighbor ... "
In conclusion the Czech Christian Democrats renewed
their approval of the Wiesbaden Agrement of Augus: 1950.
Deriving from the spirit of this fairly well-known agreement, there has appeared in recent years a personality
that may prove the dominant figure in the third period of
Czechs and Slovaks in exile. On May 29, 1955, Army General Lev Prchala stated before the participants in _the
mighty demonstration of Sudeten Germans at the 6th
Sudeten Day in Nuremberg: "As a human being and as a
European I condemn the crime that was committed against
the Sudeten Germans in 1945. As a Czech and a Christian
I feel myself obligated to ask the Sudeten German men
and women for pardon."
It is to be hoped that this seed will ripen. It is a good,
fresh seed. Although an old man sowed it, it needs the
cultivation of all true humanists who, from the mistakes
of yesterday, via the adversities of today, believe in the
dawning of a new tomorrow.
P . Hletko, M.D., hooiorary president and former president of the
League, was elected president.
Philip A. Hrobak, president of
the Lea,gue sin,ce Ma~, 1950, who
favored the election Olf Dr. Hletk-0,
now serves on the Executive Commitbce together with Monsignor
Francis J. DlllboSlh, P.A. , Lakewood, Ohio, honorary president
and former president of the
League; Paul Jamrislm, Pittsburgh,
Pa .; John A. ScJJ'bol, president of
the First Catlho[ic Slovak Uinoion ,
Phoenixville, Pa., and Joseph G.
3€
3€
3€
Prusa, secretary of the Slov-a k CaThe Slovak League of America tholic Sokol. The next Oongress
held its 36th Congress in Detroit, will be in Philadelphia, Pa. , in
Mich., May 27-29, 1962. Dr. Peter 1-964.
F.rano Stefunka, Slowik academic scu]Jptor, is working on, a memorial to Ja•n Kollar who was
among the initiators of the cultural Pan-Slaivist'ic movement in S1<r
vakia. 'Dhe Kollar creation is to be
unveiled in Mosovce, Slovakia, on
July 29, 1963, t'he 1'7oth anniversary of Kollar's birth. He is known
particularly, for his ly,ric-e,pic
poem "Slavy dcera" and his collection (4 volumes) of Slovak folksongs (Narodnie Zpievanky"). Kollar was born in Mosoivce, Slov.akia,
on Jiuly 29, 1'7 93.
1
�
SLOVAKIA
59
CZEOH GROUPS IN EXIl,E
Fritz Peter Babel
The history of Czecho-Slovak political groups in exile has unfortunately not yet been written. It would offer
the world at large a fascinating story with the suspense
and thrill of a good novel. There are actually three periods of exile: the first one from 1914 to 1918; the second
and third periods between 1938 and 1945, and from 1945
to 1948. These latter periods are harder to delineate since
they partially overlap.
Two aspects, often mutually independent, monopolize
the foreground: the actors in the drama, and the results
attained. Who, in 1914, would have dreamed that four years
later a Czecho~Slovak Republic would be among the vi.ctorious powers of the first world war? The titanic external
political success was attributable to the exploitation by a
few men of a number of favorable circumstances. At their
head stood Thomas G. Masaryk, professor of philosophy,
who - rightly or wrongly - is still today regarded as a
wise statesman, benevolent philosopher and outstanding
humanist. In the background, only known to the initiated,
was a versatile actor on the political stage, playing a vital
role. His name was Dr. Edward Benes.
Twenty years later, due to circumstances that cannot
be treated within the limited scope of this paper, the
Czecho-Slovak Republic collapsed. This collapse appeared
to be final, for the world at that time looked most critically upon the constructional defects of that State. Many
reports have been preserved from which it is clearly evident that in 1938 Czecho-Slovakia was regarded as impossible of reconstruction in its pre-Munich status, even if
Germany should lose the war.
The second period of Czecho-Slovak exile began at
this moral zero. At its head stood Dr. Benes, regarded by
many as politically bankrupt but, at the same time, regarded by an ever-growing number of followers as a tragic and the first victim of Adolf Hitler. In any event Dr.
�60
SLOVAKIA
Benes succeeded, by taking advantage of favorable circumstances, not only in restoring Czecho-Slovakia, but also in
making it an essentially Slavic State by the expulsion of
the Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars). The accoucheur of this "new" restored State was primarily Josef
Stalin, who let his bailiff Klement Gottwald, present the
bill in February 1948. Once again a Czecho-Slovak group ,
in exile seemingly succeeded in performing the impossible;
once again the existence of a single widely recognized person was a prerequisite for this development.
The third order of exile at no time couJd boast of a
person of such caliber, and for this reason it could book
no success at all. In fact, it remained to a large extent unknown. To be sure all the Czech, Slovak, and "Czechoslovak" politicians desire a Bohemian-Moravian-Slovakian
region !~berated from Communism, and to this end various
constitutional solutions have been proposed. At the same
time any uniformity of their political thinking is virtually
impossi'ble due to the Sudeten German question. More and
more Czechs and Slovaks have with the passage of time ,
come to the conclusion that this problem was not "settled"
by the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, but that it is
still awaiting a real solution. Nevertheless, again and again
voices may be heard to the contrary.
A so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," with
headquarters in the USA, which has been dissolved several
times only to be refounded again, advocates as part of its
official policy not only the approval of the expulsion of the
Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars), but it has
demanded of the Federal Republic of Germany that the act
of expulsion be recognized as "a definitively settled matter." That was the situation as expressed in a memorandum issued by the Council in the summer of 1960.
It is not within the scope and purpose of this paper
to refer to the numerous half truths and untruths the memorandum contains. It is likewise not the purpose to call
attention to the dangerous relationship between many of
its theses and Communist slogans. Since it is an important
condition of every fruitful controversy clearly to be aware
�SLOVAKIA
61
of the viewpoint of the philosophical and political opponent, a question from the above-mentioned memorandum
seems appropriate. After historic declarations and arguments in favor of the expulsion which is always referred
to as the "transfer" it says:
" ... The transfer was not considered to be an act of
retaliation but a contdbution to the security of CzechoSlovakia from the German Drang nach Ost.en and a contribution to the protection of European peace . . . In their
fight for return, the Sudeten Germans plead for recognition as a unique ethnic group. They forward this claim,
although in 1938 they coined the slogan 'Heim ins Reich~
inasmuch as they declared themselves to be an ethnic segment of the larger German nation. No doubt considerable
influence was lent to this Sudeten German claim by the
thought that the peace conference acceded the right of
self-determination solely to ethnic entirities and not to
fragments of a people living on the territory of forei,gn
States. By the demand for recognition as a special ethnic
group, they hope to acquire the right of self-determination. This demand differs in no way from those which the
Sudeten Germans pleaded for prior to the war. At that
time when the advice and complete support of Hitler was
granted them, the Sudeten Germans transferred the demand from that of autonomy and confederative reconstruction of Czecho-'Slovakia to one of separation of the border
regions from Czecho-Slovakia and annexation to the German Reich. Today they understand by self-determination
expressly the right to and power of disposition over that
portion of the Czechoslovak territory in which they, intermingled with the Czech population, were settled up to
the time of their deportation. After the experiences of
1938 that necessarily means, in the eyes of every "Czechoslovak," renewed destruction of Czecho-Slovakfa and the
annihilation of the Republic ... "
Thereupon follows a prediction for the future: " ... In
case it should come to annexing the Czecho-Slovak border
territory to Germany, Czecho-Slovakia would be economically and commercially just as mutilated as was the case
�62
SLOVAKIA
after Munich. The country's capacity to exist would be retarded and instead of being a contribution to free Europe
it would be ballast, should it be a!ble to maintain itself as
a State at all. Should the Sudeten Germans be allowed to
return and to constitute themselves in a federative union
in Czecho-Slovakia, 'lew nationality struggles, inseparable
from heavy social and especially internatnonal repercus- ,
sions, would flare up anew. The Sudeten Germans would
once again seek the aid of Germany against the Czechs
and the Slovaks, thus disturbing Czecho-Slovak relations
and becoming within Germany itself the support and lever
of undemocratic, pan-Germaniically oriented elements. The
troubled relations would mean a new threat to Czecho-Slovak independence. The satisfying of Sudeten German demands in this or that form would therefore be possible,
in the final analysis, only at the price of Czecho-Slovakia's
annihilation. One must also consider that in light of their
historical development and their experiences, State independence is an indispensa'ble prerequisite for the CzechoSlovaks' national existence and growth.
"For this very basic :reason it is a,bsolutely necessary
that the West make no further change in its approval of
the transfer and that it consider the Sudeten question settled. But for tactical reasons, too, the free world should
resist the demands of the Sudeten Germans. Any manner
of concessions would be interpreted by the Communist
government as a sacrifice of Czecho-Slovak national interests in favor of German interests and would be regarded as a new threat to the national eX!istence of the Czech
and Slovak peoples and would surely have a catastrophic
effect on the spirit of resistance to and fight a·g ainst
Communism in Czecho-Slovakia. It would compel the masses of Czechs and Slovaks to identify themselves with the
Communist government against which they now stand
resolutely opposed.
"It is of no less importance to free Czecho-Slovaks
than it is to the free world that Germany become a permanent member of the community of free peoples. This affiliation can only become effective and reliruble if Ger-
�SLOVAKIA
63
many recognizes the rights of other peoples, especially of
the peoples of Central Europe, to national independence
and sovereignty, and does not allow different groups be they from the ranks of the original population or from
the ranks of the expelled minorities - to impose a policy
on Germany which would, in its consequences, lead to a
negation of these rights. For then Germany would cut
itself off from the community of free peoples and instead
of being a co-determinant, would be a destroyer of the
Europe of the future. Since the return of the expellees
would have just such consequences, this means, in the case
of Czecho-Slovakia, that Germany should recognize the
expulsion of the Sudeten Germans as a definitive settlement.
"Such recognition will also serve as the firmest foundation for truly friendly relations between free Germany
and free Czechoslovakia. Czecho.JSlovakia desires nothing
more than to be an island of <!reative peace which introduces no tensions into the international order and gives no
occasion for quarrels but contributes to a non-violent
organization of the world."
There are also other opinions with regard to GermanCzech relations. They can, for obvious reasons, be worded
much more concisely. Here is the answer of the "Czech
Christian Democratic Movement in Exile" to the above
memorandum:
"It is our opinion that ,i t should be the highest political principle of the various refugee groups that they
resolve their own problems in a spirit of Christian understanding. The step taken by the 'Council of Free Czechoslovakia' seems to us to be determined by the opposite of
that principle. To defend the eX'pulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the western provinces of Czecho-Slovakia a measure which a self-aJppointed government of that
country executed in the year of 1945 - appears to us to
spell approval of the reprehensible deeds of the Bolshevists; it proves a lack of desire to subordinate one's own
petty feelings to the concept of a united and peaceful
Europe ... No European nation - above all no small na-
�SLOVAKIA
64
tion like ours - can find lasting peace in a divided Europe. Federalization is the only way to peace in Europe.
The Czechs could scarcely participate in such a federation
if they refused their German-speaking fellow-countrymen
the right to their homeland, thus bringing about lasting
tension between themselves and their big neighbor ... "
In conclusion the Czech Christian Democrats renewed
their approval of the Wiesbaden Agrement of Augus: 1950.
Deriving from the spirit of this fairly well-known agreement, there has appeared in recent years a personality
that may prove the dominant figure in the third period of
Czechs and Slovaks in exile. On May 29, 1955, Army General Lev Prchala stated before the participants in _the
mighty demonstration of Sudeten Germans at the 6th
Sudeten Day in Nuremberg: "As a human being and as a
European I condemn the crime that was committed against
the Sudeten Germans in 1945. As a Czech and a Christian
I feel myself obligated to ask the Sudeten German men
and women for pardon."
It is to be hoped that this seed will ripen. It is a good,
fresh seed. Although an old man sowed it, it needs the
cultivation of all true humanists who, from the mistakes
of yesterday, via the adversities of today, believe in the
dawning of a new tomorrow.
P . Hletko, M.D., hooiorary president and former president of the
League, was elected president.
Philip A. Hrobak, president of
the Lea,gue sin,ce Ma~, 1950, who
favored the election Olf Dr. Hletk-0,
now serves on the Executive Commitbce together with Monsignor
Francis J. DlllboSlh, P.A. , Lakewood, Ohio, honorary president
and former president of the
League; Paul Jamrislm, Pittsburgh,
Pa .; John A. ScJJ'bol, president of
the First Catlho[ic Slovak Uinoion ,
Phoenixville, Pa., and Joseph G.
3€
3€
3€
Prusa, secretary of the Slov-a k CaThe Slovak League of America tholic Sokol. The next Oongress
held its 36th Congress in Detroit, will be in Philadelphia, Pa. , in
Mich., May 27-29, 1962. Dr. Peter 1-964.
F.rano Stefunka, Slowik academic scu]Jptor, is working on, a memorial to Ja•n Kollar who was
among the initiators of the cultural Pan-Slaivist'ic movement in S1<r
vakia. 'Dhe Kollar creation is to be
unveiled in Mosovce, Slovakia, on
July 29, 1963, t'he 1'7oth anniversary of Kollar's birth. He is known
particularly, for his ly,ric-e,pic
poem "Slavy dcera" and his collection (4 volumes) of Slovak folksongs (Narodnie Zpievanky"). Kollar was born in Mosoivce, Slov.akia,
on Jiuly 29, 1'7 93.
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
1962, Vol. 12
Description
An account of the resource
Issue 1 (No. 35), March-June 1962.
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
1962
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
CZEOH GROUPS IN EXIl,E
Fritz Peter Babel
The history of Czecho-Slovak political groups in exile has unfortunately not yet been written. It would offer
the world at large a fascinating story with the suspense
and thrill of a good novel. There are actually three periods of exile: the first one from 1914 to 1918; the second
and third periods between 1938 and 1945, and from 1945
to 1948. These latter periods are harder to delineate since
they partially overlap.
Two aspects, often mutually independent, monopolize
the foreground: the actors in the drama, and the results
attained. Who, in 1914, would have dreamed that four years
later a Czecho~Slovak Republic would be among the vi.ctorious powers of the first world war? The titanic external
political success was attributable to the exploitation by a
few men of a number of favorable circumstances. At their
head stood Thomas G. Masaryk, professor of philosophy,
who - rightly or wrongly - is still today regarded as a
wise statesman, benevolent philosopher and outstanding
humanist. In the background, only known to the initiated,
was a versatile actor on the political stage, playing a vital
role. His name was Dr. Edward Benes.
Twenty years later, due to circumstances that cannot
be treated within the limited scope of this paper, the
Czecho-Slovak Republic collapsed. This collapse appeared
to be final, for the world at that time looked most critically upon the constructional defects of that State. Many
reports have been preserved from which it is clearly evident that in 1938 Czecho-Slovakia was regarded as impossible of reconstruction in its pre-Munich status, even if
Germany should lose the war.
The second period of Czecho-Slovak exile began at
this moral zero. At its head stood Dr. Benes, regarded by
many as politically bankrupt but, at the same time, regarded by an ever-growing number of followers as a tragic and the first victim of Adolf Hitler. In any event Dr.
60
SLOVAKIA
Benes succeeded, by taking advantage of favorable circumstances, not only in restoring Czecho-Slovakia, but also in
making it an essentially Slavic State by the expulsion of
the Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars). The accoucheur of this "new" restored State was primarily Josef
Stalin, who let his bailiff Klement Gottwald, present the
bill in February 1948. Once again a Czecho-Slovak group ,
in exile seemingly succeeded in performing the impossible;
once again the existence of a single widely recognized person was a prerequisite for this development.
The third order of exile at no time couJd boast of a
person of such caliber, and for this reason it could book
no success at all. In fact, it remained to a large extent unknown. To be sure all the Czech, Slovak, and "Czechoslovak" politicians desire a Bohemian-Moravian-Slovakian
region !~berated from Communism, and to this end various
constitutional solutions have been proposed. At the same
time any uniformity of their political thinking is virtually
impossi'ble due to the Sudeten German question. More and
more Czechs and Slovaks have with the passage of time ,
come to the conclusion that this problem was not "settled"
by the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, but that it is
still awaiting a real solution. Nevertheless, again and again
voices may be heard to the contrary.
A so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," with
headquarters in the USA, which has been dissolved several
times only to be refounded again, advocates as part of its
official policy not only the approval of the expulsion of the
Sudeten Germans and Hungarians (Magyars), but it has
demanded of the Federal Republic of Germany that the act
of expulsion be recognized as "a definitively settled matter." That was the situation as expressed in a memorandum issued by the Council in the summer of 1960.
It is not within the scope and purpose of this paper
to refer to the numerous half truths and untruths the memorandum contains. It is likewise not the purpose to call
attention to the dangerous relationship between many of
its theses and Communist slogans. Since it is an important
condition of every fruitful controversy clearly to be aware
SLOVAKIA
61
of the viewpoint of the philosophical and political opponent, a question from the above-mentioned memorandum
seems appropriate. After historic declarations and arguments in favor of the expulsion which is always referred
to as the "transfer" it says:
" ... The transfer was not considered to be an act of
retaliation but a contdbution to the security of CzechoSlovakia from the German Drang nach Ost.en and a contribution to the protection of European peace . . . In their
fight for return, the Sudeten Germans plead for recognition as a unique ethnic group. They forward this claim,
although in 1938 they coined the slogan 'Heim ins Reich~
inasmuch as they declared themselves to be an ethnic segment of the larger German nation. No doubt considerable
influence was lent to this Sudeten German claim by the
thought that the peace conference acceded the right of
self-determination solely to ethnic entirities and not to
fragments of a people living on the territory of forei,gn
States. By the demand for recognition as a special ethnic
group, they hope to acquire the right of self-determination. This demand differs in no way from those which the
Sudeten Germans pleaded for prior to the war. At that
time when the advice and complete support of Hitler was
granted them, the Sudeten Germans transferred the demand from that of autonomy and confederative reconstruction of Czecho-'Slovakia to one of separation of the border
regions from Czecho-Slovakia and annexation to the German Reich. Today they understand by self-determination
expressly the right to and power of disposition over that
portion of the Czechoslovak territory in which they, intermingled with the Czech population, were settled up to
the time of their deportation. After the experiences of
1938 that necessarily means, in the eyes of every "Czechoslovak," renewed destruction of Czecho-Slovakfa and the
annihilation of the Republic ... "
Thereupon follows a prediction for the future: " ... In
case it should come to annexing the Czecho-Slovak border
territory to Germany, Czecho-Slovakia would be economically and commercially just as mutilated as was the case
62
SLOVAKIA
after Munich. The country's capacity to exist would be retarded and instead of being a contribution to free Europe
it would be ballast, should it be a!ble to maintain itself as
a State at all. Should the Sudeten Germans be allowed to
return and to constitute themselves in a federative union
in Czecho-Slovakia, 'lew nationality struggles, inseparable
from heavy social and especially internatnonal repercus- ,
sions, would flare up anew. The Sudeten Germans would
once again seek the aid of Germany against the Czechs
and the Slovaks, thus disturbing Czecho-Slovak relations
and becoming within Germany itself the support and lever
of undemocratic, pan-Germaniically oriented elements. The
troubled relations would mean a new threat to Czecho-Slovak independence. The satisfying of Sudeten German demands in this or that form would therefore be possible,
in the final analysis, only at the price of Czecho-Slovakia's
annihilation. One must also consider that in light of their
historical development and their experiences, State independence is an indispensa'ble prerequisite for the CzechoSlovaks' national existence and growth.
"For this very basic :reason it is a,bsolutely necessary
that the West make no further change in its approval of
the transfer and that it consider the Sudeten question settled. But for tactical reasons, too, the free world should
resist the demands of the Sudeten Germans. Any manner
of concessions would be interpreted by the Communist
government as a sacrifice of Czecho-Slovak national interests in favor of German interests and would be regarded as a new threat to the national eX!istence of the Czech
and Slovak peoples and would surely have a catastrophic
effect on the spirit of resistance to and fight a·g ainst
Communism in Czecho-Slovakia. It would compel the masses of Czechs and Slovaks to identify themselves with the
Communist government against which they now stand
resolutely opposed.
"It is of no less importance to free Czecho-Slovaks
than it is to the free world that Germany become a permanent member of the community of free peoples. This affiliation can only become effective and reliruble if Ger-
SLOVAKIA
63
many recognizes the rights of other peoples, especially of
the peoples of Central Europe, to national independence
and sovereignty, and does not allow different groups be they from the ranks of the original population or from
the ranks of the expelled minorities - to impose a policy
on Germany which would, in its consequences, lead to a
negation of these rights. For then Germany would cut
itself off from the community of free peoples and instead
of being a co-determinant, would be a destroyer of the
Europe of the future. Since the return of the expellees
would have just such consequences, this means, in the case
of Czecho-Slovakia, that Germany should recognize the
expulsion of the Sudeten Germans as a definitive settlement.
"Such recognition will also serve as the firmest foundation for truly friendly relations between free Germany
and free Czechoslovakia. Czecho.JSlovakia desires nothing
more than to be an island of <!reative peace which introduces no tensions into the international order and gives no
occasion for quarrels but contributes to a non-violent
organization of the world."
There are also other opinions with regard to GermanCzech relations. They can, for obvious reasons, be worded
much more concisely. Here is the answer of the "Czech
Christian Democratic Movement in Exile" to the above
memorandum:
"It is our opinion that ,i t should be the highest political principle of the various refugee groups that they
resolve their own problems in a spirit of Christian understanding. The step taken by the 'Council of Free Czechoslovakia' seems to us to be determined by the opposite of
that principle. To defend the eX'pulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the western provinces of Czecho-Slovakia a measure which a self-aJppointed government of that
country executed in the year of 1945 - appears to us to
spell approval of the reprehensible deeds of the Bolshevists; it proves a lack of desire to subordinate one's own
petty feelings to the concept of a united and peaceful
Europe ... No European nation - above all no small na-
SLOVAKIA
64
tion like ours - can find lasting peace in a divided Europe. Federalization is the only way to peace in Europe.
The Czechs could scarcely participate in such a federation
if they refused their German-speaking fellow-countrymen
the right to their homeland, thus bringing about lasting
tension between themselves and their big neighbor ... "
In conclusion the Czech Christian Democrats renewed
their approval of the Wiesbaden Agrement of Augus: 1950.
Deriving from the spirit of this fairly well-known agreement, there has appeared in recent years a personality
that may prove the dominant figure in the third period of
Czechs and Slovaks in exile. On May 29, 1955, Army General Lev Prchala stated before the participants in _the
mighty demonstration of Sudeten Germans at the 6th
Sudeten Day in Nuremberg: "As a human being and as a
European I condemn the crime that was committed against
the Sudeten Germans in 1945. As a Czech and a Christian
I feel myself obligated to ask the Sudeten German men
and women for pardon."
It is to be hoped that this seed will ripen. It is a good,
fresh seed. Although an old man sowed it, it needs the
cultivation of all true humanists who, from the mistakes
of yesterday, via the adversities of today, believe in the
dawning of a new tomorrow.
P . Hletko, M.D., hooiorary president and former president of the
League, was elected president.
Philip A. Hrobak, president of
the Lea,gue sin,ce Ma~, 1950, who
favored the election Olf Dr. Hletk-0,
now serves on the Executive Commitbce together with Monsignor
Francis J. DlllboSlh, P.A. , Lakewood, Ohio, honorary president
and former president of the
League; Paul Jamrislm, Pittsburgh,
Pa .; John A. ScJJ'bol, president of
the First Catlho[ic Slovak Uinoion ,
Phoenixville, Pa., and Joseph G.
3€
3€
3€
Prusa, secretary of the Slov-a k CaThe Slovak League of America tholic Sokol. The next Oongress
held its 36th Congress in Detroit, will be in Philadelphia, Pa. , in
Mich., May 27-29, 1962. Dr. Peter 1-964.
F.rano Stefunka, Slowik academic scu]Jptor, is working on, a memorial to Ja•n Kollar who was
among the initiators of the cultural Pan-Slaivist'ic movement in S1<r
vakia. 'Dhe Kollar creation is to be
unveiled in Mosovce, Slovakia, on
July 29, 1963, t'he 1'7oth anniversary of Kollar's birth. He is known
particularly, for his ly,ric-e,pic
poem "Slavy dcera" and his collection (4 volumes) of Slovak folksongs (Narodnie Zpievanky"). Kollar was born in Mosoivce, Slov.akia,
on Jiuly 29, 1'7 93.
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
Czech Groups in Exile
Description
An account of the resource
Fritz Peter Habel
Slovakia, Vol. 12, No. 1 (35), March-June 1962
pp. 59-64
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Habel, Fritz Peter, 1931-2011
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March-June 1962
LCNAF+dates
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1029af3398a2c9fa89f1a6e4991ec2ca.pdf
a632d718bcae98511576910a6922921c
PDF Text
Text
56
SLOVAKIA
CZ.ECH INTRIGUES AGAINST THE SWVAK STATE
DR. A . GRÉBERT
Slovakia was saved from a great catastrophe by proclaiming her
independence: from the danger or belng partitloned between Poland,
Hungary and Germany.
For the Czech and Magyar imperialists, however, the proclama•
tion of an independent Slovakia meant a fatal defeat. The Slovaks at
last had a chance to prove to themselves and the world that they
were able and capable of taklng care of themselves and thelr country.
The Czechs on the other hand knew well that lt meant a na.II in the
coffín of Czech imperlallsm In Slov.akta. That is why the Czech imperlallsts are f!ghtlng so furlously agalnst the Idea of Slovak state
independence ror over thlrty years. In thls regard, the rightist Hacha,
the lertist Flerllnger, and "me-always-president" Beneš spoke and
acted allke. Czech post-war politlcal literature offers conclusive proofs
o[ thls.
When Hitler called Hacha to Berlin on March 15, 1949 - a day
after the proclamatlon of the lndependence of Slovakia - the Czech
presldent dld not fall to use the opportunity to lntrigue agalnst the
Slovaks. In bis conversa.tlon wlth Hitler, he said that he belleved
"the F Uhrer s hall not have too many favora ble experiences w ith the
Slovaks." Furthermore Hacha sald that the Czechs always had "closer
ties w ith Ge rmany than wlth Slovakia, wh ic h is more inclin ed t o
Hungary" (vd.: Czechoslovakla and the Nuremberg Trials, pg. 326).
True lt is that in the past the Czechs always felt ctoser to
Germany than to Siovakla, but In the case referred to, Bacha was
lnterested only In presentlng the Czechs in a most favorable light,
whlle on the Slova.ks he cast the susplclon of sympathlzlng with Hungary, whom Hitler nelther llked nor trusted. Base dlplomatlc lntrigue
was concerned. It was generally known that Hitler knew llttle about
Slovakla; cleverly lnclted susplclon about the inclinatlon of the Slovaks toward the Magyars could have catastrophic results for the development of the Slovak state. And that certalnly would have been
most pleaslng to Czech lmperlallsts.
Magyar dlplomats In Berlin also never let up intriguing against
Slovak state lndependence. Slova.kla certainly was In a dlfficult altu·
atlon. · For example, on March 25, 1989, Hitler gave the tollowlng lnformation to the supreme commander of the German army regardlng
bis stand toward Slovakla: "It 1s not certalu how long the Fiihrer
shall feel hlmself bound by the agreement concluded wlth Slovakia.
The supreme army commander thlnks that t he Fiihrer would want to
1id himself of the obligation at the flrst opportune moment and use
Slovakla as a basis of negotiation between blmself, Poland and Hungary. In the meantlme, however, Hungary is supposed to restrain
herself." (op. cit. pg. 332).
Czech and Magyar lntrlgues bore fruit.
lt took a Jot of dlplomatic cleverness and perseverance on the part
of President Tlso, bis Minister of Forelgn Affalrs and Slovak diplo·
macy to save Slovakia from the deadly danger lnclted by the Magyars
�SLOVAK.IA
67
and the Czechs. If foť nothlng else, then for avertlng this danger Dr.
Tiso and bis government deserve the gratltude and respect of the
Slovak na.tlon. Thus tbey saved the Slovak6 trom one of the great86t
catastrophies that could have overtaken them.
Czech politiclans and diplomats lntrigued even later and on otbeť
fronts of tbe diplomatic battlefield against the Slovak state. In October 1939 the USSIR declded to recognize the Slovak Republic "de
jure." At that tlme Zdenek Fierlinger, former Czech envoy, was stil\
in Moscow. H e dld everything possible to prevent the recognitlon. "I
was very much concerned," writes Fierlinger in bis Memolrs, "to have
the undeslrable psychologlcal effect of the recognltion of Slovakia
a nd our deep disappolntment explained at the Commissariat of Interna) Affalrs. I demanded very emphatically that my o bjectlons be
interpreted to competent authorities."
But the USSR dld recognize the Slovak State "de jure" and Czech
cliplomacy and Czech lntrlgues suffered a complete setback. The
Czechs sought to weaken the political situatlon of the Slovak State
internatlona.lly by having the USSR renounce recognl:tlon. But thelr
dlplomatic guns backftred. Flerllnger himself states that sendlng a
Soviet envoy to Bratislava only emphasized the lndependence of the
Slovak State.
The Soviets, like the Vatican, probably have the best information
servlce in the world. They knew well how the Slovak people felt
about the Slovak State: they knew that over 90 per cent were for lt.
That i., wby the Sovlets did not hesltate to recognlze the Slovak
State as a full-fledged member of the lnternational soclety of states.
And it ls signlficant that even at the conclusion of the war the Sovlets offered to respect Slovak statehood. They changed thelr stand
only after Dľ. Tlso refused resolutely to collaborate wlth International
Communism.
Beneš lntrlgued even at the Vatican. The Holy See was among
the ftrst to recognlze the Slovak State. Slovakia had an ambassador at
the Vatican, and the Vatican had one In Bratislava. Beneš could
not see thls.
puffed and he huffed to have the Vatlcan renounce
recognitlon.
On January 7, 1941, Beneš gave the apostolic representatlve .. ln
Great Brttain, Msgr. W. Godfrey, a letter In wblch, among other thlngs,
he stated that "the time has arrlved when we ought to come to establi.sh some sort of unofflcial contact between the new Czechoslovak
government, resldlng now In London, and the ~oly See."
Beneš knew that the existence of the Slovak State and its abllity
to live were the greatest obstacles to his des!gns. That 1s why he tried
to present Slovakla to the Roly See In the gloomiest colors: "Conditions In Slovak.la are very bad and the severity of the contemporary
government of Tlso shall have a deep influence on the situatlon of
the Catholic Church ln Slovakla after the war."
Evidently Beneš threatened the Holy See to see things his way
and recognlze hi.s government or else suffer the consequences for
the Church In Slovakla once he got back lnto power af<ter the war.
To aggravat-e the sltuation and tbe sta.tlu:& of the Slovak ambassa.dor a,t
the Vatlcan, Beneš sa id In his letter that "the Slovak delegate at tbe
He
�58
SLOVAKI.A
Holy See is a representative of a State that is entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government."
It is lnteresting on the one hand, to note that Beneš called tbe
Slovak ambassador a "delegate" - even tbough be was recognlzed as
an ambassador by the Vatlcan which had at lts dis posal men wbo
were at least as well-versed in international law and polltics as were
Deneš and his colleagues. On tbe other hand. however, Beneš wrote
about a STATE and not about a "SO-CALLED" State: the latter terminology he reserved for the lnternal-polltical front and for his nalve
admlrers. Beneš knew that he could talk about a "so-called" state
before his agents, but not before the experlenced and educated diplomats or the Vatican.
Beneš said t hat tbe Slovak government was ·•entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government." However, wben he came to Košice in 1945 according to Pápanek's statement before the Security Council of tbe
Uniled Nations in March 1948 - Beneš was completely under tbe surveillance of the Soviet army and it was even impossible for him to
make contacts wlth the surroundlng countries. "\\'ell, tbe fact still
remains that Dr. Tiso and bis government were never so "totally"
under tbe care of the Nazi government!
Tbe answer tbe Vatican gave Beneš was not the one that he had
E>xpected. Tbe Vatican answered courteously, but clearly and empbatlcally that it will not "establish some form of unofficial contact"
as Beneš desired. In the answer of the Vatican it says that " His
Em!nence is conv!nced that Your Excellency w!l.J understand. how
dellcate the contemporary situation ls and bow diCficult it would be
In the present perlod to proffer the Czechoslovak people the ad•
vantage of such contacts."
Translated into plain language that mean t: "NO!"
Evldently the Vatican gave priority to the diplomatic contacts
with the Slovak natlon and not to tbose with "the Czechoslovak
people" as Benel\ had wished. This was an apparent failure of and defeat for Beneš's diplomacy.
Beneš was angered, but not overly discouraged. Two years later,
on May 12, 1943, he sent the Vat!can a Memorandum in which he
demanded establishing contacts between tbe Vatican and tbe Czechoslovak government in London.
In it he told bis version of tbe "sad" conditions at horne: The
Czechs he satd, are without exception for the Czecboslovak government in London and "the Slovak people in its greater majority bolds
the same position. In Slovakia, polltical, social, economic and mora!
condltlons are most sad. The majori ty of the Slovak nation regards the
present regime in Bratislava gullty of thi& situaiion and as a trattor
of the Slovak people and the Czechoslovak Republlc. Former governmental Slovak parties from tbe period before March 15, 1939, (Tbe
Agrarians, Liberals, Sociallsts). are almost completely bebind the Czer hos lovak government and against the present regime in Slovakla,
wb!le from tbe ranks of former Cathollc People's Party, which took
over tbe rule of Slovak affairs from tbe hands of tbe Germans tn
1939, at least 60 per cent today - according to our reports - stand
agalnst tbe present r egime."
�fiLOVAKlA
69
That statement contalns just about as many !les and hal!truths as
it does words ! Beneš himself must have known that, because he further sald that "the Holy See mlght have other information about the
situatlon in Slovak!a, but I consider lt my duty," etc.
No doubt about lt: the Holy See dld have other information; it
had the true plcture of Slovakla. The Vatlcan had lts representative
in Bratislava! Beneš undoubtedly knew that he was lying, but the
Czech cause was built on Jies and it was possible to defend it only
with more lies.
To glve the memorandum more weight, Beneš had lt sent through
the Br!tlsh and American Government.s. Despite all thls, t he Vatican
contlnued to recogn!ze the Slovak S.tate to the end of the war. Of
course, that made Beneš all the more furious.
1t is interesting to note that Beneš did not have the courage to
r,ubllsh the Vatican's reply i o his memorandum in hls Memoirs. It
probably was not as nlce as that recelved in 1941. The stand of the
Vatican through 1943-1944 at least indicates as much.
Beneš Jived long enough to avenge himself: he had Dr. Tiso murdered, thousands upon thousands of Slovaks and Czechs - all his
opponents - jailed, pauperized, disfranchised, beaten, maimed, and
exlled to Siberia and Jachymov. He collaborated "totally" with Stalln
and h!s Czechoslovak agents to sell out the Czech and Slovak nations to the scourge of communism. He had warned the Vatlcan, but
was spurned. The Slovaks asked for it and so did the Vatican, accord·
ing to Beneš, and both got what they deserved. Beneš had won again
and gloated over bis victory. What a vlctory - for Communism!
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"We believe that it is unconditionally necessary for RUSSI A to
take a PE RMANENT part in European politlcs and that the present
collaboratlon between the Britisb In the west and the Soviets In tbe
east, together with the partlcipation of the United St·a tes, !s a fundamental condition of the permanence or a genuinely new world order,
for the realizatlon of which WE are figbtlng. However, as far as tbe
homeland 1s concerned, only the Czechoslovak people itself, through
FREE expression of its will, will decide on how we are to arrange
our homeland." - (Msgr. Ján Šrámek, Broadcast, London, Sept. 1,
1943).
•
"Our alliance with Russia was accepted UNAN IMOUSLY BY ALL
OF US, not only by our Communists and Socialista, BUT BY AL L
TH E PART( ES - and there are four of them in the government by Catholics and Protestants alike. . . . Any American or foreign cor.
respondent will tell you that WE HAVE NO CE NSORSH IP on for.
eign news from the leading world agencies, including the Associated
Press and United Press. . . . WE are the ONLY Slav country which
has diplomatic and friendly relations with the Vatican. 1 have an
ambassador at the Holy See and there is a Nuncio In Prague." (Ján Masaryk, Address at the 15th Annua l New York Herald Tribune
Forum on. Current Problems, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel , N. Y., October
!10. l 946, 4th sess!on).
�
56
SLOVAKIA
CZ.ECH INTRIGUES AGAINST THE SWVAK STATE
DR. A . GRÉBERT
Slovakia was saved from a great catastrophe by proclaiming her
independence: from the danger or belng partitloned between Poland,
Hungary and Germany.
For the Czech and Magyar imperialists, however, the proclama•
tion of an independent Slovakia meant a fatal defeat. The Slovaks at
last had a chance to prove to themselves and the world that they
were able and capable of taklng care of themselves and thelr country.
The Czechs on the other hand knew well that lt meant a na.II in the
coffín of Czech imperlallsm In Slov.akta. That is why the Czech imperlallsts are f!ghtlng so furlously agalnst the Idea of Slovak state
independence ror over thlrty years. In thls regard, the rightist Hacha,
the lertist Flerllnger, and "me-always-president" Beneš spoke and
acted allke. Czech post-war politlcal literature offers conclusive proofs
o[ thls.
When Hitler called Hacha to Berlin on March 15, 1949 - a day
after the proclamatlon of the lndependence of Slovakia - the Czech
presldent dld not fall to use the opportunity to lntrigue agalnst the
Slovaks. In bis conversa.tlon wlth Hitler, he said that he belleved
"the F Uhrer s hall not have too many favora ble experiences w ith the
Slovaks." Furthermore Hacha sald that the Czechs always had "closer
ties w ith Ge rmany than wlth Slovakia, wh ic h is more inclin ed t o
Hungary" (vd.: Czechoslovakla and the Nuremberg Trials, pg. 326).
True lt is that in the past the Czechs always felt ctoser to
Germany than to Siovakla, but In the case referred to, Bacha was
lnterested only In presentlng the Czechs in a most favorable light,
whlle on the Slova.ks he cast the susplclon of sympathlzlng with Hungary, whom Hitler nelther llked nor trusted. Base dlplomatlc lntrigue
was concerned. It was generally known that Hitler knew llttle about
Slovakla; cleverly lnclted susplclon about the inclinatlon of the Slovaks toward the Magyars could have catastrophic results for the development of the Slovak state. And that certalnly would have been
most pleaslng to Czech lmperlallsts.
Magyar dlplomats In Berlin also never let up intriguing against
Slovak state lndependence. Slova.kla certainly was In a dlfficult altu·
atlon. · For example, on March 25, 1989, Hitler gave the tollowlng lnformation to the supreme commander of the German army regardlng
bis stand toward Slovakla: "It 1s not certalu how long the Fiihrer
shall feel hlmself bound by the agreement concluded wlth Slovakia.
The supreme army commander thlnks that t he Fiihrer would want to
1id himself of the obligation at the flrst opportune moment and use
Slovakla as a basis of negotiation between blmself, Poland and Hungary. In the meantlme, however, Hungary is supposed to restrain
herself." (op. cit. pg. 332).
Czech and Magyar lntrlgues bore fruit.
lt took a Jot of dlplomatic cleverness and perseverance on the part
of President Tlso, bis Minister of Forelgn Affalrs and Slovak diplo·
macy to save Slovakia from the deadly danger lnclted by the Magyars
�SLOVAK.IA
67
and the Czechs. If foť nothlng else, then for avertlng this danger Dr.
Tiso and bis government deserve the gratltude and respect of the
Slovak na.tlon. Thus tbey saved the Slovak6 trom one of the great86t
catastrophies that could have overtaken them.
Czech politiclans and diplomats lntrigued even later and on otbeť
fronts of tbe diplomatic battlefield against the Slovak state. In October 1939 the USSIR declded to recognize the Slovak Republic "de
jure." At that tlme Zdenek Fierlinger, former Czech envoy, was stil\
in Moscow. H e dld everything possible to prevent the recognitlon. "I
was very much concerned," writes Fierlinger in bis Memolrs, "to have
the undeslrable psychologlcal effect of the recognltion of Slovakia
a nd our deep disappolntment explained at the Commissariat of Interna) Affalrs. I demanded very emphatically that my o bjectlons be
interpreted to competent authorities."
But the USSR dld recognize the Slovak State "de jure" and Czech
cliplomacy and Czech lntrlgues suffered a complete setback. The
Czechs sought to weaken the political situatlon of the Slovak State
internatlona.lly by having the USSR renounce recognl:tlon. But thelr
dlplomatic guns backftred. Flerllnger himself states that sendlng a
Soviet envoy to Bratislava only emphasized the lndependence of the
Slovak State.
The Soviets, like the Vatican, probably have the best information
servlce in the world. They knew well how the Slovak people felt
about the Slovak State: they knew that over 90 per cent were for lt.
That i., wby the Sovlets did not hesltate to recognlze the Slovak
State as a full-fledged member of the lnternational soclety of states.
And it ls signlficant that even at the conclusion of the war the Sovlets offered to respect Slovak statehood. They changed thelr stand
only after Dľ. Tlso refused resolutely to collaborate wlth International
Communism.
Beneš lntrlgued even at the Vatican. The Holy See was among
the ftrst to recognlze the Slovak State. Slovakia had an ambassador at
the Vatican, and the Vatican had one In Bratislava. Beneš could
not see thls.
puffed and he huffed to have the Vatlcan renounce
recognitlon.
On January 7, 1941, Beneš gave the apostolic representatlve .. ln
Great Brttain, Msgr. W. Godfrey, a letter In wblch, among other thlngs,
he stated that "the time has arrlved when we ought to come to establi.sh some sort of unofflcial contact between the new Czechoslovak
government, resldlng now In London, and the ~oly See."
Beneš knew that the existence of the Slovak State and its abllity
to live were the greatest obstacles to his des!gns. That 1s why he tried
to present Slovakla to the Roly See In the gloomiest colors: "Conditions In Slovak.la are very bad and the severity of the contemporary
government of Tlso shall have a deep influence on the situatlon of
the Catholic Church ln Slovakla after the war."
Evidently Beneš threatened the Holy See to see things his way
and recognlze hi.s government or else suffer the consequences for
the Church In Slovakla once he got back lnto power af<ter the war.
To aggravat-e the sltuation and tbe sta.tlu:& of the Slovak ambassa.dor a,t
the Vatlcan, Beneš sa id In his letter that "the Slovak delegate at tbe
He
�58
SLOVAKI.A
Holy See is a representative of a State that is entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government."
It is lnteresting on the one hand, to note that Beneš called tbe
Slovak ambassador a "delegate" - even tbough be was recognlzed as
an ambassador by the Vatlcan which had at lts dis posal men wbo
were at least as well-versed in international law and polltics as were
Deneš and his colleagues. On tbe other hand. however, Beneš wrote
about a STATE and not about a "SO-CALLED" State: the latter terminology he reserved for the lnternal-polltical front and for his nalve
admlrers. Beneš knew that he could talk about a "so-called" state
before his agents, but not before the experlenced and educated diplomats or the Vatican.
Beneš said t hat tbe Slovak government was ·•entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government." However, wben he came to Košice in 1945 according to Pápanek's statement before the Security Council of tbe
Uniled Nations in March 1948 - Beneš was completely under tbe surveillance of the Soviet army and it was even impossible for him to
make contacts wlth the surroundlng countries. "\\'ell, tbe fact still
remains that Dr. Tiso and bis government were never so "totally"
under tbe care of the Nazi government!
Tbe answer tbe Vatican gave Beneš was not the one that he had
E>xpected. Tbe Vatican answered courteously, but clearly and empbatlcally that it will not "establish some form of unofficial contact"
as Beneš desired. In the answer of the Vatican it says that " His
Em!nence is conv!nced that Your Excellency w!l.J understand. how
dellcate the contemporary situation ls and bow diCficult it would be
In the present perlod to proffer the Czechoslovak people the ad•
vantage of such contacts."
Translated into plain language that mean t: "NO!"
Evldently the Vatican gave priority to the diplomatic contacts
with the Slovak natlon and not to tbose with "the Czechoslovak
people" as Benel\ had wished. This was an apparent failure of and defeat for Beneš's diplomacy.
Beneš was angered, but not overly discouraged. Two years later,
on May 12, 1943, he sent the Vat!can a Memorandum in which he
demanded establishing contacts between tbe Vatican and tbe Czechoslovak government in London.
In it he told bis version of tbe "sad" conditions at horne: The
Czechs he satd, are without exception for the Czecboslovak government in London and "the Slovak people in its greater majority bolds
the same position. In Slovakia, polltical, social, economic and mora!
condltlons are most sad. The majori ty of the Slovak nation regards the
present regime in Bratislava gullty of thi& situaiion and as a trattor
of the Slovak people and the Czechoslovak Republlc. Former governmental Slovak parties from tbe period before March 15, 1939, (Tbe
Agrarians, Liberals, Sociallsts). are almost completely bebind the Czer hos lovak government and against the present regime in Slovakla,
wb!le from tbe ranks of former Cathollc People's Party, which took
over tbe rule of Slovak affairs from tbe hands of tbe Germans tn
1939, at least 60 per cent today - according to our reports - stand
agalnst tbe present r egime."
�fiLOVAKlA
69
That statement contalns just about as many !les and hal!truths as
it does words ! Beneš himself must have known that, because he further sald that "the Holy See mlght have other information about the
situatlon in Slovak!a, but I consider lt my duty," etc.
No doubt about lt: the Holy See dld have other information; it
had the true plcture of Slovakla. The Vatlcan had lts representative
in Bratislava! Beneš undoubtedly knew that he was lying, but the
Czech cause was built on Jies and it was possible to defend it only
with more lies.
To glve the memorandum more weight, Beneš had lt sent through
the Br!tlsh and American Government.s. Despite all thls, t he Vatican
contlnued to recogn!ze the Slovak S.tate to the end of the war. Of
course, that made Beneš all the more furious.
1t is interesting to note that Beneš did not have the courage to
r,ubllsh the Vatican's reply i o his memorandum in hls Memoirs. It
probably was not as nlce as that recelved in 1941. The stand of the
Vatican through 1943-1944 at least indicates as much.
Beneš Jived long enough to avenge himself: he had Dr. Tiso murdered, thousands upon thousands of Slovaks and Czechs - all his
opponents - jailed, pauperized, disfranchised, beaten, maimed, and
exlled to Siberia and Jachymov. He collaborated "totally" with Stalln
and h!s Czechoslovak agents to sell out the Czech and Slovak nations to the scourge of communism. He had warned the Vatlcan, but
was spurned. The Slovaks asked for it and so did the Vatican, accord·
ing to Beneš, and both got what they deserved. Beneš had won again
and gloated over bis victory. What a vlctory - for Communism!
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"We believe that it is unconditionally necessary for RUSSI A to
take a PE RMANENT part in European politlcs and that the present
collaboratlon between the Britisb In the west and the Soviets In tbe
east, together with the partlcipation of the United St·a tes, !s a fundamental condition of the permanence or a genuinely new world order,
for the realizatlon of which WE are figbtlng. However, as far as tbe
homeland 1s concerned, only the Czechoslovak people itself, through
FREE expression of its will, will decide on how we are to arrange
our homeland." - (Msgr. Ján Šrámek, Broadcast, London, Sept. 1,
1943).
•
"Our alliance with Russia was accepted UNAN IMOUSLY BY ALL
OF US, not only by our Communists and Socialista, BUT BY AL L
TH E PART( ES - and there are four of them in the government by Catholics and Protestants alike. . . . Any American or foreign cor.
respondent will tell you that WE HAVE NO CE NSORSH IP on for.
eign news from the leading world agencies, including the Associated
Press and United Press. . . . WE are the ONLY Slav country which
has diplomatic and friendly relations with the Vatican. 1 have an
ambassador at the Holy See and there is a Nuncio In Prague." (Ján Masaryk, Address at the 15th Annua l New York Herald Tribune
Forum on. Current Problems, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel , N. Y., October
!10. l 946, 4th sess!on).
�
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
56
SLOVAKIA
CZ.ECH INTRIGUES AGAINST THE SWVAK STATE
DR. A . GRÉBERT
Slovakia was saved from a great catastrophe by proclaiming her
independence: from the danger or belng partitloned between Poland,
Hungary and Germany.
For the Czech and Magyar imperialists, however, the proclama•
tion of an independent Slovakia meant a fatal defeat. The Slovaks at
last had a chance to prove to themselves and the world that they
were able and capable of taklng care of themselves and thelr country.
The Czechs on the other hand knew well that lt meant a na.II in the
coffín of Czech imperlallsm In Slov.akta. That is why the Czech imperlallsts are f!ghtlng so furlously agalnst the Idea of Slovak state
independence ror over thlrty years. In thls regard, the rightist Hacha,
the lertist Flerllnger, and "me-always-president" Beneš spoke and
acted allke. Czech post-war politlcal literature offers conclusive proofs
o[ thls.
When Hitler called Hacha to Berlin on March 15, 1949 - a day
after the proclamatlon of the lndependence of Slovakia - the Czech
presldent dld not fall to use the opportunity to lntrigue agalnst the
Slovaks. In bis conversa.tlon wlth Hitler, he said that he belleved
"the F Uhrer s hall not have too many favora ble experiences w ith the
Slovaks." Furthermore Hacha sald that the Czechs always had "closer
ties w ith Ge rmany than wlth Slovakia, wh ic h is more inclin ed t o
Hungary" (vd.: Czechoslovakla and the Nuremberg Trials, pg. 326).
True lt is that in the past the Czechs always felt ctoser to
Germany than to Siovakla, but In the case referred to, Bacha was
lnterested only In presentlng the Czechs in a most favorable light,
whlle on the Slova.ks he cast the susplclon of sympathlzlng with Hungary, whom Hitler nelther llked nor trusted. Base dlplomatlc lntrigue
was concerned. It was generally known that Hitler knew llttle about
Slovakla; cleverly lnclted susplclon about the inclinatlon of the Slovaks toward the Magyars could have catastrophic results for the development of the Slovak state. And that certalnly would have been
most pleaslng to Czech lmperlallsts.
Magyar dlplomats In Berlin also never let up intriguing against
Slovak state lndependence. Slova.kla certainly was In a dlfficult altu·
atlon. · For example, on March 25, 1989, Hitler gave the tollowlng lnformation to the supreme commander of the German army regardlng
bis stand toward Slovakla: "It 1s not certalu how long the Fiihrer
shall feel hlmself bound by the agreement concluded wlth Slovakia.
The supreme army commander thlnks that t he Fiihrer would want to
1id himself of the obligation at the flrst opportune moment and use
Slovakla as a basis of negotiation between blmself, Poland and Hungary. In the meantlme, however, Hungary is supposed to restrain
herself." (op. cit. pg. 332).
Czech and Magyar lntrlgues bore fruit.
lt took a Jot of dlplomatic cleverness and perseverance on the part
of President Tlso, bis Minister of Forelgn Affalrs and Slovak diplo·
macy to save Slovakia from the deadly danger lnclted by the Magyars
SLOVAK.IA
67
and the Czechs. If foť nothlng else, then for avertlng this danger Dr.
Tiso and bis government deserve the gratltude and respect of the
Slovak na.tlon. Thus tbey saved the Slovak6 trom one of the great86t
catastrophies that could have overtaken them.
Czech politiclans and diplomats lntrigued even later and on otbeť
fronts of tbe diplomatic battlefield against the Slovak state. In October 1939 the USSIR declded to recognize the Slovak Republic "de
jure." At that tlme Zdenek Fierlinger, former Czech envoy, was stil\
in Moscow. H e dld everything possible to prevent the recognitlon. "I
was very much concerned," writes Fierlinger in bis Memolrs, "to have
the undeslrable psychologlcal effect of the recognltion of Slovakia
a nd our deep disappolntment explained at the Commissariat of Interna) Affalrs. I demanded very emphatically that my o bjectlons be
interpreted to competent authorities."
But the USSR dld recognize the Slovak State "de jure" and Czech
cliplomacy and Czech lntrlgues suffered a complete setback. The
Czechs sought to weaken the political situatlon of the Slovak State
internatlona.lly by having the USSR renounce recognl:tlon. But thelr
dlplomatic guns backftred. Flerllnger himself states that sendlng a
Soviet envoy to Bratislava only emphasized the lndependence of the
Slovak State.
The Soviets, like the Vatican, probably have the best information
servlce in the world. They knew well how the Slovak people felt
about the Slovak State: they knew that over 90 per cent were for lt.
That i., wby the Sovlets did not hesltate to recognlze the Slovak
State as a full-fledged member of the lnternational soclety of states.
And it ls signlficant that even at the conclusion of the war the Sovlets offered to respect Slovak statehood. They changed thelr stand
only after Dľ. Tlso refused resolutely to collaborate wlth International
Communism.
Beneš lntrlgued even at the Vatican. The Holy See was among
the ftrst to recognlze the Slovak State. Slovakia had an ambassador at
the Vatican, and the Vatican had one In Bratislava. Beneš could
not see thls.
puffed and he huffed to have the Vatlcan renounce
recognitlon.
On January 7, 1941, Beneš gave the apostolic representatlve .. ln
Great Brttain, Msgr. W. Godfrey, a letter In wblch, among other thlngs,
he stated that "the time has arrlved when we ought to come to establi.sh some sort of unofflcial contact between the new Czechoslovak
government, resldlng now In London, and the ~oly See."
Beneš knew that the existence of the Slovak State and its abllity
to live were the greatest obstacles to his des!gns. That 1s why he tried
to present Slovakla to the Roly See In the gloomiest colors: "Conditions In Slovak.la are very bad and the severity of the contemporary
government of Tlso shall have a deep influence on the situatlon of
the Catholic Church ln Slovakla after the war."
Evidently Beneš threatened the Holy See to see things his way
and recognlze hi.s government or else suffer the consequences for
the Church In Slovakla once he got back lnto power af<ter the war.
To aggravat-e the sltuation and tbe sta.tlu:& of the Slovak ambassa.dor a,t
the Vatlcan, Beneš sa id In his letter that "the Slovak delegate at tbe
He
58
SLOVAKI.A
Holy See is a representative of a State that is entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government."
It is lnteresting on the one hand, to note that Beneš called tbe
Slovak ambassador a "delegate" - even tbough be was recognlzed as
an ambassador by the Vatlcan which had at lts dis posal men wbo
were at least as well-versed in international law and polltics as were
Deneš and his colleagues. On tbe other hand. however, Beneš wrote
about a STATE and not about a "SO-CALLED" State: the latter terminology he reserved for the lnternal-polltical front and for his nalve
admlrers. Beneš knew that he could talk about a "so-called" state
before his agents, but not before the experlenced and educated diplomats or the Vatican.
Beneš said t hat tbe Slovak government was ·•entirely in the hands
of the Nazi government." However, wben he came to Košice in 1945 according to Pápanek's statement before the Security Council of tbe
Uniled Nations in March 1948 - Beneš was completely under tbe surveillance of the Soviet army and it was even impossible for him to
make contacts wlth the surroundlng countries. "\\'ell, tbe fact still
remains that Dr. Tiso and bis government were never so "totally"
under tbe care of the Nazi government!
Tbe answer tbe Vatican gave Beneš was not the one that he had
E>xpected. Tbe Vatican answered courteously, but clearly and empbatlcally that it will not "establish some form of unofficial contact"
as Beneš desired. In the answer of the Vatican it says that " His
Em!nence is conv!nced that Your Excellency w!l.J understand. how
dellcate the contemporary situation ls and bow diCficult it would be
In the present perlod to proffer the Czechoslovak people the ad•
vantage of such contacts."
Translated into plain language that mean t: "NO!"
Evldently the Vatican gave priority to the diplomatic contacts
with the Slovak natlon and not to tbose with "the Czechoslovak
people" as Benel\ had wished. This was an apparent failure of and defeat for Beneš's diplomacy.
Beneš was angered, but not overly discouraged. Two years later,
on May 12, 1943, he sent the Vat!can a Memorandum in which he
demanded establishing contacts between tbe Vatican and tbe Czechoslovak government in London.
In it he told bis version of tbe "sad" conditions at horne: The
Czechs he satd, are without exception for the Czecboslovak government in London and "the Slovak people in its greater majority bolds
the same position. In Slovakia, polltical, social, economic and mora!
condltlons are most sad. The majori ty of the Slovak nation regards the
present regime in Bratislava gullty of thi& situaiion and as a trattor
of the Slovak people and the Czechoslovak Republlc. Former governmental Slovak parties from tbe period before March 15, 1939, (Tbe
Agrarians, Liberals, Sociallsts). are almost completely bebind the Czer hos lovak government and against the present regime in Slovakla,
wb!le from tbe ranks of former Cathollc People's Party, which took
over tbe rule of Slovak affairs from tbe hands of tbe Germans tn
1939, at least 60 per cent today - according to our reports - stand
agalnst tbe present r egime."
fiLOVAKlA
69
That statement contalns just about as many !les and hal!truths as
it does words ! Beneš himself must have known that, because he further sald that "the Holy See mlght have other information about the
situatlon in Slovak!a, but I consider lt my duty," etc.
No doubt about lt: the Holy See dld have other information; it
had the true plcture of Slovakla. The Vatlcan had lts representative
in Bratislava! Beneš undoubtedly knew that he was lying, but the
Czech cause was built on Jies and it was possible to defend it only
with more lies.
To glve the memorandum more weight, Beneš had lt sent through
the Br!tlsh and American Government.s. Despite all thls, t he Vatican
contlnued to recogn!ze the Slovak S.tate to the end of the war. Of
course, that made Beneš all the more furious.
1t is interesting to note that Beneš did not have the courage to
r,ubllsh the Vatican's reply i o his memorandum in hls Memoirs. It
probably was not as nlce as that recelved in 1941. The stand of the
Vatican through 1943-1944 at least indicates as much.
Beneš Jived long enough to avenge himself: he had Dr. Tiso murdered, thousands upon thousands of Slovaks and Czechs - all his
opponents - jailed, pauperized, disfranchised, beaten, maimed, and
exlled to Siberia and Jachymov. He collaborated "totally" with Stalln
and h!s Czechoslovak agents to sell out the Czech and Slovak nations to the scourge of communism. He had warned the Vatlcan, but
was spurned. The Slovaks asked for it and so did the Vatican, accord·
ing to Beneš, and both got what they deserved. Beneš had won again
and gloated over bis victory. What a vlctory - for Communism!
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT?
"We believe that it is unconditionally necessary for RUSSI A to
take a PE RMANENT part in European politlcs and that the present
collaboratlon between the Britisb In the west and the Soviets In tbe
east, together with the partlcipation of the United St·a tes, !s a fundamental condition of the permanence or a genuinely new world order,
for the realizatlon of which WE are figbtlng. However, as far as tbe
homeland 1s concerned, only the Czechoslovak people itself, through
FREE expression of its will, will decide on how we are to arrange
our homeland." - (Msgr. Ján Šrámek, Broadcast, London, Sept. 1,
1943).
•
"Our alliance with Russia was accepted UNAN IMOUSLY BY ALL
OF US, not only by our Communists and Socialista, BUT BY AL L
TH E PART( ES - and there are four of them in the government by Catholics and Protestants alike. . . . Any American or foreign cor.
respondent will tell you that WE HAVE NO CE NSORSH IP on for.
eign news from the leading world agencies, including the Associated
Press and United Press. . . . WE are the ONLY Slav country which
has diplomatic and friendly relations with the Vatican. 1 have an
ambassador at the Holy See and there is a Nuncio In Prague." (Ján Masaryk, Address at the 15th Annua l New York Herald Tribune
Forum on. Current Problems, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel , N. Y., October
!10. l 946, 4th sess!on).
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
Czech Intrigues Against the Slovak State
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. A. Grébert
Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2), December 1951
pp. 56-59
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Grébert, Arvéd, 1915-2001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1951
LCNAF+dates
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/18568cf87072b2d0c785fb1de512d85a.pdf
fee1e957cbc49432acfcc6df3a2354d6
PDF Text
Text
74
SLOVAKIA
CZECH REDS ROOST RED AIMS IN CUBA
For over a year transports have been rolling from
Polish and former German eastern ports, loaded with
war material for Castro's Cuba. Czech weapons depots
and barracks have been combed over and practically all
German rifles and heavy artillery left from World War
II were prepared for shipment, some of which were still
being used by Czech soldiers.
The Czech general staff readily dispensed with tanks
of the T-34 type, however, and the Skoda anti-aircraft
guns, since they are being regularly replaced by the latest
T-54 tanks and anti-aircraft missiles. The Cuban crisis
gave the Czechs an opportunity to discard some of their
old supplies and pocket a pretty penny on the deal. The
tanks and heavy guns were shipped without munition,
which was allegedly "forgotten."
More than 500 Czech officers and non-coms are said
to have entered Cuban barracks along with the aforementioned supplies, where they immediately set to work to
train Cuban men and women in their use.
During the big military parade on J anue.ry 4, 1961
- celebrating the second 3jnniversary of the Cuban revolutionaries - there were even Czech officers and noncoms seated in the tanks that filed past Fidel Castro. It
may be assumed that the natives were still not adept
enough at running them to take over the controls themselves. They may be now.
While all this is going on in Cuba, Prague is turning
out tons of propaganda for Cuban consumption. Castro
and his henchmen can rely on their Czech helpers whose
methods and measures have been tried out successfully in
other countries.
Prague credit to Castro to the tune of $20 million
was cited in Novotny's propaganda organ in small print.
This sum does not seem to have been exhausted, for at
the close of 1960 president of the Cuban National Bank,
Commandant Dr. Ernesto Guevaro was reported in Prague
�SLOVAKIA
75
to arrange not only additional arms allotments but munition for the tanks and artillery guns and the exchange
of more officers and specialists. At the beginning of 1961,
at least 200 Cubans went to Czecho-Slovakia to get practical experience in larger industries there.
While the Czechs are doing everything they can to
aid material ends, they are also trying to ,p ut a peaceful
foot forward by sponsoring expositions in Havana. Plans
for these shows were prepared by the Brno architects
Denk and Pospisil. The Czechs want to show the Cubans just what socialism looks like. They will display
all kinds of Czech export goods including Prague hams,
Pilsner beer, all kinds of machinery and, of course, their
brand of plum brandy (Slivovice).
BOOK REVIEWS
Gilbert L. Oddo: Slovakia and Its ' the form of yet unpublished ma,People, New York, Speller ' nuSC'l'lipts.
and Sons, Inc., 1960, xi-361
IReviewirug the end results, one
pp., $6.00.
can, be grateful fur Prof. Oddo's
Prolfessor Oddo, a native-fuoirn limit_a~o.ns, whitc'h forced him to
Amerkan, undertook a dilflficult , a di.iif1~~lt process of research
and demanding task in copinlg . and w:iiiltmg, as they wo:iik t~ !he
with a phase of the history of a I a~va•nt~ge of t?~ reader, proVId~ng
country whose la!llguage he lh'as I him with a cri~ical_ Slovak version
the country s h1s'toriy from the
no't mastered and to whose na- /
tional arehives and otJher insti- n,mbh centu,r y to the present day.
tuti«ms he has never had access. ,• ~ddo's version, m~ed~y ?1>jectConseq,uenrtly, in an olbje'ctive a,p- 1ve and compreh~~s1ve rn its asproa'Oh, he had to rely on sources s~s;1111e~_t ai:id critique of Slo~,a(scarce as they are) pulbHshed in k1a s Justoncal mov~ents, ~ill,
English and French. In am,a,1,yzing I ~ c?urse, .con-trast w1'tlh previous
Professors
works in the Slovak la•n,guage, or 1nteripre'tahons lby
studying documents in the airch- T,homson, Busek-sipullber, K~rner,
ives o,f S,lova•k cultural assolcia- etc., w.ho were markedly mflutions in America, (there are over eniced hY C~ech sources.
bwo million Americans of Slovak 1 '.Ilhe history of Slovakia is a suiboru,gin, wiitJh a scor,e of associa- ject which, in languages other
tions, newspaiperis and period'ica1's), than Slovak, was until recen'tly
he was aided, arccordi,ng to his given the silent treaJtrrnent; and
severa'l the little that was reported was
by
aclcnO'Wlledgeimenlts,
Slov,ak intellectua,ls, professors done so i.nicompetently and withand linguists, teachiong at Canadian out adequate rese'areh, and - in
not
and American universities, and by I Professor Oddo's views their English language works in without unnecessary pa-ejudice.
'°~
I
�
74
SLOVAKIA
CZECH REDS ROOST RED AIMS IN CUBA
For over a year transports have been rolling from
Polish and former German eastern ports, loaded with
war material for Castro's Cuba. Czech weapons depots
and barracks have been combed over and practically all
German rifles and heavy artillery left from World War
II were prepared for shipment, some of which were still
being used by Czech soldiers.
The Czech general staff readily dispensed with tanks
of the T-34 type, however, and the Skoda anti-aircraft
guns, since they are being regularly replaced by the latest
T-54 tanks and anti-aircraft missiles. The Cuban crisis
gave the Czechs an opportunity to discard some of their
old supplies and pocket a pretty penny on the deal. The
tanks and heavy guns were shipped without munition,
which was allegedly "forgotten."
More than 500 Czech officers and non-coms are said
to have entered Cuban barracks along with the aforementioned supplies, where they immediately set to work to
train Cuban men and women in their use.
During the big military parade on J anue.ry 4, 1961
- celebrating the second 3jnniversary of the Cuban revolutionaries - there were even Czech officers and noncoms seated in the tanks that filed past Fidel Castro. It
may be assumed that the natives were still not adept
enough at running them to take over the controls themselves. They may be now.
While all this is going on in Cuba, Prague is turning
out tons of propaganda for Cuban consumption. Castro
and his henchmen can rely on their Czech helpers whose
methods and measures have been tried out successfully in
other countries.
Prague credit to Castro to the tune of $20 million
was cited in Novotny's propaganda organ in small print.
This sum does not seem to have been exhausted, for at
the close of 1960 president of the Cuban National Bank,
Commandant Dr. Ernesto Guevaro was reported in Prague
�SLOVAKIA
75
to arrange not only additional arms allotments but munition for the tanks and artillery guns and the exchange
of more officers and specialists. At the beginning of 1961,
at least 200 Cubans went to Czecho-Slovakia to get practical experience in larger industries there.
While the Czechs are doing everything they can to
aid material ends, they are also trying to ,p ut a peaceful
foot forward by sponsoring expositions in Havana. Plans
for these shows were prepared by the Brno architects
Denk and Pospisil. The Czechs want to show the Cubans just what socialism looks like. They will display
all kinds of Czech export goods including Prague hams,
Pilsner beer, all kinds of machinery and, of course, their
brand of plum brandy (Slivovice).
BOOK REVIEWS
Gilbert L. Oddo: Slovakia and Its ' the form of yet unpublished ma,People, New York, Speller ' nuSC'l'lipts.
and Sons, Inc., 1960, xi-361
IReviewirug the end results, one
pp., $6.00.
can, be grateful fur Prof. Oddo's
Prolfessor Oddo, a native-fuoirn limit_a~o.ns, whitc'h forced him to
Amerkan, undertook a dilflficult , a di.iif1~~lt process of research
and demanding task in copinlg . and w:iiiltmg, as they wo:iik t~ !he
with a phase of the history of a I a~va•nt~ge of t?~ reader, proVId~ng
country whose la!llguage he lh'as I him with a cri~ical_ Slovak version
the country s h1s'toriy from the
no't mastered and to whose na- /
tional arehives and otJher insti- n,mbh centu,r y to the present day.
tuti«ms he has never had access. ,• ~ddo's version, m~ed~y ?1>jectConseq,uenrtly, in an olbje'ctive a,p- 1ve and compreh~~s1ve rn its asproa'Oh, he had to rely on sources s~s;1111e~_t ai:id critique of Slo~,a(scarce as they are) pulbHshed in k1a s Justoncal mov~ents, ~ill,
English and French. In am,a,1,yzing I ~ c?urse, .con-trast w1'tlh previous
Professors
works in the Slovak la•n,guage, or 1nteripre'tahons lby
studying documents in the airch- T,homson, Busek-sipullber, K~rner,
ives o,f S,lova•k cultural assolcia- etc., w.ho were markedly mflutions in America, (there are over eniced hY C~ech sources.
bwo million Americans of Slovak 1 '.Ilhe history of Slovakia is a suiboru,gin, wiitJh a scor,e of associa- ject which, in languages other
tions, newspaiperis and period'ica1's), than Slovak, was until recen'tly
he was aided, arccordi,ng to his given the silent treaJtrrnent; and
severa'l the little that was reported was
by
aclcnO'Wlledgeimenlts,
Slov,ak intellectua,ls, professors done so i.nicompetently and withand linguists, teachiong at Canadian out adequate rese'areh, and - in
not
and American universities, and by I Professor Oddo's views their English language works in without unnecessary pa-ejudice.
'°~
I
�
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
1962, Vol. 12
Description
An account of the resource
Issue 1 (No. 35), March-June 1962.
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
1962
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
74
SLOVAKIA
CZECH REDS ROOST RED AIMS IN CUBA
For over a year transports have been rolling from
Polish and former German eastern ports, loaded with
war material for Castro's Cuba. Czech weapons depots
and barracks have been combed over and practically all
German rifles and heavy artillery left from World War
II were prepared for shipment, some of which were still
being used by Czech soldiers.
The Czech general staff readily dispensed with tanks
of the T-34 type, however, and the Skoda anti-aircraft
guns, since they are being regularly replaced by the latest
T-54 tanks and anti-aircraft missiles. The Cuban crisis
gave the Czechs an opportunity to discard some of their
old supplies and pocket a pretty penny on the deal. The
tanks and heavy guns were shipped without munition,
which was allegedly "forgotten."
More than 500 Czech officers and non-coms are said
to have entered Cuban barracks along with the aforementioned supplies, where they immediately set to work to
train Cuban men and women in their use.
During the big military parade on J anue.ry 4, 1961
- celebrating the second 3jnniversary of the Cuban revolutionaries - there were even Czech officers and noncoms seated in the tanks that filed past Fidel Castro. It
may be assumed that the natives were still not adept
enough at running them to take over the controls themselves. They may be now.
While all this is going on in Cuba, Prague is turning
out tons of propaganda for Cuban consumption. Castro
and his henchmen can rely on their Czech helpers whose
methods and measures have been tried out successfully in
other countries.
Prague credit to Castro to the tune of $20 million
was cited in Novotny's propaganda organ in small print.
This sum does not seem to have been exhausted, for at
the close of 1960 president of the Cuban National Bank,
Commandant Dr. Ernesto Guevaro was reported in Prague
SLOVAKIA
75
to arrange not only additional arms allotments but munition for the tanks and artillery guns and the exchange
of more officers and specialists. At the beginning of 1961,
at least 200 Cubans went to Czecho-Slovakia to get practical experience in larger industries there.
While the Czechs are doing everything they can to
aid material ends, they are also trying to ,p ut a peaceful
foot forward by sponsoring expositions in Havana. Plans
for these shows were prepared by the Brno architects
Denk and Pospisil. The Czechs want to show the Cubans just what socialism looks like. They will display
all kinds of Czech export goods including Prague hams,
Pilsner beer, all kinds of machinery and, of course, their
brand of plum brandy (Slivovice).
BOOK REVIEWS
Gilbert L. Oddo: Slovakia and Its ' the form of yet unpublished ma,People, New York, Speller ' nuSC'l'lipts.
and Sons, Inc., 1960, xi-361
IReviewirug the end results, one
pp., $6.00.
can, be grateful fur Prof. Oddo's
Prolfessor Oddo, a native-fuoirn limit_a~o.ns, whitc'h forced him to
Amerkan, undertook a dilflficult , a di.iif1~~lt process of research
and demanding task in copinlg . and w:iiiltmg, as they wo:iik t~ !he
with a phase of the history of a I a~va•nt~ge of t?~ reader, proVId~ng
country whose la!llguage he lh'as I him with a cri~ical_ Slovak version
the country s h1s'toriy from the
no't mastered and to whose na- /
tional arehives and otJher insti- n,mbh centu,r y to the present day.
tuti«ms he has never had access. ,• ~ddo's version, m~ed~y ?1>jectConseq,uenrtly, in an olbje'ctive a,p- 1ve and compreh~~s1ve rn its asproa'Oh, he had to rely on sources s~s;1111e~_t ai:id critique of Slo~,a(scarce as they are) pulbHshed in k1a s Justoncal mov~ents, ~ill,
English and French. In am,a,1,yzing I ~ c?urse, .con-trast w1'tlh previous
Professors
works in the Slovak la•n,guage, or 1nteripre'tahons lby
studying documents in the airch- T,homson, Busek-sipullber, K~rner,
ives o,f S,lova•k cultural assolcia- etc., w.ho were markedly mflutions in America, (there are over eniced hY C~ech sources.
bwo million Americans of Slovak 1 '.Ilhe history of Slovakia is a suiboru,gin, wiitJh a scor,e of associa- ject which, in languages other
tions, newspaiperis and period'ica1's), than Slovak, was until recen'tly
he was aided, arccordi,ng to his given the silent treaJtrrnent; and
severa'l the little that was reported was
by
aclcnO'Wlledgeimenlts,
Slov,ak intellectua,ls, professors done so i.nicompetently and withand linguists, teachiong at Canadian out adequate rese'areh, and - in
not
and American universities, and by I Professor Oddo's views their English language works in without unnecessary pa-ejudice.
'°~
I
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
Czech Reds Boost Red Aims in Cuba
Description
An account of the resource
Slovakia, Vol. 12, No. 1 (35), March-June 1962
pp. 74-75
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March-June 1962
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/caa18326ad68641c46264df5abeb4dda.pdf
ab8f40392e290d1e1bbdf4e113b22dcc
PDF Text
Text
86
SLOVAKIA
C'LECH
REDS HAVE SCHOOL TROUBLE
By Eberhard Mahnert
"Red Justice," official Communist Party mouthpiece
for Czecho-Slovakia, recently reported that thirty per
cent of the students enrolled in Czech and Slovak colleges and universities had to drop out. Only last September, however, the same paper had lauded the socialist
school system as the most efficacious and progressive,
giving the individual citizen the widest possible benefits
by systematic development of his abilities. One month
later the same news sheet had to admit the downright
failure of the educational setup it had so lavishly praised.
Who is at fault? The teachers, of course, especially
those not yet imbued with the "new spirit." A series of
political purges is soon to be launched, despite the conspicuous shortage of teachers in Czecho-Slovakia, a situation likewise due to the "cleansing" that followed the
Communist power grab. At that time an educational framework which had proved workable for a century and a half
was jettisoned in favor of a Soviet-styled imitation.
Until 1948, the Czecho-Slovak school system was based
on principles developed during the reign of Empress Maria
Theresia of Austria and her son Joseph II and found acceptance in the territories of the Danubian Monarchy. The
First Czecho~lovak Republic was careful not to alter
this well established structure, which was the very foundation of the high educational level of the Czech nation.
The case was different with the Slovaks whom the Czechs
did not allow to maintain their own schools of higher
learning.
With the L;ommunist putsch the "reactionary" school
-;;ystem was swept aside; so-called reform measures were
introduced. The entire structure was radically transformed
to duplicate its Soviet original, regardless of whether or
not it suited the educational needs of the Czech and Slovak peoples. The new measures abolished the former system of five years of primary school, eight years of high
school and four to five years of college. They introduced
a new system \vith an eight-grade primary school plus an
additional three years of secondary school that were ap-
�SLOVAKIA
87
proved as an adequate basis for college entrance. Courses
in• certain subjects were reduced to half their former number, making it possible for a pupil to get a degree in engineering at the age of 19 or 20, where he was previously
not ready for ~aduation until 22 or 23. Subjects that formerly had been given priority were replaced under the new
setup by intensive courses in political propaganda that
stressed Party ideology.
During the years 1952 to 1953 a number of schools
of technology were founded - today there are seventeen
such colleges - many of them with but little more than
the crudest types of laboratories, technical libraries and
the like. SeJdom does one find a text!book available; for
the most part the students work f.rom so-called scripts
which they themselves have compiled. In selecting aspirants for college preparatory schools and universities, the
authorities show preference for children from proletarian
homes, a tactic that envisages the complete annihilation
of the Czech middle class with its high standards of education.
Some years ago it became evident that students educated under these new conditions, whose time was also
taken up by pairamilitary training, Communist Youth Association commitments and Party organization duties,
lagged behind in their studies. Furthermore, several weeks
of the year are taken up in so-called "polytechnical training" at unpaid jobs in industry. Small wonder, then, that
students who lack ability due to their "proletarian" origins, fail to stand the pace. They make up the bulk of
the thirty per cent forced to throw in the sponge.
In 1959, the Czech Communist regime, following the
lead of the Soviet school reform of 1959, also introduced
new educational measures, the first stage of which took
effect in 1961 at the beginning of the scholastic year. To
raise the educational standards of the general public, primary school will be extended from eight to nine years.
"Polytechnical training," thus far encouraged only by the
Czech Communist Party, will become obligatory, with intensification of paramilitary training.
This shake-up of the school system to conform to
Communist aims will certainly not raise the over-all edu-
�88
SLOVAKIA
cational level. Today industries that employ "engineers"
with such limited training are already beginning to complain of their lack of ability. These young men report for
work without . knowing the most elementary techniques in
their field nor is there much likelihood of improvement
in the future. If unchanged, however, such conditions will
reduce a population with a higher than ·. average educational potential to a generation of robots.
A POLICY OF GENOCIDE
By Anton F. Wuschek
After the expulsion of the Sudeten G€rmans there remained approximately 200,000 Germans in the area that
now embraces Czecho-Slovakia. Many of them are still
residing in their old homes in the Sudetenland, others
have been transferred to original Czech areas. Along
with the Hungarian, Ukrainian and Polish minorities in
the CSR, the German element is one of the largest ethnic
groups that do not belong to the official nation of the
State of Czechs and Slovaks.
Little has been said of the existence of this German
group within the past years. Not until two years ago did
they become the subject of considerable discussion within
Czecho-Slovak Communist Party circles, when, in connection . with the introduction of the new Socialist constitution in the CSR the new status of the ethnic minorities was decided on. Whereas the new constitution gives
a minimum of cultural rights to the Ukrainian, Hungarian and Polish minorities, it -deprives the German minority every right to an autonomous group life. State
President Antonin Novotny justified this fact with the
statement that the German question was settled by the
expulsion from their homes of some three million Sudeten G€rmans. The remaining Germans would thus no
longer be considered as a minority.
The logic of this statement was by no means given
unanimous aproval. Secretary of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia (CPC), Bruno Kohler, took the . opportunity to discuss the Sudeten
G€rman issue in detail in. the official 9rgan of the C:PC
�
86
SLOVAKIA
C'LECH
REDS HAVE SCHOOL TROUBLE
By Eberhard Mahnert
"Red Justice," official Communist Party mouthpiece
for Czecho-Slovakia, recently reported that thirty per
cent of the students enrolled in Czech and Slovak colleges and universities had to drop out. Only last September, however, the same paper had lauded the socialist
school system as the most efficacious and progressive,
giving the individual citizen the widest possible benefits
by systematic development of his abilities. One month
later the same news sheet had to admit the downright
failure of the educational setup it had so lavishly praised.
Who is at fault? The teachers, of course, especially
those not yet imbued with the "new spirit." A series of
political purges is soon to be launched, despite the conspicuous shortage of teachers in Czecho-Slovakia, a situation likewise due to the "cleansing" that followed the
Communist power grab. At that time an educational framework which had proved workable for a century and a half
was jettisoned in favor of a Soviet-styled imitation.
Until 1948, the Czecho-Slovak school system was based
on principles developed during the reign of Empress Maria
Theresia of Austria and her son Joseph II and found acceptance in the territories of the Danubian Monarchy. The
First Czecho~lovak Republic was careful not to alter
this well established structure, which was the very foundation of the high educational level of the Czech nation.
The case was different with the Slovaks whom the Czechs
did not allow to maintain their own schools of higher
learning.
With the L;ommunist putsch the "reactionary" school
-;;ystem was swept aside; so-called reform measures were
introduced. The entire structure was radically transformed
to duplicate its Soviet original, regardless of whether or
not it suited the educational needs of the Czech and Slovak peoples. The new measures abolished the former system of five years of primary school, eight years of high
school and four to five years of college. They introduced
a new system \vith an eight-grade primary school plus an
additional three years of secondary school that were ap-
�SLOVAKIA
87
proved as an adequate basis for college entrance. Courses
in• certain subjects were reduced to half their former number, making it possible for a pupil to get a degree in engineering at the age of 19 or 20, where he was previously
not ready for ~aduation until 22 or 23. Subjects that formerly had been given priority were replaced under the new
setup by intensive courses in political propaganda that
stressed Party ideology.
During the years 1952 to 1953 a number of schools
of technology were founded - today there are seventeen
such colleges - many of them with but little more than
the crudest types of laboratories, technical libraries and
the like. SeJdom does one find a text!book available; for
the most part the students work f.rom so-called scripts
which they themselves have compiled. In selecting aspirants for college preparatory schools and universities, the
authorities show preference for children from proletarian
homes, a tactic that envisages the complete annihilation
of the Czech middle class with its high standards of education.
Some years ago it became evident that students educated under these new conditions, whose time was also
taken up by pairamilitary training, Communist Youth Association commitments and Party organization duties,
lagged behind in their studies. Furthermore, several weeks
of the year are taken up in so-called "polytechnical training" at unpaid jobs in industry. Small wonder, then, that
students who lack ability due to their "proletarian" origins, fail to stand the pace. They make up the bulk of
the thirty per cent forced to throw in the sponge.
In 1959, the Czech Communist regime, following the
lead of the Soviet school reform of 1959, also introduced
new educational measures, the first stage of which took
effect in 1961 at the beginning of the scholastic year. To
raise the educational standards of the general public, primary school will be extended from eight to nine years.
"Polytechnical training," thus far encouraged only by the
Czech Communist Party, will become obligatory, with intensification of paramilitary training.
This shake-up of the school system to conform to
Communist aims will certainly not raise the over-all edu-
�88
SLOVAKIA
cational level. Today industries that employ "engineers"
with such limited training are already beginning to complain of their lack of ability. These young men report for
work without . knowing the most elementary techniques in
their field nor is there much likelihood of improvement
in the future. If unchanged, however, such conditions will
reduce a population with a higher than ·. average educational potential to a generation of robots.
A POLICY OF GENOCIDE
By Anton F. Wuschek
After the expulsion of the Sudeten G€rmans there remained approximately 200,000 Germans in the area that
now embraces Czecho-Slovakia. Many of them are still
residing in their old homes in the Sudetenland, others
have been transferred to original Czech areas. Along
with the Hungarian, Ukrainian and Polish minorities in
the CSR, the German element is one of the largest ethnic
groups that do not belong to the official nation of the
State of Czechs and Slovaks.
Little has been said of the existence of this German
group within the past years. Not until two years ago did
they become the subject of considerable discussion within
Czecho-Slovak Communist Party circles, when, in connection . with the introduction of the new Socialist constitution in the CSR the new status of the ethnic minorities was decided on. Whereas the new constitution gives
a minimum of cultural rights to the Ukrainian, Hungarian and Polish minorities, it -deprives the German minority every right to an autonomous group life. State
President Antonin Novotny justified this fact with the
statement that the German question was settled by the
expulsion from their homes of some three million Sudeten G€rmans. The remaining Germans would thus no
longer be considered as a minority.
The logic of this statement was by no means given
unanimous aproval. Secretary of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia (CPC), Bruno Kohler, took the . opportunity to discuss the Sudeten
G€rman issue in detail in. the official 9rgan of the C:PC
�
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
86
SLOVAKIA
C'LECH
REDS HAVE SCHOOL TROUBLE
By Eberhard Mahnert
"Red Justice," official Communist Party mouthpiece
for Czecho-Slovakia, recently reported that thirty per
cent of the students enrolled in Czech and Slovak colleges and universities had to drop out. Only last September, however, the same paper had lauded the socialist
school system as the most efficacious and progressive,
giving the individual citizen the widest possible benefits
by systematic development of his abilities. One month
later the same news sheet had to admit the downright
failure of the educational setup it had so lavishly praised.
Who is at fault? The teachers, of course, especially
those not yet imbued with the "new spirit." A series of
political purges is soon to be launched, despite the conspicuous shortage of teachers in Czecho-Slovakia, a situation likewise due to the "cleansing" that followed the
Communist power grab. At that time an educational framework which had proved workable for a century and a half
was jettisoned in favor of a Soviet-styled imitation.
Until 1948, the Czecho-Slovak school system was based
on principles developed during the reign of Empress Maria
Theresia of Austria and her son Joseph II and found acceptance in the territories of the Danubian Monarchy. The
First Czecho~lovak Republic was careful not to alter
this well established structure, which was the very foundation of the high educational level of the Czech nation.
The case was different with the Slovaks whom the Czechs
did not allow to maintain their own schools of higher
learning.
With the L;ommunist putsch the "reactionary" school
-;;ystem was swept aside; so-called reform measures were
introduced. The entire structure was radically transformed
to duplicate its Soviet original, regardless of whether or
not it suited the educational needs of the Czech and Slovak peoples. The new measures abolished the former system of five years of primary school, eight years of high
school and four to five years of college. They introduced
a new system \vith an eight-grade primary school plus an
additional three years of secondary school that were ap-
SLOVAKIA
87
proved as an adequate basis for college entrance. Courses
in• certain subjects were reduced to half their former number, making it possible for a pupil to get a degree in engineering at the age of 19 or 20, where he was previously
not ready for ~aduation until 22 or 23. Subjects that formerly had been given priority were replaced under the new
setup by intensive courses in political propaganda that
stressed Party ideology.
During the years 1952 to 1953 a number of schools
of technology were founded - today there are seventeen
such colleges - many of them with but little more than
the crudest types of laboratories, technical libraries and
the like. SeJdom does one find a text!book available; for
the most part the students work f.rom so-called scripts
which they themselves have compiled. In selecting aspirants for college preparatory schools and universities, the
authorities show preference for children from proletarian
homes, a tactic that envisages the complete annihilation
of the Czech middle class with its high standards of education.
Some years ago it became evident that students educated under these new conditions, whose time was also
taken up by pairamilitary training, Communist Youth Association commitments and Party organization duties,
lagged behind in their studies. Furthermore, several weeks
of the year are taken up in so-called "polytechnical training" at unpaid jobs in industry. Small wonder, then, that
students who lack ability due to their "proletarian" origins, fail to stand the pace. They make up the bulk of
the thirty per cent forced to throw in the sponge.
In 1959, the Czech Communist regime, following the
lead of the Soviet school reform of 1959, also introduced
new educational measures, the first stage of which took
effect in 1961 at the beginning of the scholastic year. To
raise the educational standards of the general public, primary school will be extended from eight to nine years.
"Polytechnical training," thus far encouraged only by the
Czech Communist Party, will become obligatory, with intensification of paramilitary training.
This shake-up of the school system to conform to
Communist aims will certainly not raise the over-all edu-
88
SLOVAKIA
cational level. Today industries that employ "engineers"
with such limited training are already beginning to complain of their lack of ability. These young men report for
work without . knowing the most elementary techniques in
their field nor is there much likelihood of improvement
in the future. If unchanged, however, such conditions will
reduce a population with a higher than ·. average educational potential to a generation of robots.
A POLICY OF GENOCIDE
By Anton F. Wuschek
After the expulsion of the Sudeten G€rmans there remained approximately 200,000 Germans in the area that
now embraces Czecho-Slovakia. Many of them are still
residing in their old homes in the Sudetenland, others
have been transferred to original Czech areas. Along
with the Hungarian, Ukrainian and Polish minorities in
the CSR, the German element is one of the largest ethnic
groups that do not belong to the official nation of the
State of Czechs and Slovaks.
Little has been said of the existence of this German
group within the past years. Not until two years ago did
they become the subject of considerable discussion within
Czecho-Slovak Communist Party circles, when, in connection . with the introduction of the new Socialist constitution in the CSR the new status of the ethnic minorities was decided on. Whereas the new constitution gives
a minimum of cultural rights to the Ukrainian, Hungarian and Polish minorities, it -deprives the German minority every right to an autonomous group life. State
President Antonin Novotny justified this fact with the
statement that the German question was settled by the
expulsion from their homes of some three million Sudeten G€rmans. The remaining Germans would thus no
longer be considered as a minority.
The logic of this statement was by no means given
unanimous aproval. Secretary of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia (CPC), Bruno Kohler, took the . opportunity to discuss the Sudeten
G€rman issue in detail in. the official 9rgan of the C:PC
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
Czech Reds Have School Trouble
Description
An account of the resource
Eberhard Mahnert
Slovakia, Vol. 13, No. 1 (36), March 1963
pp. 86-88
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Mahnert, Eberhard
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
March 1963
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/17bbd2b0b0b6b263fdc0f1514dbbc107.pdf
428431437c9616138dea7efadf8399e7
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
63
Czech-Slovak Relations From
the 1840s to 1914
EDITA BOSAK
Czech-Slovak relations were a constant but also a fundamental
problem in the history of the Czech :md Slovak people, particularly
from their political union in 1918 until the creation of two separate
states in 1993. Their common state had been created out of the
framework of the Austro-Hungarian Empire where the differences
between the two peoples were already quite marked and also grossly
underestimated . Since the arrival of the Magyars in today's Hungary
in the late 9th century, the Slovaks had experienced a distinctly
different development from the Czechs. Almost one thousand years
of Hungarian rule had marked their economic activities , social life,
degree of devotion to religion, mentality, tradition, and history. Even
with the initial euphoria that followed the creation of the common
state on 28 October 1918, these fundamental differences, which had
not been fully considered, could not be erased. Not only were they
cultural-linguistic but also religious. Our purpose is to examine how
these differences were perceived prior to 1914 and what attempts
were made to establish political relations between the two nations.
The emergence of the Czech and Slovak national movements in
the early nineteenth century helped to create a feeling of Slav
solidarity. However, in the 1840s, the acceptance by most Slovak
intellectuals of the central Slovak dialect as the Slovak literary
language caused a permanent literary rift between the two peoples.
The Slovaks were facing the first large scale attempts by the
Magyars to assimilate the non-Magyars in Hungary. By 1844,
�64
SLOVAKIA
Magyar was made the official language of the country. The Slovak
Lutherans were especially threatened because their close ties with the
Czech Protestants were construed by official circles as evidence of
treason, that is to say, collaboration with a foreign power. Thus they
had to re-evaluate their position , especially since the Czechs were
quite indifferent to the political and cultural situation of the Slovaks,
embroiled as they were with their own national struggle with the
Germans in Bohemia and Moravia. Assistance of any kind was not
forthcoming . Nevertheless, the Czechs were considering creating a
"Czechoslovak" literary language, yet refused to allow the modern
Czech literary language to adopt any Slovak characteristics in order
that the Slovaks might be able to identify with it.
The Czechs were convinced that all concessions had to come
from the Slovaks. However, as the idea that they were a nation of
Slavs distinct from the Czechs grew among the Slovaks , there arose
an incompatibility with the idea of being Czechoslovak and using
only Czech as the literary medium. In the final analysis, a new
Slovak literary language was the only recourse available to the
Slovaks. Unfortunately, this step hardly fulfilled the expectations of
L'udovit Stur and his followers that the Slovaks would become
unified. The fact is that religious differences played an important
role. The Slovaks were for the greater part Roman Catholics. But
about one quarter was Lutheran and it was this group which tended
to have the Czech ties that dated as far back as the sixteenth century
and which used the Kralicka Bible for both literary and religious
purposes . This split in Slovak society profoundly influenced the
development of Czech-Slovak relations.
The introduction of Sturovcina as the new Slovak literary language was called, remained a bone of contention between the Czechs
and Slovaks for many decades . In the post-1849 period, CzechSlovak reciprocity almost completely disappeared. Controversy over
the language split and political circumstances drove the two further
apart. There were, however, some leading Czechs who continued to
believe and to advocate the idea of Czechoslovakism, that is , the
cultural ethnic and linguistic unity of both peoples as fellow Slavs.
For instance, Karel Havlicek maintained that
�SLOVAKIA
65
the Czechoslav lands, Bohemia, Moravia, a part of Silesia and Slovakia
in Hungary were for a Jong time one nation as far as literary and spiritual
life goes, and the greater part of them belonged to one state. Well-known
individuals in Bohemia as well as in Moravia, and likewise in Slovakia
had always worked towards the complete union of these lands comprising
one nation, and considered themselves members of one tribe, which is
verified by the names and works of men from all these Jands. 2
But there were other leading lights among the Czechs like the
Old Czech Party leader Frantisek L. Rieger who accused the Slovaks of having "tom away" from the Czech nation. From 1849 to
1868 there was next to no political interest in Slovak affairs.
In the 1870's, 1880's and 1890's literary contact was sporadic
and minimal. The continuity of Czech-Slovak relations was maintained by a few Czech writers and persons involved in cultural
activities. The closure of the three Slovak gymnazia forced Slovak
students to go abroad to study, especially to Moravia which was
geographically closer to Upper Hungary, as Slovakia was called .
Conditions were difficult and the students were not always well
received, as Vavro Srobar comments in his biography, Z mojho
iivota (From My Own Life), concerning his own experience with
Czech professors. Contact was not always amicable on the day-today level. Students found it difficult to learn Czech and soon discovered that academically they were far behind the Czech students.
It was the work of such writers as Bozena Nemcova, Adolf
Heyduk, Rudolf Pokorny, and Jozef Holecek who kept the Czech
public informed on who and what the Slovaks were and under what
conditions they were surviving in Hungary. However, only a tiny
segment of the intelligentsia had any interest of a genuine nature in
211 Ceskoslovanska
zeme, Cechy, Morava, cast Slezska a Slovenska v Uhi'fch jsou
jiz davno v literarnfm a du~evnfm zivote jednfm narodem, a vet~f cast jejich byla
jiz i jednfm statem. Znamej~f duchove jak z Cech, tak z Moravy, tak i ze Slovenska
odjakziva smerovali k uplnemu spojenf techto zernf jednoho naroda, a povafovali
sebe vzdy za osudy jednoho kmene, na co svedcf jmena a spisy najznamenitej~fch
muz0 v~ech tech krajin". Karel Havlfcek Borovsky, Politicke spisy, Vol. III, ed.
Dr. Zdenek Tobolka, Prague: Jan Laichter, 1902, p. 178.
�66
SLOVAKIA
the Slovaks. The overall view of the Slovaks tended to be a rather
sentimental and romantic one. For example, the short time spent by
Bozena Nemcova in Slovakia produced a collection of fairytales
Slovensk6 pohadky a povesti (Slovak Stories and Tales), two novels
with Slovak themes Pohorska vesnice (Mountain Villages) and
Chyie pod horami (Shanties At the Foothills), and a monograph
Krajov a lesov na Zvolensku (Lands and Forests of Zvolen) . Throughout her life, she remained in regular correspondence with Gustav
K. Zechenter, the minister and poet Samuel Chalupka, and the poet
Samuel Tomasik, author of the Slovak hymn "Hej, Slovaci!"
Of the other early Czech Slovakophiles, R. Pokorny wrote
Potulky po Slovensku (Wandering About Slovakia), Literama shoda
ceskoslovenska (Czechoslovak Literary Agreement); A. Heyduk
Cymbal a Husle (Cymbal and Violin); and J. Holecek Podejme ruku
Slovakum (Let's Give Our Hand To the Slovaks). Heyduk's verses
were sentimental, and the description of daily Slovak life was highly
coloured but Holecek, as a journalist, pointed out to the Czechs the
political importance of the Slovaks for them, that is, a union of
Czech and Slovak forces in opposition to German pressure in the
Czech Lands. This was to become one of the major arguments in
favour of Czech-Slovak reciprocity in the late 1890's. Pokorny, too ,
did some foundation work in re-establishing Czech-Slovak contact
by setting-up the "Knihovna ceskoslovenska" (Czechoslovak
Library). Its purpose was to publish the work of Slovak literary
figures but due to financial stress, it closed in 1881 after having
published only two works . One can see that Czech society at large
actually had very little contact with the Slovaks or even knowledge
about them until the 1890's. Pavel Sochan, a Slovak artist, described
the situation as follows :
the circle of Slovak friends was then very limited among the Czechs ,
whereas among the Mora vi ans we had many sincere friends . Even
intelligent Czechs considered Slovaks as "tinkers" and Slovakia as the
"land of tinkers" .3
3Pavel Sochan, "Zalozenie spolku 'Detvan' v Prahe roku 1882" in Stanislav Meciar
ed., Detvan 50 rokov v Prahe, Turc. Sv. Martin: Slovensky akademicky spolok
�SLOVAKIA
67
At official functions, Czech academics often mistook the Slovaks for Bulgarians or Russians, for the Slovak language seemed
very foreign sounding and unintelligible to their ears . They knew
nothing of Slovak literature or her poets and writers. It was a very
small Czech literary group which expressed any interest in the life of
their brother Slavs.
As the nineteenth century was coming to a close, the political
situation of both the Czechs and the Slovaks required a new
approach. What was needed was a realistic and systematic education
effort of the Czech public with the existential struggle of the Slovaks
in Hungary if aid was to be obtained for them. They had to become
acquainted with Slovak culture, folklore and way of life . On the
other hand, the Slovaks had to be awakened, educated, and shown
that the Czechs were to be trusted and that they no longer held any
grudges over the language issue. It was Karel Kalal, a Czech
schoolteacher, who took on this role of arousing the Czechs in the
1890's and early 1900's to the plight of the Slovaks. Initially , his
attitude vis-a-vis Slovak conditions was na"ively romantic and
sentimental but by the twentieth century he became much more
realistic in his comprehension, and his writing improved. Although
his efforts were crowned with some success, the language question
remained a thorn in the flesh of the Czechs.
The Czechs were involved with the process of establishing their
own separate identity from that of the Germans and yet they refused
to see or accept the same nationalism in the Slovaks. They continued
to see Czech-Slovak reciprocity in terms of one language, that is
Czech. Kalal was just as stubborn a supporter of the Czechoslovak
language. He represented a threat to the existence of the Slovak
language and was often attacked for his articles by the Martin group.
This language question was one of the basic problems hindering any
"Detvan", 1932, pp . 8-9 . The original Slovak text is : " ...kruh slovenskych
priatefov bol vtedy medzi Cechmi vefmi obmedzeny, kdezto medzi Moravanmi
mali sme vefa uprimnych priatefov. I inteligentnf Cesi pokladali Slovakov za
"dratenfkov" a Slovensko za "zeme drateru'lru ".
�68
SLOVAKIA
great Slovak moves towards the Czechs. The intellectual group
centred in Turciansky Svaty Martin never ceased to defend the cultural-linguistic uniqueness of the Slovak nation from that of the Czech.
The Slovak language and the idea of a distinct nation were the only
weapons which they had at their disposal to fight Magyarisation. As
it was, denationalisation of the younger generation, via mainly the
school system, continued to increase.
Another literary figure very active in attempting to bring about a
rapprochement between the Czechs and the Slovaks was Jaroslav
Vlcek . Born in Slovakia of mixed Czech-Slovak parentage, Vlcek
spent his formative years on Slovak soil and received his early
schooling there. While studying in Prague, he helped establish a student university club, Detvan, in 1882, for Slovak students studying
there. During his student days, Vlcek wrote articles on a regular basis for the Slovak magazine Oral (Eagle) on Czech literature titled
"Listy z Ciech" ("Letters from the Czech lands"), and in the Czech
magazine Ruch a kvety (Activity and Flowers) on Slovak literature.
His first major work Literatura na Slovensku (Literature in Slovakia)
appeared in 1881. In 1883 he published a daring article in Slovanskf
sbomfk (Slavonic Magazine) called "Slovensko za poslednfch peti
let", (Slovakia in the Last Five Years) in which he disclosed the
practices of the governing Magyar circles in Slovakia. In 1890,
Vlcek published Dejiny literatlfry slovenske (The History of Slovak
Literature). Vlcek was the first head of Detvan and he maintained an
active interest in the club through the years canvassing to get support
for it.
The purpose of Detvan was to bring together Slovak students, to
entertain and to educate them by having them give papers on Slovak
literature, history and the contemporary conditions. The most important figures in the first decade of Detvan's existence were Vlcek, P.
Sochan, Cyril Krcmery, St. Daxner, Ladislav Nadasi, Jan Slabej,
Matej Bencur, M. Ursfny, Dusan Makovicky, J. Smetanay, and
Srobar. Almost all of them were, at one time or another, to take part
in the Slovak national awakening. Detvan organised Slovak evenings open to the Czech public whenever there was a significant
Slovak celebration in order that the Czech public might come to
�SLOVAKIA
69
know that the Slovaks were more than just a land of tinkers, that
they had their own history, their great men, and that they were now
in need of a helping hand from their brothers to stave off the process
of Magyarisation. This club collaborated on similar ventures with
the other Czech and Moravian clubs, with the Slovak club Tatran in
Vienna and with the Slovak Club in Budapest. They canvassed in
Bohemia and Slovakia for funds to help Slovak students to come to
study in Prague.
During Srobar's presidency, Detvan came to have the greatest
contact with the average Czech living in Prague. Srobar had been
influenced by the realist philosophy (political program) which
Tomas G. Masaryk (later to become the first President of the Czechoslovak Republic in 1918) expounded in his university classes.
He came to believe that the political passivity favoured by the Martin
group was not beneficial to the Slovak nation, that the Slovaks must
abandon their fatalistic policy and stop expecting salvation from the
east, from their Russian brothers. Upon returning home he became
active in politics and ran for the Hungarian Parliament.
In 1891 and 1895 the Czechs organised two large provincial
exhibitions. The stand on the ethnographic exhibition was of the
greatest importance, for the Slovaks had two rooms devoted to their
culture, under the title "Part of the Czechoslav nation". Czech
attendance at this exhibition was large and press coverage thorough,
giving the Czech public its first opportunity to become acquainted
with Slovak culture on a grand scale.
Following the excitement and goodwill engendered by the
Ethnographic Exhibition, the Ceskoslovanska Jednota (Czechoslavonic Unit), was formed on 7 May 1896 with the well-known
Slavist, Professor Frantisek Pastrnek, as chairman. According to its
constitution, its purpose was the "...cultivation of Czechoslav interests and the support of the poor young Slav people" .4 The vehicle
via which this was to be carried out was: "a) to publish, to promote,
4Literami archiv pamatnik narodnfho pfsemnictvf, Rotnagl Collection. "Ucel
spolku je pestovati kultumi zajmy ceskoslovanske a podporovati chudou mladez
slovanskou" .
�70
SLOVAKIA
to collect, to buy literary works and to found libraries; b) to grant
stipends and to support Slav students studying in Prague ... ; c) public
lectures and discussions, excluding political ones; d) to sponsor
social entertainment" .5 This organisation was created to act as a defense mechanism in areas culturally endangered by Germans, for
example Moravia, Silesia and to help these Czechs outside of
Bohemia to maintain their identity (Lower Austria, Vienna). As far
as the Slovaks were concerned, the aim was to maintain contact, to
acquaint the Czech nation with the Slovak culture, to give Slovak
students financial support in Prague, and to establish Czech libraries
in Slovakia. The organisation did not really become deeply involved
with the Slovak situation until 1909. Detvan members Srobar,
Smetanay and K. Salva, a publisher in Rufomberok, were directly
connected with Jednota as trustees for Slovakia.
Meanwhile, in Martin , the representatives of the Slovak National
Party remained determined to uphold the programme of Shir and the
concept of "Okolie", come what may . Any acceptance of the idea of
a single nation called Czechoslovak was out of the question for it
meant the refutation of the Slovak language. The language separation
was regarded as a tragedy by the Czechs but for the ardent Slovak
nationalists, it meant arising from the dead. 6 According to Elie
Kedourie, "the test ... , by which a nation is known to exist is that of
language. A group speaking the same language is known as a
nation, and a nation ought to constitute a state" .7 To the Martin
nationalists, acceptance of the Czech idea of two branches of one
nation , of being completely identical peoples, despite the patent
social, economic, linguistic and cultural differences which one
thousand years of a different history had imposed upon them, was
simply not possible. It meant a denial of their nationhood which their
awakened distinct national consciousness forbade. Thus the writings
of such ardent Czech Slovakophiles as Kalal were not always well
5Ibid. , Third regulation of Constitution .
6Stefan Jan~ak. tivot Dr. Pavla Blahu, Tmava: Spolok sv. Vojtecha, 1947, I, p.
41.
7Elie Kedourie, Nationalism , London: Hutchinson & Co., 1974, p. 68.
�SLOVAKIA
71
received in the Martin circle. In their publication Narodnie noviny
(National News), they made it clear that the Czechs were not being
made familiar with true Slovak conditions:
The Czech public only misleads itself, when "the friends " of the
Slovaks come to it with these sorts of things. He who is a friend of the
Slovaks and understands their situation would not now refer to the written
language .. . From amongst the professionals of our Czech brothers none
took a deep interest in the Slovaks, thus rose K. Kalal, as an "expert" on
Slovak affairs.8
Masaryk, too, often came under fire by the older generation of
Slovak political leaders, represented by Svetozar Hurban Vajansky a
leading nationalist, poet and editor of Narodnie noviny. Masaryk
was accused of anti-clericalism, immorality in the sense of disrespect
for tradition and ethics, misrepresentation of the economic situation
in Slovakia, that is that poverty was not on a national scale but existed only in certain regions of the country which were not conducive
to crop growing due to geography , such as Orava and Eastern
Slovakia, and finally, for having turned some of the young people
away from their own party, the Slovak National Party. Vajansky felt
the young simply did not fully comprehend the gravity of the
domestic situation, that there were no alternatives to the tactics used,
and that unity amongst all Slovaks in the face of the onslaught of
Magyarisation was vital.
The older generation was convinced that writing in newspapers,
facing stiff fines and longterm jail sentences for these articles, nonparticipation in the government and steadfastness in their religious
affiliations were the only avenues open to them in stemming
Magyarisation. They believed in co-operation amongst the Slavs, for
example the Czechs as their closest brethren, but not at the expense
8Narodnie noviny, 1901, No. 64. Original text reads: "c'.:eske obecenstvo Jen myli
sa, keel' "priatelia" Slovakov prichodia mu s takymito vecmi. Kto je priatefom
Slovakov a rozumie ich polofoniu , teraz nebude sa tyka{ otazky ich spisovneho
jazyka ... U bratov c'.:echov z povolanych fudf nikto nev~fmal si de,kJadnej~ie
Slovakov , tak povstal K. Kalal , ako "znalec" vo veciach slovenskych".
�72
SLOVAKIA
of their national language , with the resulting loss of their separate
identity. This was something which the Czechs never came to
understand fully and which created so much ill-feeling after 1918.
At the tum of the century, the student club Detvan in Prague lost
a good deal of its drive with the departure of many of its most active
students , especially Srobar, who returned to Slovakia to establish
himself in a medical practice in 1899 in Rufomberok. His departure
left a gap which was to be filled later by a young Slovak from
Kosariska, Milan Rastislav Stefanik. In the summer of 1897 Srobar
and four other young , progressive-thinking, Slovak students
dissatisfied with the tum of events at the Martin celebrations, went
to Bystricka to speak with Masaryk. He had already had a great
influence upon the Slovak students in Prague, and Srobar had taken
very much to heart the realist philosophy which Masaryk
expounded, that is "drobna praca", small work amongst the people
themselves. 9 At this meeting the basic foundation for a liberaldemocratic thinking review called Hlas (Voice) was laid . Its
adherents, called Hlasists, were represented by Srobar, Pavel Blaho
and A. Stefanek, journalists, and the lawyer Ivan Derer, all of whom
were to play prominent roles in the government of Czechoslovakia
after World War I. They believed in progressive thinking, democracy, reason and non-intervention of the Roman Catholic Church in
the daily life of the peasants. They were ardent Czechoslovaks,
devoted to the idea of Czechoslovak unity (Ceskoslovenska jednota). Most of their support came from the organisation Jednota in
Prague. The first copy of Hlas was published in 1898 in Skalica
911 Drobna praca" was
developed in depth in a series of lectures by Masaryk in 1898.
These can be found in Jak pracovat?, ZUrich: Konfrontation SA, 1977, pp. 16-27.
Masaryk wanted students to take the knowledge they had acquired in school and by
going into the countryside to pass it on to the common man in a practical fashion
thus helping him to better himself and to educate himself. At the same time
Masaryk believed that such endeavours would lead to greater opportunities for
both. They would "be coming into contact with people and learning to work
together" (p.57), thus promoting a better understanding between each other and
furthering their national goal.
�SLOVAKIA
73
under the editorship of Blaho. Most of the young people involved
were former Detvan members. Due to financial problems, it
appeared for the last time in 1904. It had not been able to build-up a
wide enough reading public. Their open Czechoslovak program was
regarded with suspicion by the majority of the Slovak intellectuals
and others who might have bought a copy.
Albeit short-lived, Hlas had a tremendous impact on Slovak
political, social and cultural life. It was instrumental in establishing
the idea of a union of the Czechs and Slovaks on cultural and
national lines. It stressed the need to educate the peasants to think
and make their own decisions and especially to free themselves from
the influence of the clergy. Education was not only the means of
building an awareness of the Slovak identity and political activity but
also the means of bringing about change in such areas as the
temperance movement.
From 1909 to 1914, the progressive young Slovaks again
concentrated themselves around a monthly review, Prudy. Once
more, its appearance was due to the initiative of Detvan members,
for example Bohdan Pavlu. It described its program as being an
open platform upon which all were welcome to come and express
their views. Most of the members were former Hlasists. One can see
that the motivation for Czech-Slovak reciprocity from the Slovak
side tended to be initiated by those people who had actually studied
in the Czech Lands. One can understand why Narodnie novinytried
to discourage students from continuing their higher education there.
For the Martinites, to go to Bohemia meant returning as a
Czechophile as a foregone conclusion
It should be pointed out that although Czech political opinion
may have softened vis-a-vis the Slovaks after Rieger, there was
never any question of political support.IO As far as the Young
10In several speeches both in Prague and Budapest Rieger made it very clear that
the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks was not a legal one. The
Czechs had no legal right to interfere in Slovak affairs , and moreover, had not been
requested to do so by Slovak political leaders. See Jozef Jablonicky, "Prfspevok k
cesko-slovenskym vzt'ahom od konca 19. stor. do roku 1914", in Historicke stlfdie,
�74
SLOVAKIA
Czech Party was concerned, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia formed
one unit as an historic state. Newly formed Czech political parties
did not include the question of the Slovaks in their program. They
upheld Rieger's stand that the Slovak question is a causa finita. 11
The only political leader to have a divergent view was Masaryk.
He believed that Slovakia was a part of contemporary Czech politics.
The span of time during which his influence was particularly
significant to Slovak affairs was from 1896 to 1902. From then on
he stopped travelling to Bystricka and turned his attention to
Bohemian politics and dualism. His newspapers Cas and Nasa doba
continued to publish articles on Slovakia. By the early 1900's the
articles were losing their romantic style in describing Slovak
conditions while such journals as Osveta and Slovanskj piehled
concentrated on the culture and literature of Slovakia.
This political stand of non-intervention continued even after the
particularly unpleasant incident at Cernova in 1907 when the local
Hungarian authorities opened fire upon unarmed Slovak villagers
who had not wanted their new church to be consecrated by the
Magyar clergy but wanted their own priest Andrej Hlinka, who had
built it, to be the officiating personage. Although Czech Slovakophiles were able to get much propaganda out of the incident, the Czech
political position remained the same. Czech politicans had no wish to
threaten the Czech program based on Bohemia's Historic State
Rights, nor to interfere in the internal matters of another state, Hungary. Contact between the Czechs and the Slovaks was very much
on a limited literary and cultural level. In 1911, the Czechoslovak
Unity under the direction Professor Fr. Bfly published Slovenska
citanka, an encyclopedia on Slovak culture and literature. From 1907
to 1910 Nase Slovensko (Our Slovakia), an annual journal was
published to acquaint the Czech public with the Slovaks.
From 1908 until the break out of war, Jednota organised annual
meetings of Czech and Slovak intellectuals at the Moravian health
spa Luhacovice. Initially 26 individuals came together, but by 1914
IV, 1958, p. 8.
11 Ibid., p. 22.
�SLOVAKIA
75
their number had grown to 300. 12 It should be noted that those who
were active were the small number of Hlasists, the young generation
mostly educated in Bohemia, Milan Hodza, a member of the Hungarian Parliament and representative of the Agrarian idea in Slovakia,
and a few of the old guard from Martin; and from the Czechs, it was
predominantly members of the Jednota. It is here that one begins to
have some suggestion of possible discourse on political aspects. The
actual meetings were held in secret and there appear to be no known
official minutes. That something along political lines was being aired
in these circles emerges in a letter from R . Pilat to the American
Slovak, Milan Getting, in the summer of 1913 where he suggests
that: " .. .it is high time that work was carried out on achieving the
future program of a union of Czechs and Slovaks in a political
sense". 13 He appears to have a premonition of the coming war and
he adds confidentially that "preparations from the Czech side are on
the way, in the event of the defeat of Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and
Silesia would be united with Slovakia in one state" .14
On 4 April 1914, Frantisek Votruba a well-known Czech publicist living in Slovakia presented at a major political rally in Prague a
resolution of protest against Magyar oppression of its nationalities,
along with a demand for the revision of the Ausgleich and the terms
of dualism.1 5 This is indicative of the fact that most Slovaks still
thought in terms of a resolution of their problems within the terms of
the present state rather than outside of it with the dissolution of
Austria-Hungary.
Some mention must be made of the interests of industry, ban12 Ibid., p. 20.
13 v . Kumek , "0 cinnosti a vyznamu Ceskoslovenske jednoty pi'ed vznikem
CSR", Historicky casopis 10 (1962), pp . 366-7 in Miroslav Peknfk, "Slovenska
politika v Uhorsku a kry~talizacia jej politickych koncepcif pred vznikom I.
svetovej voj ny" , Slovensko v politickom systeme Ceskoslovenska, Bratislava:
SA V, 1992, pp . 44.
14 M. Getting, Americkf Slovaci a vyvin ceskoslovenskej myslienky v rokoch
1914-18, Pittsburg: n. p., 1933 , p. 12 in Peknfk , p. 44.
15Slo vensky tyidennfk 12 , 4 . April 1914, No. 15 , p. 3 in Peknfk, p. 44.
�76
SLOVAKIA
king and investment in Slovakia by the Slovaks. With gradual economic growth in the 1870's and 1880's, the Tatra Bank was established in 1886 in Turciansky Svaty Martin. Shortly afterwards ,
there were bank officials and small investors , soon followed by
branches in three other towns . By 1909, there were many similar
banks throughout Slovakia. However, Czech investment was very
small in Slovakia. Czech Slovakophiles extolled the virtues of
Slovak resources, the untapped wealth, and so forth in such publications as Slovenska cftanka but it was not really significant.
Similarly, there was very little movement of Slovak labour to
Bohemia and Moravia except for the tinkers who wandered far to
earn their bread. The largest manufacturing concern, Ceskoslovenska-Kolben-Danek (C-K-D) factory, had not a single employee
recorded as coming from Slovakia in the period 1871-1920.16
In the decades that preceded the Great War, the idea of a union
of the Czechs and the Slovaks was proposed initially by intellectuals
rather than politicians as the only alternative to a situation which
could no longer be tolerated. The general Czech and Slovak population knew very little of each other. The Czechs did not recognize
the Slovak language and tended to mistake Slovaks for Yugoslavs
as late as 1918.1 7 They had greater personal contact with other
Europeans than with the Slovaks. Similarly, the educated Slovaks
were much more at home in Vienna and Budapest. In fact, the peasants and workers migrated to these two cities as a general rule
rather than to the Czech Lands.
In addition, there was no truly unified Czech-Slovak club or
association upon which Czechoslovak unity could be built. Ceskoslovanska Jednota had been founded by a minority, based on an
idea rather than as the result of a political and economic evolutionary
process. Thus, much of the misunderstanding which resulted after
16F . W. Carter, "C-K-D Employees, Prague 1871-1920: Some Aspects of Their
Geographical Distribution", Journal of Historical Geography, I (I), 1975, p. 95.
17Jan Hajda, "The Role of Intelligentsia in Society" in Miloslav Rechcigl, ed.,
The Czechoslovak Contribution to World Culture, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff,
1964, p. 311.
�SLOVAKIA
77
1918 can be attributed to a mutual lack of awareness. The Czech
intelligentsia sought to change basic Slovak society along the lines
of their own but they did not take into account the growth and
differentiation of the other.
The "Anketa" carried out by Pnfdy in 1914 and finally published
in 1919 clearly showed that those who welcomed political cooperation with the Czechs were the former Hlasists and Pnidists, the
liberal-progressive streams in the Slovak National Party. Tampering
with the Slovak language was out of the question . Co-operation was
still relatively limited as Stefanek, an ardent supporter of CzechSlovak relations, remarked:
In my view, the Czech political parties should work more systematically and their leaders should above all else know Slovakia personally
and all their pronouncements on our behalf in the Austrian parliament and
in delegations should be founded on their own views . As far as I am
aware, other than Prof. Dr. Masaryk, Dr. Herben and Klofac and a few
Agrarian politicians, no one has been to Slovakia, not even Dr. Hajn, nor
Dr. Fiedler, Dr. Korner, Dr. Fort and many more excellent Czech
politicians who through their own personal contact could accomplish
much good . Slovakia still remains terra incognita even for Czech
politicians, for university professors, writers , in short for the "cream" of
the Czech nation. On the other hand we gladly recognize the good work of
Czech politicans.18
I 811 Anketa", Prudy V , 9-10 (1913/ 1914- 1919), p. 11 .
�
SLOVAKIA
63
Czech-Slovak Relations From
the 1840s to 1914
EDITA BOSAK
Czech-Slovak relations were a constant but also a fundamental
problem in the history of the Czech :md Slovak people, particularly
from their political union in 1918 until the creation of two separate
states in 1993. Their common state had been created out of the
framework of the Austro-Hungarian Empire where the differences
between the two peoples were already quite marked and also grossly
underestimated . Since the arrival of the Magyars in today's Hungary
in the late 9th century, the Slovaks had experienced a distinctly
different development from the Czechs. Almost one thousand years
of Hungarian rule had marked their economic activities , social life,
degree of devotion to religion, mentality, tradition, and history. Even
with the initial euphoria that followed the creation of the common
state on 28 October 1918, these fundamental differences, which had
not been fully considered, could not be erased. Not only were they
cultural-linguistic but also religious. Our purpose is to examine how
these differences were perceived prior to 1914 and what attempts
were made to establish political relations between the two nations.
The emergence of the Czech and Slovak national movements in
the early nineteenth century helped to create a feeling of Slav
solidarity. However, in the 1840s, the acceptance by most Slovak
intellectuals of the central Slovak dialect as the Slovak literary
language caused a permanent literary rift between the two peoples.
The Slovaks were facing the first large scale attempts by the
Magyars to assimilate the non-Magyars in Hungary. By 1844,
�64
SLOVAKIA
Magyar was made the official language of the country. The Slovak
Lutherans were especially threatened because their close ties with the
Czech Protestants were construed by official circles as evidence of
treason, that is to say, collaboration with a foreign power. Thus they
had to re-evaluate their position , especially since the Czechs were
quite indifferent to the political and cultural situation of the Slovaks,
embroiled as they were with their own national struggle with the
Germans in Bohemia and Moravia. Assistance of any kind was not
forthcoming . Nevertheless, the Czechs were considering creating a
"Czechoslovak" literary language, yet refused to allow the modern
Czech literary language to adopt any Slovak characteristics in order
that the Slovaks might be able to identify with it.
The Czechs were convinced that all concessions had to come
from the Slovaks. However, as the idea that they were a nation of
Slavs distinct from the Czechs grew among the Slovaks , there arose
an incompatibility with the idea of being Czechoslovak and using
only Czech as the literary medium. In the final analysis, a new
Slovak literary language was the only recourse available to the
Slovaks. Unfortunately, this step hardly fulfilled the expectations of
L'udovit Stur and his followers that the Slovaks would become
unified. The fact is that religious differences played an important
role. The Slovaks were for the greater part Roman Catholics. But
about one quarter was Lutheran and it was this group which tended
to have the Czech ties that dated as far back as the sixteenth century
and which used the Kralicka Bible for both literary and religious
purposes . This split in Slovak society profoundly influenced the
development of Czech-Slovak relations.
The introduction of Sturovcina as the new Slovak literary language was called, remained a bone of contention between the Czechs
and Slovaks for many decades . In the post-1849 period, CzechSlovak reciprocity almost completely disappeared. Controversy over
the language split and political circumstances drove the two further
apart. There were, however, some leading Czechs who continued to
believe and to advocate the idea of Czechoslovakism, that is , the
cultural ethnic and linguistic unity of both peoples as fellow Slavs.
For instance, Karel Havlicek maintained that
�SLOVAKIA
65
the Czechoslav lands, Bohemia, Moravia, a part of Silesia and Slovakia
in Hungary were for a Jong time one nation as far as literary and spiritual
life goes, and the greater part of them belonged to one state. Well-known
individuals in Bohemia as well as in Moravia, and likewise in Slovakia
had always worked towards the complete union of these lands comprising
one nation, and considered themselves members of one tribe, which is
verified by the names and works of men from all these Jands. 2
But there were other leading lights among the Czechs like the
Old Czech Party leader Frantisek L. Rieger who accused the Slovaks of having "tom away" from the Czech nation. From 1849 to
1868 there was next to no political interest in Slovak affairs.
In the 1870's, 1880's and 1890's literary contact was sporadic
and minimal. The continuity of Czech-Slovak relations was maintained by a few Czech writers and persons involved in cultural
activities. The closure of the three Slovak gymnazia forced Slovak
students to go abroad to study, especially to Moravia which was
geographically closer to Upper Hungary, as Slovakia was called .
Conditions were difficult and the students were not always well
received, as Vavro Srobar comments in his biography, Z mojho
iivota (From My Own Life), concerning his own experience with
Czech professors. Contact was not always amicable on the day-today level. Students found it difficult to learn Czech and soon discovered that academically they were far behind the Czech students.
It was the work of such writers as Bozena Nemcova, Adolf
Heyduk, Rudolf Pokorny, and Jozef Holecek who kept the Czech
public informed on who and what the Slovaks were and under what
conditions they were surviving in Hungary. However, only a tiny
segment of the intelligentsia had any interest of a genuine nature in
211 Ceskoslovanska
zeme, Cechy, Morava, cast Slezska a Slovenska v Uhi'fch jsou
jiz davno v literarnfm a du~evnfm zivote jednfm narodem, a vet~f cast jejich byla
jiz i jednfm statem. Znamej~f duchove jak z Cech, tak z Moravy, tak i ze Slovenska
odjakziva smerovali k uplnemu spojenf techto zernf jednoho naroda, a povafovali
sebe vzdy za osudy jednoho kmene, na co svedcf jmena a spisy najznamenitej~fch
muz0 v~ech tech krajin". Karel Havlfcek Borovsky, Politicke spisy, Vol. III, ed.
Dr. Zdenek Tobolka, Prague: Jan Laichter, 1902, p. 178.
�66
SLOVAKIA
the Slovaks. The overall view of the Slovaks tended to be a rather
sentimental and romantic one. For example, the short time spent by
Bozena Nemcova in Slovakia produced a collection of fairytales
Slovensk6 pohadky a povesti (Slovak Stories and Tales), two novels
with Slovak themes Pohorska vesnice (Mountain Villages) and
Chyie pod horami (Shanties At the Foothills), and a monograph
Krajov a lesov na Zvolensku (Lands and Forests of Zvolen) . Throughout her life, she remained in regular correspondence with Gustav
K. Zechenter, the minister and poet Samuel Chalupka, and the poet
Samuel Tomasik, author of the Slovak hymn "Hej, Slovaci!"
Of the other early Czech Slovakophiles, R. Pokorny wrote
Potulky po Slovensku (Wandering About Slovakia), Literama shoda
ceskoslovenska (Czechoslovak Literary Agreement); A. Heyduk
Cymbal a Husle (Cymbal and Violin); and J. Holecek Podejme ruku
Slovakum (Let's Give Our Hand To the Slovaks). Heyduk's verses
were sentimental, and the description of daily Slovak life was highly
coloured but Holecek, as a journalist, pointed out to the Czechs the
political importance of the Slovaks for them, that is, a union of
Czech and Slovak forces in opposition to German pressure in the
Czech Lands. This was to become one of the major arguments in
favour of Czech-Slovak reciprocity in the late 1890's. Pokorny, too ,
did some foundation work in re-establishing Czech-Slovak contact
by setting-up the "Knihovna ceskoslovenska" (Czechoslovak
Library). Its purpose was to publish the work of Slovak literary
figures but due to financial stress, it closed in 1881 after having
published only two works . One can see that Czech society at large
actually had very little contact with the Slovaks or even knowledge
about them until the 1890's. Pavel Sochan, a Slovak artist, described
the situation as follows :
the circle of Slovak friends was then very limited among the Czechs ,
whereas among the Mora vi ans we had many sincere friends . Even
intelligent Czechs considered Slovaks as "tinkers" and Slovakia as the
"land of tinkers" .3
3Pavel Sochan, "Zalozenie spolku 'Detvan' v Prahe roku 1882" in Stanislav Meciar
ed., Detvan 50 rokov v Prahe, Turc. Sv. Martin: Slovensky akademicky spolok
�SLOVAKIA
67
At official functions, Czech academics often mistook the Slovaks for Bulgarians or Russians, for the Slovak language seemed
very foreign sounding and unintelligible to their ears . They knew
nothing of Slovak literature or her poets and writers. It was a very
small Czech literary group which expressed any interest in the life of
their brother Slavs.
As the nineteenth century was coming to a close, the political
situation of both the Czechs and the Slovaks required a new
approach. What was needed was a realistic and systematic education
effort of the Czech public with the existential struggle of the Slovaks
in Hungary if aid was to be obtained for them. They had to become
acquainted with Slovak culture, folklore and way of life . On the
other hand, the Slovaks had to be awakened, educated, and shown
that the Czechs were to be trusted and that they no longer held any
grudges over the language issue. It was Karel Kalal, a Czech
schoolteacher, who took on this role of arousing the Czechs in the
1890's and early 1900's to the plight of the Slovaks. Initially , his
attitude vis-a-vis Slovak conditions was na"ively romantic and
sentimental but by the twentieth century he became much more
realistic in his comprehension, and his writing improved. Although
his efforts were crowned with some success, the language question
remained a thorn in the flesh of the Czechs.
The Czechs were involved with the process of establishing their
own separate identity from that of the Germans and yet they refused
to see or accept the same nationalism in the Slovaks. They continued
to see Czech-Slovak reciprocity in terms of one language, that is
Czech. Kalal was just as stubborn a supporter of the Czechoslovak
language. He represented a threat to the existence of the Slovak
language and was often attacked for his articles by the Martin group.
This language question was one of the basic problems hindering any
"Detvan", 1932, pp . 8-9 . The original Slovak text is : " ...kruh slovenskych
priatefov bol vtedy medzi Cechmi vefmi obmedzeny, kdezto medzi Moravanmi
mali sme vefa uprimnych priatefov. I inteligentnf Cesi pokladali Slovakov za
"dratenfkov" a Slovensko za "zeme drateru'lru ".
�68
SLOVAKIA
great Slovak moves towards the Czechs. The intellectual group
centred in Turciansky Svaty Martin never ceased to defend the cultural-linguistic uniqueness of the Slovak nation from that of the Czech.
The Slovak language and the idea of a distinct nation were the only
weapons which they had at their disposal to fight Magyarisation. As
it was, denationalisation of the younger generation, via mainly the
school system, continued to increase.
Another literary figure very active in attempting to bring about a
rapprochement between the Czechs and the Slovaks was Jaroslav
Vlcek . Born in Slovakia of mixed Czech-Slovak parentage, Vlcek
spent his formative years on Slovak soil and received his early
schooling there. While studying in Prague, he helped establish a student university club, Detvan, in 1882, for Slovak students studying
there. During his student days, Vlcek wrote articles on a regular basis for the Slovak magazine Oral (Eagle) on Czech literature titled
"Listy z Ciech" ("Letters from the Czech lands"), and in the Czech
magazine Ruch a kvety (Activity and Flowers) on Slovak literature.
His first major work Literatura na Slovensku (Literature in Slovakia)
appeared in 1881. In 1883 he published a daring article in Slovanskf
sbomfk (Slavonic Magazine) called "Slovensko za poslednfch peti
let", (Slovakia in the Last Five Years) in which he disclosed the
practices of the governing Magyar circles in Slovakia. In 1890,
Vlcek published Dejiny literatlfry slovenske (The History of Slovak
Literature). Vlcek was the first head of Detvan and he maintained an
active interest in the club through the years canvassing to get support
for it.
The purpose of Detvan was to bring together Slovak students, to
entertain and to educate them by having them give papers on Slovak
literature, history and the contemporary conditions. The most important figures in the first decade of Detvan's existence were Vlcek, P.
Sochan, Cyril Krcmery, St. Daxner, Ladislav Nadasi, Jan Slabej,
Matej Bencur, M. Ursfny, Dusan Makovicky, J. Smetanay, and
Srobar. Almost all of them were, at one time or another, to take part
in the Slovak national awakening. Detvan organised Slovak evenings open to the Czech public whenever there was a significant
Slovak celebration in order that the Czech public might come to
�SLOVAKIA
69
know that the Slovaks were more than just a land of tinkers, that
they had their own history, their great men, and that they were now
in need of a helping hand from their brothers to stave off the process
of Magyarisation. This club collaborated on similar ventures with
the other Czech and Moravian clubs, with the Slovak club Tatran in
Vienna and with the Slovak Club in Budapest. They canvassed in
Bohemia and Slovakia for funds to help Slovak students to come to
study in Prague.
During Srobar's presidency, Detvan came to have the greatest
contact with the average Czech living in Prague. Srobar had been
influenced by the realist philosophy (political program) which
Tomas G. Masaryk (later to become the first President of the Czechoslovak Republic in 1918) expounded in his university classes.
He came to believe that the political passivity favoured by the Martin
group was not beneficial to the Slovak nation, that the Slovaks must
abandon their fatalistic policy and stop expecting salvation from the
east, from their Russian brothers. Upon returning home he became
active in politics and ran for the Hungarian Parliament.
In 1891 and 1895 the Czechs organised two large provincial
exhibitions. The stand on the ethnographic exhibition was of the
greatest importance, for the Slovaks had two rooms devoted to their
culture, under the title "Part of the Czechoslav nation". Czech
attendance at this exhibition was large and press coverage thorough,
giving the Czech public its first opportunity to become acquainted
with Slovak culture on a grand scale.
Following the excitement and goodwill engendered by the
Ethnographic Exhibition, the Ceskoslovanska Jednota (Czechoslavonic Unit), was formed on 7 May 1896 with the well-known
Slavist, Professor Frantisek Pastrnek, as chairman. According to its
constitution, its purpose was the "...cultivation of Czechoslav interests and the support of the poor young Slav people" .4 The vehicle
via which this was to be carried out was: "a) to publish, to promote,
4Literami archiv pamatnik narodnfho pfsemnictvf, Rotnagl Collection. "Ucel
spolku je pestovati kultumi zajmy ceskoslovanske a podporovati chudou mladez
slovanskou" .
�70
SLOVAKIA
to collect, to buy literary works and to found libraries; b) to grant
stipends and to support Slav students studying in Prague ... ; c) public
lectures and discussions, excluding political ones; d) to sponsor
social entertainment" .5 This organisation was created to act as a defense mechanism in areas culturally endangered by Germans, for
example Moravia, Silesia and to help these Czechs outside of
Bohemia to maintain their identity (Lower Austria, Vienna). As far
as the Slovaks were concerned, the aim was to maintain contact, to
acquaint the Czech nation with the Slovak culture, to give Slovak
students financial support in Prague, and to establish Czech libraries
in Slovakia. The organisation did not really become deeply involved
with the Slovak situation until 1909. Detvan members Srobar,
Smetanay and K. Salva, a publisher in Rufomberok, were directly
connected with Jednota as trustees for Slovakia.
Meanwhile, in Martin , the representatives of the Slovak National
Party remained determined to uphold the programme of Shir and the
concept of "Okolie", come what may . Any acceptance of the idea of
a single nation called Czechoslovak was out of the question for it
meant the refutation of the Slovak language. The language separation
was regarded as a tragedy by the Czechs but for the ardent Slovak
nationalists, it meant arising from the dead. 6 According to Elie
Kedourie, "the test ... , by which a nation is known to exist is that of
language. A group speaking the same language is known as a
nation, and a nation ought to constitute a state" .7 To the Martin
nationalists, acceptance of the Czech idea of two branches of one
nation , of being completely identical peoples, despite the patent
social, economic, linguistic and cultural differences which one
thousand years of a different history had imposed upon them, was
simply not possible. It meant a denial of their nationhood which their
awakened distinct national consciousness forbade. Thus the writings
of such ardent Czech Slovakophiles as Kalal were not always well
5Ibid. , Third regulation of Constitution .
6Stefan Jan~ak. tivot Dr. Pavla Blahu, Tmava: Spolok sv. Vojtecha, 1947, I, p.
41.
7Elie Kedourie, Nationalism , London: Hutchinson & Co., 1974, p. 68.
�SLOVAKIA
71
received in the Martin circle. In their publication Narodnie noviny
(National News), they made it clear that the Czechs were not being
made familiar with true Slovak conditions:
The Czech public only misleads itself, when "the friends " of the
Slovaks come to it with these sorts of things. He who is a friend of the
Slovaks and understands their situation would not now refer to the written
language .. . From amongst the professionals of our Czech brothers none
took a deep interest in the Slovaks, thus rose K. Kalal, as an "expert" on
Slovak affairs.8
Masaryk, too, often came under fire by the older generation of
Slovak political leaders, represented by Svetozar Hurban Vajansky a
leading nationalist, poet and editor of Narodnie noviny. Masaryk
was accused of anti-clericalism, immorality in the sense of disrespect
for tradition and ethics, misrepresentation of the economic situation
in Slovakia, that is that poverty was not on a national scale but existed only in certain regions of the country which were not conducive
to crop growing due to geography , such as Orava and Eastern
Slovakia, and finally, for having turned some of the young people
away from their own party, the Slovak National Party. Vajansky felt
the young simply did not fully comprehend the gravity of the
domestic situation, that there were no alternatives to the tactics used,
and that unity amongst all Slovaks in the face of the onslaught of
Magyarisation was vital.
The older generation was convinced that writing in newspapers,
facing stiff fines and longterm jail sentences for these articles, nonparticipation in the government and steadfastness in their religious
affiliations were the only avenues open to them in stemming
Magyarisation. They believed in co-operation amongst the Slavs, for
example the Czechs as their closest brethren, but not at the expense
8Narodnie noviny, 1901, No. 64. Original text reads: "c'.:eske obecenstvo Jen myli
sa, keel' "priatelia" Slovakov prichodia mu s takymito vecmi. Kto je priatefom
Slovakov a rozumie ich polofoniu , teraz nebude sa tyka{ otazky ich spisovneho
jazyka ... U bratov c'.:echov z povolanych fudf nikto nev~fmal si de,kJadnej~ie
Slovakov , tak povstal K. Kalal , ako "znalec" vo veciach slovenskych".
�72
SLOVAKIA
of their national language , with the resulting loss of their separate
identity. This was something which the Czechs never came to
understand fully and which created so much ill-feeling after 1918.
At the tum of the century, the student club Detvan in Prague lost
a good deal of its drive with the departure of many of its most active
students , especially Srobar, who returned to Slovakia to establish
himself in a medical practice in 1899 in Rufomberok. His departure
left a gap which was to be filled later by a young Slovak from
Kosariska, Milan Rastislav Stefanik. In the summer of 1897 Srobar
and four other young , progressive-thinking, Slovak students
dissatisfied with the tum of events at the Martin celebrations, went
to Bystricka to speak with Masaryk. He had already had a great
influence upon the Slovak students in Prague, and Srobar had taken
very much to heart the realist philosophy which Masaryk
expounded, that is "drobna praca", small work amongst the people
themselves. 9 At this meeting the basic foundation for a liberaldemocratic thinking review called Hlas (Voice) was laid . Its
adherents, called Hlasists, were represented by Srobar, Pavel Blaho
and A. Stefanek, journalists, and the lawyer Ivan Derer, all of whom
were to play prominent roles in the government of Czechoslovakia
after World War I. They believed in progressive thinking, democracy, reason and non-intervention of the Roman Catholic Church in
the daily life of the peasants. They were ardent Czechoslovaks,
devoted to the idea of Czechoslovak unity (Ceskoslovenska jednota). Most of their support came from the organisation Jednota in
Prague. The first copy of Hlas was published in 1898 in Skalica
911 Drobna praca" was
developed in depth in a series of lectures by Masaryk in 1898.
These can be found in Jak pracovat?, ZUrich: Konfrontation SA, 1977, pp. 16-27.
Masaryk wanted students to take the knowledge they had acquired in school and by
going into the countryside to pass it on to the common man in a practical fashion
thus helping him to better himself and to educate himself. At the same time
Masaryk believed that such endeavours would lead to greater opportunities for
both. They would "be coming into contact with people and learning to work
together" (p.57), thus promoting a better understanding between each other and
furthering their national goal.
�SLOVAKIA
73
under the editorship of Blaho. Most of the young people involved
were former Detvan members. Due to financial problems, it
appeared for the last time in 1904. It had not been able to build-up a
wide enough reading public. Their open Czechoslovak program was
regarded with suspicion by the majority of the Slovak intellectuals
and others who might have bought a copy.
Albeit short-lived, Hlas had a tremendous impact on Slovak
political, social and cultural life. It was instrumental in establishing
the idea of a union of the Czechs and Slovaks on cultural and
national lines. It stressed the need to educate the peasants to think
and make their own decisions and especially to free themselves from
the influence of the clergy. Education was not only the means of
building an awareness of the Slovak identity and political activity but
also the means of bringing about change in such areas as the
temperance movement.
From 1909 to 1914, the progressive young Slovaks again
concentrated themselves around a monthly review, Prudy. Once
more, its appearance was due to the initiative of Detvan members,
for example Bohdan Pavlu. It described its program as being an
open platform upon which all were welcome to come and express
their views. Most of the members were former Hlasists. One can see
that the motivation for Czech-Slovak reciprocity from the Slovak
side tended to be initiated by those people who had actually studied
in the Czech Lands. One can understand why Narodnie novinytried
to discourage students from continuing their higher education there.
For the Martinites, to go to Bohemia meant returning as a
Czechophile as a foregone conclusion
It should be pointed out that although Czech political opinion
may have softened vis-a-vis the Slovaks after Rieger, there was
never any question of political support.IO As far as the Young
10In several speeches both in Prague and Budapest Rieger made it very clear that
the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks was not a legal one. The
Czechs had no legal right to interfere in Slovak affairs , and moreover, had not been
requested to do so by Slovak political leaders. See Jozef Jablonicky, "Prfspevok k
cesko-slovenskym vzt'ahom od konca 19. stor. do roku 1914", in Historicke stlfdie,
�74
SLOVAKIA
Czech Party was concerned, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia formed
one unit as an historic state. Newly formed Czech political parties
did not include the question of the Slovaks in their program. They
upheld Rieger's stand that the Slovak question is a causa finita. 11
The only political leader to have a divergent view was Masaryk.
He believed that Slovakia was a part of contemporary Czech politics.
The span of time during which his influence was particularly
significant to Slovak affairs was from 1896 to 1902. From then on
he stopped travelling to Bystricka and turned his attention to
Bohemian politics and dualism. His newspapers Cas and Nasa doba
continued to publish articles on Slovakia. By the early 1900's the
articles were losing their romantic style in describing Slovak
conditions while such journals as Osveta and Slovanskj piehled
concentrated on the culture and literature of Slovakia.
This political stand of non-intervention continued even after the
particularly unpleasant incident at Cernova in 1907 when the local
Hungarian authorities opened fire upon unarmed Slovak villagers
who had not wanted their new church to be consecrated by the
Magyar clergy but wanted their own priest Andrej Hlinka, who had
built it, to be the officiating personage. Although Czech Slovakophiles were able to get much propaganda out of the incident, the Czech
political position remained the same. Czech politicans had no wish to
threaten the Czech program based on Bohemia's Historic State
Rights, nor to interfere in the internal matters of another state, Hungary. Contact between the Czechs and the Slovaks was very much
on a limited literary and cultural level. In 1911, the Czechoslovak
Unity under the direction Professor Fr. Bfly published Slovenska
citanka, an encyclopedia on Slovak culture and literature. From 1907
to 1910 Nase Slovensko (Our Slovakia), an annual journal was
published to acquaint the Czech public with the Slovaks.
From 1908 until the break out of war, Jednota organised annual
meetings of Czech and Slovak intellectuals at the Moravian health
spa Luhacovice. Initially 26 individuals came together, but by 1914
IV, 1958, p. 8.
11 Ibid., p. 22.
�SLOVAKIA
75
their number had grown to 300. 12 It should be noted that those who
were active were the small number of Hlasists, the young generation
mostly educated in Bohemia, Milan Hodza, a member of the Hungarian Parliament and representative of the Agrarian idea in Slovakia,
and a few of the old guard from Martin; and from the Czechs, it was
predominantly members of the Jednota. It is here that one begins to
have some suggestion of possible discourse on political aspects. The
actual meetings were held in secret and there appear to be no known
official minutes. That something along political lines was being aired
in these circles emerges in a letter from R . Pilat to the American
Slovak, Milan Getting, in the summer of 1913 where he suggests
that: " .. .it is high time that work was carried out on achieving the
future program of a union of Czechs and Slovaks in a political
sense". 13 He appears to have a premonition of the coming war and
he adds confidentially that "preparations from the Czech side are on
the way, in the event of the defeat of Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and
Silesia would be united with Slovakia in one state" .14
On 4 April 1914, Frantisek Votruba a well-known Czech publicist living in Slovakia presented at a major political rally in Prague a
resolution of protest against Magyar oppression of its nationalities,
along with a demand for the revision of the Ausgleich and the terms
of dualism.1 5 This is indicative of the fact that most Slovaks still
thought in terms of a resolution of their problems within the terms of
the present state rather than outside of it with the dissolution of
Austria-Hungary.
Some mention must be made of the interests of industry, ban12 Ibid., p. 20.
13 v . Kumek , "0 cinnosti a vyznamu Ceskoslovenske jednoty pi'ed vznikem
CSR", Historicky casopis 10 (1962), pp . 366-7 in Miroslav Peknfk, "Slovenska
politika v Uhorsku a kry~talizacia jej politickych koncepcif pred vznikom I.
svetovej voj ny" , Slovensko v politickom systeme Ceskoslovenska, Bratislava:
SA V, 1992, pp . 44.
14 M. Getting, Americkf Slovaci a vyvin ceskoslovenskej myslienky v rokoch
1914-18, Pittsburg: n. p., 1933 , p. 12 in Peknfk , p. 44.
15Slo vensky tyidennfk 12 , 4 . April 1914, No. 15 , p. 3 in Peknfk, p. 44.
�76
SLOVAKIA
king and investment in Slovakia by the Slovaks. With gradual economic growth in the 1870's and 1880's, the Tatra Bank was established in 1886 in Turciansky Svaty Martin. Shortly afterwards ,
there were bank officials and small investors , soon followed by
branches in three other towns . By 1909, there were many similar
banks throughout Slovakia. However, Czech investment was very
small in Slovakia. Czech Slovakophiles extolled the virtues of
Slovak resources, the untapped wealth, and so forth in such publications as Slovenska cftanka but it was not really significant.
Similarly, there was very little movement of Slovak labour to
Bohemia and Moravia except for the tinkers who wandered far to
earn their bread. The largest manufacturing concern, Ceskoslovenska-Kolben-Danek (C-K-D) factory, had not a single employee
recorded as coming from Slovakia in the period 1871-1920.16
In the decades that preceded the Great War, the idea of a union
of the Czechs and the Slovaks was proposed initially by intellectuals
rather than politicians as the only alternative to a situation which
could no longer be tolerated. The general Czech and Slovak population knew very little of each other. The Czechs did not recognize
the Slovak language and tended to mistake Slovaks for Yugoslavs
as late as 1918.1 7 They had greater personal contact with other
Europeans than with the Slovaks. Similarly, the educated Slovaks
were much more at home in Vienna and Budapest. In fact, the peasants and workers migrated to these two cities as a general rule
rather than to the Czech Lands.
In addition, there was no truly unified Czech-Slovak club or
association upon which Czechoslovak unity could be built. Ceskoslovanska Jednota had been founded by a minority, based on an
idea rather than as the result of a political and economic evolutionary
process. Thus, much of the misunderstanding which resulted after
16F . W. Carter, "C-K-D Employees, Prague 1871-1920: Some Aspects of Their
Geographical Distribution", Journal of Historical Geography, I (I), 1975, p. 95.
17Jan Hajda, "The Role of Intelligentsia in Society" in Miloslav Rechcigl, ed.,
The Czechoslovak Contribution to World Culture, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff,
1964, p. 311.
�SLOVAKIA
77
1918 can be attributed to a mutual lack of awareness. The Czech
intelligentsia sought to change basic Slovak society along the lines
of their own but they did not take into account the growth and
differentiation of the other.
The "Anketa" carried out by Pnfdy in 1914 and finally published
in 1919 clearly showed that those who welcomed political cooperation with the Czechs were the former Hlasists and Pnidists, the
liberal-progressive streams in the Slovak National Party. Tampering
with the Slovak language was out of the question . Co-operation was
still relatively limited as Stefanek, an ardent supporter of CzechSlovak relations, remarked:
In my view, the Czech political parties should work more systematically and their leaders should above all else know Slovakia personally
and all their pronouncements on our behalf in the Austrian parliament and
in delegations should be founded on their own views . As far as I am
aware, other than Prof. Dr. Masaryk, Dr. Herben and Klofac and a few
Agrarian politicians, no one has been to Slovakia, not even Dr. Hajn, nor
Dr. Fiedler, Dr. Korner, Dr. Fort and many more excellent Czech
politicians who through their own personal contact could accomplish
much good . Slovakia still remains terra incognita even for Czech
politicians, for university professors, writers , in short for the "cream" of
the Czech nation. On the other hand we gladly recognize the good work of
Czech politicans.18
I 811 Anketa", Prudy V , 9-10 (1913/ 1914- 1919), p. 11 .
�
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
1991-92, Vol. 35
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 35 (No. 64-65), 1991-92.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
The Slovak League of America
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
1991-92
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
63
Czech-Slovak Relations From
the 1840s to 1914
EDITA BOSAK
Czech-Slovak relations were a constant but also a fundamental
problem in the history of the Czech :md Slovak people, particularly
from their political union in 1918 until the creation of two separate
states in 1993. Their common state had been created out of the
framework of the Austro-Hungarian Empire where the differences
between the two peoples were already quite marked and also grossly
underestimated . Since the arrival of the Magyars in today's Hungary
in the late 9th century, the Slovaks had experienced a distinctly
different development from the Czechs. Almost one thousand years
of Hungarian rule had marked their economic activities , social life,
degree of devotion to religion, mentality, tradition, and history. Even
with the initial euphoria that followed the creation of the common
state on 28 October 1918, these fundamental differences, which had
not been fully considered, could not be erased. Not only were they
cultural-linguistic but also religious. Our purpose is to examine how
these differences were perceived prior to 1914 and what attempts
were made to establish political relations between the two nations.
The emergence of the Czech and Slovak national movements in
the early nineteenth century helped to create a feeling of Slav
solidarity. However, in the 1840s, the acceptance by most Slovak
intellectuals of the central Slovak dialect as the Slovak literary
language caused a permanent literary rift between the two peoples.
The Slovaks were facing the first large scale attempts by the
Magyars to assimilate the non-Magyars in Hungary. By 1844,
64
SLOVAKIA
Magyar was made the official language of the country. The Slovak
Lutherans were especially threatened because their close ties with the
Czech Protestants were construed by official circles as evidence of
treason, that is to say, collaboration with a foreign power. Thus they
had to re-evaluate their position , especially since the Czechs were
quite indifferent to the political and cultural situation of the Slovaks,
embroiled as they were with their own national struggle with the
Germans in Bohemia and Moravia. Assistance of any kind was not
forthcoming . Nevertheless, the Czechs were considering creating a
"Czechoslovak" literary language, yet refused to allow the modern
Czech literary language to adopt any Slovak characteristics in order
that the Slovaks might be able to identify with it.
The Czechs were convinced that all concessions had to come
from the Slovaks. However, as the idea that they were a nation of
Slavs distinct from the Czechs grew among the Slovaks , there arose
an incompatibility with the idea of being Czechoslovak and using
only Czech as the literary medium. In the final analysis, a new
Slovak literary language was the only recourse available to the
Slovaks. Unfortunately, this step hardly fulfilled the expectations of
L'udovit Stur and his followers that the Slovaks would become
unified. The fact is that religious differences played an important
role. The Slovaks were for the greater part Roman Catholics. But
about one quarter was Lutheran and it was this group which tended
to have the Czech ties that dated as far back as the sixteenth century
and which used the Kralicka Bible for both literary and religious
purposes . This split in Slovak society profoundly influenced the
development of Czech-Slovak relations.
The introduction of Sturovcina as the new Slovak literary language was called, remained a bone of contention between the Czechs
and Slovaks for many decades . In the post-1849 period, CzechSlovak reciprocity almost completely disappeared. Controversy over
the language split and political circumstances drove the two further
apart. There were, however, some leading Czechs who continued to
believe and to advocate the idea of Czechoslovakism, that is , the
cultural ethnic and linguistic unity of both peoples as fellow Slavs.
For instance, Karel Havlicek maintained that
SLOVAKIA
65
the Czechoslav lands, Bohemia, Moravia, a part of Silesia and Slovakia
in Hungary were for a Jong time one nation as far as literary and spiritual
life goes, and the greater part of them belonged to one state. Well-known
individuals in Bohemia as well as in Moravia, and likewise in Slovakia
had always worked towards the complete union of these lands comprising
one nation, and considered themselves members of one tribe, which is
verified by the names and works of men from all these Jands. 2
But there were other leading lights among the Czechs like the
Old Czech Party leader Frantisek L. Rieger who accused the Slovaks of having "tom away" from the Czech nation. From 1849 to
1868 there was next to no political interest in Slovak affairs.
In the 1870's, 1880's and 1890's literary contact was sporadic
and minimal. The continuity of Czech-Slovak relations was maintained by a few Czech writers and persons involved in cultural
activities. The closure of the three Slovak gymnazia forced Slovak
students to go abroad to study, especially to Moravia which was
geographically closer to Upper Hungary, as Slovakia was called .
Conditions were difficult and the students were not always well
received, as Vavro Srobar comments in his biography, Z mojho
iivota (From My Own Life), concerning his own experience with
Czech professors. Contact was not always amicable on the day-today level. Students found it difficult to learn Czech and soon discovered that academically they were far behind the Czech students.
It was the work of such writers as Bozena Nemcova, Adolf
Heyduk, Rudolf Pokorny, and Jozef Holecek who kept the Czech
public informed on who and what the Slovaks were and under what
conditions they were surviving in Hungary. However, only a tiny
segment of the intelligentsia had any interest of a genuine nature in
211 Ceskoslovanska
zeme, Cechy, Morava, cast Slezska a Slovenska v Uhi'fch jsou
jiz davno v literarnfm a du~evnfm zivote jednfm narodem, a vet~f cast jejich byla
jiz i jednfm statem. Znamej~f duchove jak z Cech, tak z Moravy, tak i ze Slovenska
odjakziva smerovali k uplnemu spojenf techto zernf jednoho naroda, a povafovali
sebe vzdy za osudy jednoho kmene, na co svedcf jmena a spisy najznamenitej~fch
muz0 v~ech tech krajin". Karel Havlfcek Borovsky, Politicke spisy, Vol. III, ed.
Dr. Zdenek Tobolka, Prague: Jan Laichter, 1902, p. 178.
66
SLOVAKIA
the Slovaks. The overall view of the Slovaks tended to be a rather
sentimental and romantic one. For example, the short time spent by
Bozena Nemcova in Slovakia produced a collection of fairytales
Slovensk6 pohadky a povesti (Slovak Stories and Tales), two novels
with Slovak themes Pohorska vesnice (Mountain Villages) and
Chyie pod horami (Shanties At the Foothills), and a monograph
Krajov a lesov na Zvolensku (Lands and Forests of Zvolen) . Throughout her life, she remained in regular correspondence with Gustav
K. Zechenter, the minister and poet Samuel Chalupka, and the poet
Samuel Tomasik, author of the Slovak hymn "Hej, Slovaci!"
Of the other early Czech Slovakophiles, R. Pokorny wrote
Potulky po Slovensku (Wandering About Slovakia), Literama shoda
ceskoslovenska (Czechoslovak Literary Agreement); A. Heyduk
Cymbal a Husle (Cymbal and Violin); and J. Holecek Podejme ruku
Slovakum (Let's Give Our Hand To the Slovaks). Heyduk's verses
were sentimental, and the description of daily Slovak life was highly
coloured but Holecek, as a journalist, pointed out to the Czechs the
political importance of the Slovaks for them, that is, a union of
Czech and Slovak forces in opposition to German pressure in the
Czech Lands. This was to become one of the major arguments in
favour of Czech-Slovak reciprocity in the late 1890's. Pokorny, too ,
did some foundation work in re-establishing Czech-Slovak contact
by setting-up the "Knihovna ceskoslovenska" (Czechoslovak
Library). Its purpose was to publish the work of Slovak literary
figures but due to financial stress, it closed in 1881 after having
published only two works . One can see that Czech society at large
actually had very little contact with the Slovaks or even knowledge
about them until the 1890's. Pavel Sochan, a Slovak artist, described
the situation as follows :
the circle of Slovak friends was then very limited among the Czechs ,
whereas among the Mora vi ans we had many sincere friends . Even
intelligent Czechs considered Slovaks as "tinkers" and Slovakia as the
"land of tinkers" .3
3Pavel Sochan, "Zalozenie spolku 'Detvan' v Prahe roku 1882" in Stanislav Meciar
ed., Detvan 50 rokov v Prahe, Turc. Sv. Martin: Slovensky akademicky spolok
SLOVAKIA
67
At official functions, Czech academics often mistook the Slovaks for Bulgarians or Russians, for the Slovak language seemed
very foreign sounding and unintelligible to their ears . They knew
nothing of Slovak literature or her poets and writers. It was a very
small Czech literary group which expressed any interest in the life of
their brother Slavs.
As the nineteenth century was coming to a close, the political
situation of both the Czechs and the Slovaks required a new
approach. What was needed was a realistic and systematic education
effort of the Czech public with the existential struggle of the Slovaks
in Hungary if aid was to be obtained for them. They had to become
acquainted with Slovak culture, folklore and way of life . On the
other hand, the Slovaks had to be awakened, educated, and shown
that the Czechs were to be trusted and that they no longer held any
grudges over the language issue. It was Karel Kalal, a Czech
schoolteacher, who took on this role of arousing the Czechs in the
1890's and early 1900's to the plight of the Slovaks. Initially , his
attitude vis-a-vis Slovak conditions was na"ively romantic and
sentimental but by the twentieth century he became much more
realistic in his comprehension, and his writing improved. Although
his efforts were crowned with some success, the language question
remained a thorn in the flesh of the Czechs.
The Czechs were involved with the process of establishing their
own separate identity from that of the Germans and yet they refused
to see or accept the same nationalism in the Slovaks. They continued
to see Czech-Slovak reciprocity in terms of one language, that is
Czech. Kalal was just as stubborn a supporter of the Czechoslovak
language. He represented a threat to the existence of the Slovak
language and was often attacked for his articles by the Martin group.
This language question was one of the basic problems hindering any
"Detvan", 1932, pp . 8-9 . The original Slovak text is : " ...kruh slovenskych
priatefov bol vtedy medzi Cechmi vefmi obmedzeny, kdezto medzi Moravanmi
mali sme vefa uprimnych priatefov. I inteligentnf Cesi pokladali Slovakov za
"dratenfkov" a Slovensko za "zeme drateru'lru ".
68
SLOVAKIA
great Slovak moves towards the Czechs. The intellectual group
centred in Turciansky Svaty Martin never ceased to defend the cultural-linguistic uniqueness of the Slovak nation from that of the Czech.
The Slovak language and the idea of a distinct nation were the only
weapons which they had at their disposal to fight Magyarisation. As
it was, denationalisation of the younger generation, via mainly the
school system, continued to increase.
Another literary figure very active in attempting to bring about a
rapprochement between the Czechs and the Slovaks was Jaroslav
Vlcek . Born in Slovakia of mixed Czech-Slovak parentage, Vlcek
spent his formative years on Slovak soil and received his early
schooling there. While studying in Prague, he helped establish a student university club, Detvan, in 1882, for Slovak students studying
there. During his student days, Vlcek wrote articles on a regular basis for the Slovak magazine Oral (Eagle) on Czech literature titled
"Listy z Ciech" ("Letters from the Czech lands"), and in the Czech
magazine Ruch a kvety (Activity and Flowers) on Slovak literature.
His first major work Literatura na Slovensku (Literature in Slovakia)
appeared in 1881. In 1883 he published a daring article in Slovanskf
sbomfk (Slavonic Magazine) called "Slovensko za poslednfch peti
let", (Slovakia in the Last Five Years) in which he disclosed the
practices of the governing Magyar circles in Slovakia. In 1890,
Vlcek published Dejiny literatlfry slovenske (The History of Slovak
Literature). Vlcek was the first head of Detvan and he maintained an
active interest in the club through the years canvassing to get support
for it.
The purpose of Detvan was to bring together Slovak students, to
entertain and to educate them by having them give papers on Slovak
literature, history and the contemporary conditions. The most important figures in the first decade of Detvan's existence were Vlcek, P.
Sochan, Cyril Krcmery, St. Daxner, Ladislav Nadasi, Jan Slabej,
Matej Bencur, M. Ursfny, Dusan Makovicky, J. Smetanay, and
Srobar. Almost all of them were, at one time or another, to take part
in the Slovak national awakening. Detvan organised Slovak evenings open to the Czech public whenever there was a significant
Slovak celebration in order that the Czech public might come to
SLOVAKIA
69
know that the Slovaks were more than just a land of tinkers, that
they had their own history, their great men, and that they were now
in need of a helping hand from their brothers to stave off the process
of Magyarisation. This club collaborated on similar ventures with
the other Czech and Moravian clubs, with the Slovak club Tatran in
Vienna and with the Slovak Club in Budapest. They canvassed in
Bohemia and Slovakia for funds to help Slovak students to come to
study in Prague.
During Srobar's presidency, Detvan came to have the greatest
contact with the average Czech living in Prague. Srobar had been
influenced by the realist philosophy (political program) which
Tomas G. Masaryk (later to become the first President of the Czechoslovak Republic in 1918) expounded in his university classes.
He came to believe that the political passivity favoured by the Martin
group was not beneficial to the Slovak nation, that the Slovaks must
abandon their fatalistic policy and stop expecting salvation from the
east, from their Russian brothers. Upon returning home he became
active in politics and ran for the Hungarian Parliament.
In 1891 and 1895 the Czechs organised two large provincial
exhibitions. The stand on the ethnographic exhibition was of the
greatest importance, for the Slovaks had two rooms devoted to their
culture, under the title "Part of the Czechoslav nation". Czech
attendance at this exhibition was large and press coverage thorough,
giving the Czech public its first opportunity to become acquainted
with Slovak culture on a grand scale.
Following the excitement and goodwill engendered by the
Ethnographic Exhibition, the Ceskoslovanska Jednota (Czechoslavonic Unit), was formed on 7 May 1896 with the well-known
Slavist, Professor Frantisek Pastrnek, as chairman. According to its
constitution, its purpose was the "...cultivation of Czechoslav interests and the support of the poor young Slav people" .4 The vehicle
via which this was to be carried out was: "a) to publish, to promote,
4Literami archiv pamatnik narodnfho pfsemnictvf, Rotnagl Collection. "Ucel
spolku je pestovati kultumi zajmy ceskoslovanske a podporovati chudou mladez
slovanskou" .
70
SLOVAKIA
to collect, to buy literary works and to found libraries; b) to grant
stipends and to support Slav students studying in Prague ... ; c) public
lectures and discussions, excluding political ones; d) to sponsor
social entertainment" .5 This organisation was created to act as a defense mechanism in areas culturally endangered by Germans, for
example Moravia, Silesia and to help these Czechs outside of
Bohemia to maintain their identity (Lower Austria, Vienna). As far
as the Slovaks were concerned, the aim was to maintain contact, to
acquaint the Czech nation with the Slovak culture, to give Slovak
students financial support in Prague, and to establish Czech libraries
in Slovakia. The organisation did not really become deeply involved
with the Slovak situation until 1909. Detvan members Srobar,
Smetanay and K. Salva, a publisher in Rufomberok, were directly
connected with Jednota as trustees for Slovakia.
Meanwhile, in Martin , the representatives of the Slovak National
Party remained determined to uphold the programme of Shir and the
concept of "Okolie", come what may . Any acceptance of the idea of
a single nation called Czechoslovak was out of the question for it
meant the refutation of the Slovak language. The language separation
was regarded as a tragedy by the Czechs but for the ardent Slovak
nationalists, it meant arising from the dead. 6 According to Elie
Kedourie, "the test ... , by which a nation is known to exist is that of
language. A group speaking the same language is known as a
nation, and a nation ought to constitute a state" .7 To the Martin
nationalists, acceptance of the Czech idea of two branches of one
nation , of being completely identical peoples, despite the patent
social, economic, linguistic and cultural differences which one
thousand years of a different history had imposed upon them, was
simply not possible. It meant a denial of their nationhood which their
awakened distinct national consciousness forbade. Thus the writings
of such ardent Czech Slovakophiles as Kalal were not always well
5Ibid. , Third regulation of Constitution .
6Stefan Jan~ak. tivot Dr. Pavla Blahu, Tmava: Spolok sv. Vojtecha, 1947, I, p.
41.
7Elie Kedourie, Nationalism , London: Hutchinson & Co., 1974, p. 68.
SLOVAKIA
71
received in the Martin circle. In their publication Narodnie noviny
(National News), they made it clear that the Czechs were not being
made familiar with true Slovak conditions:
The Czech public only misleads itself, when "the friends " of the
Slovaks come to it with these sorts of things. He who is a friend of the
Slovaks and understands their situation would not now refer to the written
language .. . From amongst the professionals of our Czech brothers none
took a deep interest in the Slovaks, thus rose K. Kalal, as an "expert" on
Slovak affairs.8
Masaryk, too, often came under fire by the older generation of
Slovak political leaders, represented by Svetozar Hurban Vajansky a
leading nationalist, poet and editor of Narodnie noviny. Masaryk
was accused of anti-clericalism, immorality in the sense of disrespect
for tradition and ethics, misrepresentation of the economic situation
in Slovakia, that is that poverty was not on a national scale but existed only in certain regions of the country which were not conducive
to crop growing due to geography , such as Orava and Eastern
Slovakia, and finally, for having turned some of the young people
away from their own party, the Slovak National Party. Vajansky felt
the young simply did not fully comprehend the gravity of the
domestic situation, that there were no alternatives to the tactics used,
and that unity amongst all Slovaks in the face of the onslaught of
Magyarisation was vital.
The older generation was convinced that writing in newspapers,
facing stiff fines and longterm jail sentences for these articles, nonparticipation in the government and steadfastness in their religious
affiliations were the only avenues open to them in stemming
Magyarisation. They believed in co-operation amongst the Slavs, for
example the Czechs as their closest brethren, but not at the expense
8Narodnie noviny, 1901, No. 64. Original text reads: "c'.:eske obecenstvo Jen myli
sa, keel' "priatelia" Slovakov prichodia mu s takymito vecmi. Kto je priatefom
Slovakov a rozumie ich polofoniu , teraz nebude sa tyka{ otazky ich spisovneho
jazyka ... U bratov c'.:echov z povolanych fudf nikto nev~fmal si de,kJadnej~ie
Slovakov , tak povstal K. Kalal , ako "znalec" vo veciach slovenskych".
72
SLOVAKIA
of their national language , with the resulting loss of their separate
identity. This was something which the Czechs never came to
understand fully and which created so much ill-feeling after 1918.
At the tum of the century, the student club Detvan in Prague lost
a good deal of its drive with the departure of many of its most active
students , especially Srobar, who returned to Slovakia to establish
himself in a medical practice in 1899 in Rufomberok. His departure
left a gap which was to be filled later by a young Slovak from
Kosariska, Milan Rastislav Stefanik. In the summer of 1897 Srobar
and four other young , progressive-thinking, Slovak students
dissatisfied with the tum of events at the Martin celebrations, went
to Bystricka to speak with Masaryk. He had already had a great
influence upon the Slovak students in Prague, and Srobar had taken
very much to heart the realist philosophy which Masaryk
expounded, that is "drobna praca", small work amongst the people
themselves. 9 At this meeting the basic foundation for a liberaldemocratic thinking review called Hlas (Voice) was laid . Its
adherents, called Hlasists, were represented by Srobar, Pavel Blaho
and A. Stefanek, journalists, and the lawyer Ivan Derer, all of whom
were to play prominent roles in the government of Czechoslovakia
after World War I. They believed in progressive thinking, democracy, reason and non-intervention of the Roman Catholic Church in
the daily life of the peasants. They were ardent Czechoslovaks,
devoted to the idea of Czechoslovak unity (Ceskoslovenska jednota). Most of their support came from the organisation Jednota in
Prague. The first copy of Hlas was published in 1898 in Skalica
911 Drobna praca" was
developed in depth in a series of lectures by Masaryk in 1898.
These can be found in Jak pracovat?, ZUrich: Konfrontation SA, 1977, pp. 16-27.
Masaryk wanted students to take the knowledge they had acquired in school and by
going into the countryside to pass it on to the common man in a practical fashion
thus helping him to better himself and to educate himself. At the same time
Masaryk believed that such endeavours would lead to greater opportunities for
both. They would "be coming into contact with people and learning to work
together" (p.57), thus promoting a better understanding between each other and
furthering their national goal.
SLOVAKIA
73
under the editorship of Blaho. Most of the young people involved
were former Detvan members. Due to financial problems, it
appeared for the last time in 1904. It had not been able to build-up a
wide enough reading public. Their open Czechoslovak program was
regarded with suspicion by the majority of the Slovak intellectuals
and others who might have bought a copy.
Albeit short-lived, Hlas had a tremendous impact on Slovak
political, social and cultural life. It was instrumental in establishing
the idea of a union of the Czechs and Slovaks on cultural and
national lines. It stressed the need to educate the peasants to think
and make their own decisions and especially to free themselves from
the influence of the clergy. Education was not only the means of
building an awareness of the Slovak identity and political activity but
also the means of bringing about change in such areas as the
temperance movement.
From 1909 to 1914, the progressive young Slovaks again
concentrated themselves around a monthly review, Prudy. Once
more, its appearance was due to the initiative of Detvan members,
for example Bohdan Pavlu. It described its program as being an
open platform upon which all were welcome to come and express
their views. Most of the members were former Hlasists. One can see
that the motivation for Czech-Slovak reciprocity from the Slovak
side tended to be initiated by those people who had actually studied
in the Czech Lands. One can understand why Narodnie novinytried
to discourage students from continuing their higher education there.
For the Martinites, to go to Bohemia meant returning as a
Czechophile as a foregone conclusion
It should be pointed out that although Czech political opinion
may have softened vis-a-vis the Slovaks after Rieger, there was
never any question of political support.IO As far as the Young
10In several speeches both in Prague and Budapest Rieger made it very clear that
the relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks was not a legal one. The
Czechs had no legal right to interfere in Slovak affairs , and moreover, had not been
requested to do so by Slovak political leaders. See Jozef Jablonicky, "Prfspevok k
cesko-slovenskym vzt'ahom od konca 19. stor. do roku 1914", in Historicke stlfdie,
74
SLOVAKIA
Czech Party was concerned, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia formed
one unit as an historic state. Newly formed Czech political parties
did not include the question of the Slovaks in their program. They
upheld Rieger's stand that the Slovak question is a causa finita. 11
The only political leader to have a divergent view was Masaryk.
He believed that Slovakia was a part of contemporary Czech politics.
The span of time during which his influence was particularly
significant to Slovak affairs was from 1896 to 1902. From then on
he stopped travelling to Bystricka and turned his attention to
Bohemian politics and dualism. His newspapers Cas and Nasa doba
continued to publish articles on Slovakia. By the early 1900's the
articles were losing their romantic style in describing Slovak
conditions while such journals as Osveta and Slovanskj piehled
concentrated on the culture and literature of Slovakia.
This political stand of non-intervention continued even after the
particularly unpleasant incident at Cernova in 1907 when the local
Hungarian authorities opened fire upon unarmed Slovak villagers
who had not wanted their new church to be consecrated by the
Magyar clergy but wanted their own priest Andrej Hlinka, who had
built it, to be the officiating personage. Although Czech Slovakophiles were able to get much propaganda out of the incident, the Czech
political position remained the same. Czech politicans had no wish to
threaten the Czech program based on Bohemia's Historic State
Rights, nor to interfere in the internal matters of another state, Hungary. Contact between the Czechs and the Slovaks was very much
on a limited literary and cultural level. In 1911, the Czechoslovak
Unity under the direction Professor Fr. Bfly published Slovenska
citanka, an encyclopedia on Slovak culture and literature. From 1907
to 1910 Nase Slovensko (Our Slovakia), an annual journal was
published to acquaint the Czech public with the Slovaks.
From 1908 until the break out of war, Jednota organised annual
meetings of Czech and Slovak intellectuals at the Moravian health
spa Luhacovice. Initially 26 individuals came together, but by 1914
IV, 1958, p. 8.
11 Ibid., p. 22.
SLOVAKIA
75
their number had grown to 300. 12 It should be noted that those who
were active were the small number of Hlasists, the young generation
mostly educated in Bohemia, Milan Hodza, a member of the Hungarian Parliament and representative of the Agrarian idea in Slovakia,
and a few of the old guard from Martin; and from the Czechs, it was
predominantly members of the Jednota. It is here that one begins to
have some suggestion of possible discourse on political aspects. The
actual meetings were held in secret and there appear to be no known
official minutes. That something along political lines was being aired
in these circles emerges in a letter from R . Pilat to the American
Slovak, Milan Getting, in the summer of 1913 where he suggests
that: " .. .it is high time that work was carried out on achieving the
future program of a union of Czechs and Slovaks in a political
sense". 13 He appears to have a premonition of the coming war and
he adds confidentially that "preparations from the Czech side are on
the way, in the event of the defeat of Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and
Silesia would be united with Slovakia in one state" .14
On 4 April 1914, Frantisek Votruba a well-known Czech publicist living in Slovakia presented at a major political rally in Prague a
resolution of protest against Magyar oppression of its nationalities,
along with a demand for the revision of the Ausgleich and the terms
of dualism.1 5 This is indicative of the fact that most Slovaks still
thought in terms of a resolution of their problems within the terms of
the present state rather than outside of it with the dissolution of
Austria-Hungary.
Some mention must be made of the interests of industry, ban12 Ibid., p. 20.
13 v . Kumek , "0 cinnosti a vyznamu Ceskoslovenske jednoty pi'ed vznikem
CSR", Historicky casopis 10 (1962), pp . 366-7 in Miroslav Peknfk, "Slovenska
politika v Uhorsku a kry~talizacia jej politickych koncepcif pred vznikom I.
svetovej voj ny" , Slovensko v politickom systeme Ceskoslovenska, Bratislava:
SA V, 1992, pp . 44.
14 M. Getting, Americkf Slovaci a vyvin ceskoslovenskej myslienky v rokoch
1914-18, Pittsburg: n. p., 1933 , p. 12 in Peknfk , p. 44.
15Slo vensky tyidennfk 12 , 4 . April 1914, No. 15 , p. 3 in Peknfk, p. 44.
76
SLOVAKIA
king and investment in Slovakia by the Slovaks. With gradual economic growth in the 1870's and 1880's, the Tatra Bank was established in 1886 in Turciansky Svaty Martin. Shortly afterwards ,
there were bank officials and small investors , soon followed by
branches in three other towns . By 1909, there were many similar
banks throughout Slovakia. However, Czech investment was very
small in Slovakia. Czech Slovakophiles extolled the virtues of
Slovak resources, the untapped wealth, and so forth in such publications as Slovenska cftanka but it was not really significant.
Similarly, there was very little movement of Slovak labour to
Bohemia and Moravia except for the tinkers who wandered far to
earn their bread. The largest manufacturing concern, Ceskoslovenska-Kolben-Danek (C-K-D) factory, had not a single employee
recorded as coming from Slovakia in the period 1871-1920.16
In the decades that preceded the Great War, the idea of a union
of the Czechs and the Slovaks was proposed initially by intellectuals
rather than politicians as the only alternative to a situation which
could no longer be tolerated. The general Czech and Slovak population knew very little of each other. The Czechs did not recognize
the Slovak language and tended to mistake Slovaks for Yugoslavs
as late as 1918.1 7 They had greater personal contact with other
Europeans than with the Slovaks. Similarly, the educated Slovaks
were much more at home in Vienna and Budapest. In fact, the peasants and workers migrated to these two cities as a general rule
rather than to the Czech Lands.
In addition, there was no truly unified Czech-Slovak club or
association upon which Czechoslovak unity could be built. Ceskoslovanska Jednota had been founded by a minority, based on an
idea rather than as the result of a political and economic evolutionary
process. Thus, much of the misunderstanding which resulted after
16F . W. Carter, "C-K-D Employees, Prague 1871-1920: Some Aspects of Their
Geographical Distribution", Journal of Historical Geography, I (I), 1975, p. 95.
17Jan Hajda, "The Role of Intelligentsia in Society" in Miloslav Rechcigl, ed.,
The Czechoslovak Contribution to World Culture, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff,
1964, p. 311.
SLOVAKIA
77
1918 can be attributed to a mutual lack of awareness. The Czech
intelligentsia sought to change basic Slovak society along the lines
of their own but they did not take into account the growth and
differentiation of the other.
The "Anketa" carried out by Pnfdy in 1914 and finally published
in 1919 clearly showed that those who welcomed political cooperation with the Czechs were the former Hlasists and Pnidists, the
liberal-progressive streams in the Slovak National Party. Tampering
with the Slovak language was out of the question . Co-operation was
still relatively limited as Stefanek, an ardent supporter of CzechSlovak relations, remarked:
In my view, the Czech political parties should work more systematically and their leaders should above all else know Slovakia personally
and all their pronouncements on our behalf in the Austrian parliament and
in delegations should be founded on their own views . As far as I am
aware, other than Prof. Dr. Masaryk, Dr. Herben and Klofac and a few
Agrarian politicians, no one has been to Slovakia, not even Dr. Hajn, nor
Dr. Fiedler, Dr. Korner, Dr. Fort and many more excellent Czech
politicians who through their own personal contact could accomplish
much good . Slovakia still remains terra incognita even for Czech
politicians, for university professors, writers , in short for the "cream" of
the Czech nation. On the other hand we gladly recognize the good work of
Czech politicans.18
I 811 Anketa", Prudy V , 9-10 (1913/ 1914- 1919), p. 11 .
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
Czech-Slovak Relations from the 1840's to 1914
Description
An account of the resource
Edita Bosák
Slovakia, Vol. 35 (No. 64-65), 1991-92
pp. 63-77
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bosák, Edita, 1950-2022
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1991-92
name
-
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/8320014a1e675180cb66a4d5cd12571a.pdf
0492c598abeb6d567b20343bd0edda41
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
27
CZECHO-SWVAKIA YESTERDAY AND TODAY
BY VLADIMiR PEKEILSKY
In the past several years some writers of our Czech
exile have attempted to diagnose the tragedy of us all at
home and in foreign lands. But they have had little success
with it. J. M. Kolar, for example, is today already forgotten
and the more actual Dr. Radimsky has been elevated particularly by publishers and the Czech National Socialists.
Both authors came out with much that was true, but they
either did not want to or did not know how to express the
whole truth. Perhaps they feared the consequences. And
fear has big eyes. Nevertheless, many times it is not only
fear, but opportunism and various other interests which
prevent authors from writing about matters that might
interest readers the most. It was just this that inspired me
to touch upon problems which still are strictly taboo in
most Czech exile publications.
Czecho-Slovakia 1918-1938
Today very few of our people want to recall the whole
truth about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Without regard to nationality and political affiliation, that is. The
younger generation, born after 1925, did not know the first
Repu blic and, therefore, cannot make any judgments of it
from personal experiences. For us oldsters it meant much,
though only 20 years in the thousand-year history of our
Czech nation, and the judgment of history may arouse only
criticism, because with the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia the road for modern dictatorships into Central Europe was facilitated. In exile we have become accustomed
to read - from articles of former collaborators of Dr.
Edward Benes - nothing but praise about the first republic. The writers deliberately fail to see the state bankruptcies of 1938-1939 and 1945-1948, the internal causes
thereof. They blame everything on outside intervention.
The first Republic was presented to the world as a
model of democracy, freedom, state order and welfare, and,
were it not - according to them - for the bad Germans
1
�28
SLOVAKIA
and Russians, it still could have been the "perfection" it
was. Not a word is said a'bout the patronage of France.
Thus they continue to falsify the facts, just as they did
during the time of Masaryk and Benes w'hen huge sums
were paid out to foreign journals and journalists to sing
nothing but praises aibout the first Republic.
Of course, we can and we should recall the many
good things about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Yet it
would be irresponsible of us if we did not look into the
causes of the bankruptcy and collapse of democratic Czecho-Slovakia within ourselves and in internal circumstances. Dr. Vaclav Boucek, principal defender of Masaryk and
Benes, did not flatter the state system of Czecho-Slovakia
when he described it as a "quasi-democracy with a quasiparliamentary system."
A multitude of good people, financially well-founded
groups, investors, state officers, but also political barterers
were satisfied with the then Prague ·r egime. The propertyless groups of inhabitants, the indebted peasants and
home owners, the unemployed and the adherents of nonCzech nationalities (e.g., the greater unemployment in the
German sectors and the vain attempts of the new Slovak
intelligentsia to fill positions in the public life of Slovakia)
looked upon the state system with more or less criticism.
And today very few of our people want to admit that comIJ11mism had a significant voice in our political life from
the very first years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But
the fact is that it did. The following statistics show the
results of three elections, the mandates won by the respective parties:
Politica•l Party
cs Social Demo.c ratic (1)
cs People's Party (2)
c.s
A1grarian ORepulblioam,) (3)
C"'5 Na:ti,o nal Socialist (4)
C-S Niattiona,l Democratic (5)
C,S Tradesmen's
C-S Progressive Socialist
Slovak Na-tionail (6)
(Hlinka's) Slovak People's (7)
Czech Na,tcional Fascist
'Mand-at-es won by tihe Parties
1920
1925
1-935
33
29
3'1
28
415
24
28
113'
13
74
1,9
6
3
1~
23
38
22
45
28
17
l:'7
22
6
�29
SLOVAKIA
German Sociialist Democratic
German Community
German Nationalist
German Nat'io.n1al So,ci,a iist
German Agrariain
German Christian Socialists
German Democraili:c
Sudeten Germ-run,
Magyar Agrarian
Miaigyar-Germain Soc. Dem.
Magy,a r Christian Socia,Jist
Ma,gyair Bloc
GS Communist (8)
Others
Tota,] Number of Mandates
17
111
1-0
7
1,1
24
10
5
1,3
5
6
44
1
4
5
4
9
30
285
300
300
(1) The main worker's Gsocialist) party founded in 11878.
(2) Hliruka's Slovak People's Party voted with this party in the
19!20 elec1Jiions and was allowed 12 manda:tes, 1while the resp.
Czeoho,Slovak P,e ople's Pa,r ty (Sra1mek's) got 21. The largest
Slovak politi'c al p,arty in Slovakia.
(3) Founded by Amltonin Svehla in 1899.
(4) Founded by Czeclh soci-a.Jists in 1896. Dr. Edward Benes later
lbecame its leader.
(5) Fiounded tby Dr. Kramar in 19118 ; comlbi·n ed witlh the Dle'c.h
Nation/al Union Party (Strilbrny's) be!fo,r e the 19315 elections.
(6) Founded be'fore fhe 1872 elections. In 19315 it voted wiith
Hlinka's party as the Autonomist BJ.oc.
(7) The Slovatk People's (Populist) :Party was founded by !Father
Andrew Hlinika, Dec. 5, 1905.
(8) The Czecho-'SJ,o,v ak (iread "Cm;)OH") Communist Party was
fuunijed Nov. 2, 1920, after .brea~ing with the So'Ci-a•l Democrats; the deputies joining it: 23 Czeeho..Slovak S1oci1al Democraits, 3 German Social Democrats, aind 1· Ma,g;yar Soci,al
Democrat.
(The parties qualified as "Czecho-Slovak" were in fact
Czech-dominated parties · with affiliates in Slovakia. There
were only two genuine SLOVAK political parties: the IDinka Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National Party;
both supported autonomy for Slovakia, the Pittsburgh Pact
of May 30, 1918. - Ed. note).
The municipal election in Prague, May 29, 1938, showed
the following five parties. with the largest vote: Cze<:h National Socialists - 151,600; Communists - 99,900; Social
Democrats - 75,809; National Unity - 68,007; Czech Populist - 37,749.
In the 1925 parliamentary elections the Communist
�30
SLOVAKIA
Party received 933,711 votes; ten years later (1935) it
got 849,0000 votes.
Do the above statistics warrant the frequently used
phrase "Masaryk's or Benes's Republic" and calling the citizens of Czecho-Slovakia "the children of Masaryk"?
Would any Czech want to say that the communists, Henleinists, Magyars, Poles, and Slovaks considered themselves "children of Masaryk"? It is a fact that even the
Czech rightists criticized or repudiated Masaryk in a
large measure. Not only the extreme groups but even a
large part of the Czech National Democrats, Agrarians, and
adherents of the Czech People's Party in Moravia.
We know that during the rule of Masaryk and Benes
many things were done which were not honorable. For example, already in 1924 freedom of the press was limited
by Law No. 124, and the freedom of the press in the "democratic Czecho-:Slovak Republic," so highly praised by
Radio Free Europe even today, in reality looked much
less free than in France, the United States and England.
Various publications, not only those of the opposition,
were frequently confiscated and censored and were issued
with "white windows" or as "corrected" issues after censorship. At that time it was said that the journalists
were thereby trained "to worship at the willows."
,'
Corruption was extensive, but no law could be promulgated to wipe it out because political parties and many
government people were against passing such a law. Hundreds of millions of crowns thus disappeared in bottomless
pockets. We still remember the alcohol case, the gasoline
affair, the corruption in the sugar business, in the construction of the electrical plant in Ervenice and the Fenix
Insurance affair, and the corruption connected with the
land reform, the parceling out of surplus estates.
In tlhe first Republic even the elections cannot be
called- truly democratic. The broad masses of the people
were not satisfied with the electoral system, because: they
were not allowed to choose candidates. The law, however,
ordered all citizens .to take part in the elections and to vote
for the political parties and their selected candidates. Ob-
�SLOVAKIA
31
viously many incapable people thus became members of
the parliament, interested not in the welfare of the people
and the country, but in the first place in the welfare and
power of their respective parties. Corruption flourished.
Only the political key was used in forming a government
and qualifications for a ministerial position meant practically nothing. The parties controlled all public service
jobs in the State on the national and local levels. Since one
had a large selection of political parties, quite a few citizens carried memib ership cards of several political parties.
Thus was the first Czecho-Slovak Republic undermined, as well as confidence in the State and the democratic system which hypocritically bore the slogan "Truth
prevails" on its escutcheon - which even the present communist regime has allowed to remain on the State insignia.
The enthusiasm with which the Slovaks and Czechs
welcomed the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
in 1918 soon cooled and forced many hot heads into opposition. The am1bitious Dr. Benes, however, knew how to deal
with the opposition: he liquidated it ruthlessly. To this
end he used his secret archive which he had made up for
opportune moments, even doctors' opinions, as in the case
of Stnbrny. Democracy became limited during the lifetime
of T. G. Masaryk, and more so during the presidency of
Dr. Benes.
Masaryk did not seek the support of political parties;
he was above all parties. Benes, on the other hand, depended on the support of t!he National Socialists, who, in 1935
tried, though unsuccessfully, to promulgate a law to dissolve all political parties and to establish a new uniform
State party with himself at its head. The National Socialists must be regard~d as the grave-diggers of CzechoSlovakia and democracy; their active collaboration with
the communists during the war and after is still fresh in
our memories.
The parasites of Benes's political clique refuse to admit their guilt in the catastrophe. They still sing praises
to Bene~ with the help of whose name they hope to find
favor with Czech settlers in Canada and the United States.
�32
SLOVAKIA
Ruthenia illustrate s Benes's political character quite clearly. During a visit to that country in May, 1934, when he
was still Foreign Minister, Benes said: "Czecho-S lovakia,
having become the holder (trustee) of Sub-Carp athian Russia by the decision of the Peace Conferenc e, will never give
up this land, it will never allow any revisionism in this
question and shall defend this land with you to its last
drop of blood" (Narodna Politika: May 6, 1924) .
We know just how Benes defended Ruthenia : he negotiated with Soviet Ambassa dor Majsky in London, in
1941, to sell out that hapless country.
On July 4, 1938, Dr. Benes prophesie d to a deputatio n
of Sokols: "Nothing will happen tha,t might harm our State,
our Republic and our democrat ic regime; in this jubilee
year of our Republic, with our sincere effort for just colla:boratio n with all citizens of all nationalit ies, we shall demonstrat e anew to the world that our State is just, solid,
ready to resist aggressio n, mature and peace-lov ing." The
result: Munich!
To complem ent the shameles s character of Benes in
his statemen t, published in the "Wiedom osci polskie" (June
15, 1941): "And when a man thinks of it, we Czechs nevertheless did foresee actually everythin g!" When a Polish
journalis t asked him whether he really meant everythin g,
Benes replied: "Yes, I mean everythin g!"
The Munich catastrop he, the capitulati on and flight
of Dr. Benes into foreign lands did away for the time being with any remnants of sympafili y the Czech nation had
for Benes (the Slovaks and others had none for him). In
1945, the Czech nation welcomed his return, but the enthusiasm displayed was not for him but rather an expressio n
of joy that the war and Nazi occupatio n had ended.
The Second Republic
Post-Mun ich Czecho-S lovakia, the second Republic, was
of short duration. It was still free, but betrayed by all its
foreign friends; it was smaller in area and without great
!hopes of preservat ion. It was also without Benes, who had
voluntari ly resigned from the presidenc y and, after his
�SLOVAKIA
33
flight from Czecho-Slovakia, had even wished much success to the new, constitutionally elected, President, Dr.
Emil Ha.cha. With the voluntary joining of the parties of
the right in the Party of National Unity and the parties
of the left in the Labor Party, an effort was expressed to
simplify and cure the ills of political life.
The relations of the first Republic, particularly the
person and environment of Dr. Benes, were the target of
wide criticism, especially from the Party of National Unity
which, surprisingly enough, even the National Socialists
joined. The party renounced Benes and favored the right.
Its chairman, J. V. Klofac, identifying Czech National Socialism with Hitler's National Socialism, said: "We must
not only catch up with Germany and its National Socialism,
but surpass it .... In Central Europe we must give a model
example of coexistence of the Slovanic peoples and Germans, which is all the easier for us, since we are also connected by blood. My Father's mother was a full-blooded
German." And referring to Benes quite obviously, Klofac
proclaimed: "We must repudiate everyone who prattles
like a child about the approaching moment that shall return to us everything we lost in October - and which is
definitely lost." No Czech political party so completely reversed itself up to that time.
The conflict with the Slovaks and Hitler's intervention
liquidated the second Republic; the Czech lands became
the "Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia."
The Protectorat.e of Bohemia and Moravia
The burden of the German occupation was felt not
only in public life, but also by every society and family.
German pressure was terrific; aJbout 300,000 Czechs proclaimed themselves Germans. Children were taught German and sang German songs. The attempt to unite the
parties and groups of the right, which after March 15, 1939,
formed the so-called "National Committee," failed and the
party of the so-called "National Alliance" was formed. Various rightist and fascist groups existed too, illegally but
tolerated, which had little or practically no influence with
the Germans. Opportunistic servants and functionaries of
�34
SLOVAKIA
former political parties better served the purposes of the
Germans than the nationalistic groups. Even though no one
wants to admit it, the fact is that, after the arrival of the
German Army in Pilsen, among the first to be arrested and
liquidated, along with the students, on November 17, 1939,
were also fascists and Vlajkists.
Collaboration with the Germans was ratlher common;
it was rather a question of the personal character of individuals without regard to political belief. Opportunism
played a significant role until the defeat of the Germans at
Stalingrad. Czech resistance against nazism grew with the
approaching end of the war. One of the most notorious
collaborators was Emanuel Moravec, Minister of Enlightenment, former co-worker of Stransky's "Lidove Noviny"
and Benes's Military propagandist (alias Stanislav Yester).
We remember, too, Arno Baise, former communist, who
held the leading position in the trade organization NO-OZ;
and Emanuel Slechta, designated in the Records of the London Department of the Interior as a collaborator, who nevertheless was given a place in the presidium of the Czech
National Socialists and, in 1948, became the chairman of
the communized Czech socialists.
Benes's decrees, prepared by Dr. Jaroslav Stransky in
London, often punishing with the tendency of personal vengeance (recall the cases of Stribrny, R. Beran, and others),
created the possibility of settling personal accounts and
were more or less a weapon for political blackmail. Benes
often assured the world that the Constitution of 1920 was
still valid during the war and after 1945, bu't he ruled by
decrees, flaunting ther~by the highest law of the land,
which he had sworn to uphold.
The Foreign Activity of Dr. Benes
. As an exile in London, Benes proclaimed himself president of Czecho-Slovakia, organized a government, proclaimed war against Hitler and all his allies, borrowed from
Britain for his. activity over fifty million pounds Sterling,
and covered with a veil of secrecy the fate of the gold
treasure that was in foreign lands. Benes welcomed the defeat of France, wlhich showed him no sympathy, organized
�SLOVAKIA
35
a foreign army of a!bout 4,000 men in England, and every
year prophesied the aproaching end of Hitler. Churchill was
criticized openly even during the war, but anyone who attempted to criticize Benes was ruthlessly denounced and liquidated. Benes's vanity and ambition knew no bounds; critics and opponents were arrested or politically isolated
(Gen. Lev Prchala, Deputy Fr. Schwarz, Ambassador Osusky, former Prime Minister M. Hod.fa, Rudolph Be~hyne,
leader of the Czech Social Democrats, Malim, president of
the State Bank,and others).
Benes had quite a bit of opposition not only among the
exiles, but even among the old settlers in the United States
and Canada. In 1940, Czech Catholics still backed Dr. Emil
Ha.cha, the duly elected president of Czecho-Slovakia; Slovak emigration was for the most part for the Slovak State.
While the freethinkers and socialists supported Benes at
the outset, the Communists adopted a wait-and-see attitude. In the United States, the most outspoken against
Benes was the Czech Monsignor F. Mikolasek, whose
scorching articles appeared in the St. Louis "Hlas," and
the "Katolicky Delnik." Many of us expected Dr. Charles
Pergler to openly stand against Benes, since he was evicted
from Czecho-Slovakia by Masaryk and Benes despite his
many merits for the Czecho-Slovak Republic and his deputorial mandate. But he remained silent like so many others.
In the London exile, Dr. Benes committed further
treason against the principles of freedom and democracy:
he prepared the liquidation of civic parties that were always strongly opposed to him. The National Socialists he
had in the palm of his hand; to the Social Democrats and
the Populists he sent his agents (B. Lausman, V. Majer,
P. Tigrid, I. Duch.a.eek, and others). The only problem that
Benes had, as far as the presidency of Czecho-Slovakia
was concerned, were the communists toward whom, however, he had had no internal opposition. In 1939, Benes
wrote in his "Democracy Today and Tomorrow": .
"On the other hand, Communism in its philosophy and morality
has a certain similarity with democracy. It also stands for equality
,of all peoples and nations. It is also humanitarian, : un.ivel"Salistiic,
intellectu-alistic and rationalistic. It is also pacifist, intemationalistic
�36
SLOVAKIA
and stands for a policy of United Nations. From this standpoint its
moral and phil050phical basis is the same as that of democracy."
The main supposition of Benes's agreement with the
Reds was the assurance that with their support he would
again become President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
and be able to rule dictatorially by means of "revolutionary" decrees. He turned his back cooly on the anti-communist Polish exiles with whom, when he needed them to
gain the support of the English, Benes concluded pacts of
friendship and close political and economical cooperation
in the future.
The People's Democracy 1945-1948
The events of 1945-1948 are well known to us. Benes's
decrees contributed to the socialization of Czecho-Slovakia, tJhe expulsion of the Sudeten Germans caused an economical vacuum for many years, and retributional decrees
helped to liquidate the anti-communist opposition.
The height of the immorality of Benes's regime was
the issuance of his decree of October 27, 1945, which amnestied all crimes against humanity during the "punishment of Germans and collaborators" after May 5, 1945. In
the history of justice this amnesty represents a singular
document wher~by a government sanctioned murder, violence, and thievery - something that no dictatorship, not
even the Nazi type, allowed itself up to that time.
Benes, his government, and the non-communist parties indisputably helped to bolshevize Czecho~Slovakia.
They tried to suripass the Reds in cruelty during the expulsion of Germans and Magyars and they out-trumped
them in chauvinism. On June 25, 1945, the National Socialists formed the so-called socialistic bloc with the Social
Democrats and Communists and then tried to create a common socialistic party - similar to the SED in East Germany - which, however, the Communists would not buy.
In 1945 there was no freedom of the press, the government controlling everything. There were a few exceptional
journalists who, from time to time, tried to criticize some
of the existing conditions, but to no avail. The Kosice Program, approved by all the political parties permitted to ex-
�SLOVAKIA
37
ist by Prague and united in the so-called National Front,
clearly stated the limits of post-war freedom for everyone
and was the program for the progressive bolshevization of
Czecho-Slovakia.
The first postwar elections, in May, 1946, brought victory for the Communists who received 38.1 per cent (in
Slovakia only 30.4 per cent) of the votes cast. During the
election campaign the solidarity of the National Front was
not violated in the new government of Klement Gottwald.
All political leaders vowed to remain loyal to the Soviet
Union and unanimously approved the two-year economic
plan which was on the order of the Soviet five-year..plan.
Dr. Hubert Ripka, the National Socialist Minister, zealously propagated the Czecho-Slovak-Soviet Treaty of colla1boration (Dec. 13, 1943) and tied the economy of the country to that of the Soviet Union.
When Stalin forced Prague not to participate in the
Marshall Plan, in 1947, the non-Communist Ministers had
more cause to resign then than they had in February 1948.
At that time, however, the Ministers still speculated that
they would be able to continue to share power with the
Reds. They were not concerned about the principle of freedom, democracy, or western orientation; they simply
wanted to remain in power.
The resignation of twelve non-communist Ministers
(out of a total of 26), headed by Dr. Peter Zenkl, on February 20, 1948, helped only the Communists to gain all
positions which tJhey did not occupy up to that time. The
Reds were completely prepared for t 1he events of February
1948, whereas the non-communist parties were not. In
fact they played into the hands of the Reds. In the fall of
1947, several anti-Communist deputies had been liquidated
by the National Front coalition of Benes-Gottwald. The
Reds had no trouble in finding quislings and informers to
oust the resigned ministers and their adherents from the
parties and replacing them with "reliaible" people. Dr.
Zenkl and company - after President Benes did what
Gottwald asked him to do - then realized that they were
through governing. Some were arrested but many of them
departed to the West, the Reds doing practically nothing
�38
SLOVAKIA
to stop them. The blackguards had done their work, they
were free to go.
The Present Communist Czecho-Slovakia
After February, 1948, political persecution had free
reign, the decisions of the People's Courts from the years
1945-1948 were revised and new processes initiated. Tens
of thousands citizens left the Republic. The Communist
Party took over all positions; the Social Democrats united
with the Communists on June 27, 1948; the National Socialists, changing their name to "Czech Socialists," recognized the leading role of the Communists and today are
criticizing themselves for their "bourgeois past"; Sramek's
Populists became the party of Catholic Socialism with the
task of completing the collectivization of agriculture. 'Dhe
Communist Party and its secret police ruthlessly liquidated all non-communist influence and practically all possibility of resistance, including that of the ecclesiastical
hierachy, which could perhaps hinder their progress toward socialism and communism. Small industrial enterprises, up to 1948 not affected by Benes's decrees, were nationalized, as were gradually even the smaller businesses
and trades. At the same time the industrialization of the
Czech lands and Slovakia was increased, costing billions of
crowns which lowered the living standard of the inhabitants to a minimum.
The Communist party purged itself of "undesirable"
elements, deviationists and nationalists, thus ridding itself
of pre-war malcontents. In the end Rudolph Slansky, Secretary-General of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party,
and ten other leading Reds were executed November 27,
1952. They were charged with "anti-State activities, espionage, Zionism, and economic sa!botage." Gottwald's group
within the party was victorious over the Slansky faction,
•b ut Gottwald did not enjoy his victory very long. He
died nine days after Stalin in 1953 (March 14). After a
t!hree year purge the situation within the Communist Party
became sta!bilized in 1953.
The money reform of June 1, 1953, with which some
dissatisfaction was displayed in various places, was sup-
�SLOVAKIA
39
posed to raise the living standard of the people and improve the economical situation. The buying power of the
Czecho-Slovak crown was restored and the quality of products became better. Prices of commodities and wages of
workers were adjusted, swelling the ranks of the people
who had little. From 1956 the Red regime has been using
more refined methods of psychological persuasion with the
peasants, so that by October 1, 1959, only 19 per cent of
the land remained in private hands. All sectors of political
and economical life have been patterned after the Soviet
model. Industrial production, according to official statistics, was four times higher in 1959 than in 1938, and by
1965 it is supposed to be sixteen times higher. In Slovakia, industrial production increased seven times over that
in 1937. The standard of living, however, has not been keeping up with increased production. Prices on many necessities are still rather higih.
A large majority of the population is not communist,
nor is it happy with the communist regime. Annually,
however, people who knew better times are dying; their
places are being taken over by the younger generation
which knows little else than "people's democracy." The successes of the Red regimes with sputniks and luniks has
influenced the thinking of many; as has also the policy of
appeasement and containment of the West. Active resistance against the Reds is practically nil. To hold onto what
people have and perhaps for more material advantage,
many people are cooperating with the Reds.
In 1960 we saw new changes and reorganization. Some
200,000 employees in the administration of the State were
made available for industry and agriculture with the dissolution of the provincial system which was replaced by
ten larger economic regions. Great changes took place also
in the organization of work; gradually two shifts are being instituted in all the larger enterprises. A new Constitution has been adopted to replace the Constitution of 1920.
If we criticize the "golden times" of the First Republic and do not mention the many positive deeds of that
period, it is because the First Republic did not fulfill the
promises of the Castle propaganda. Worse, however, is
�40
SLOVAKIA
the fact that the representative s of the First Republic
could not strengthen the morale of the people which was
shaken by the long hegemony of the Habsburgs, and Benes' s capitulation broke many a backbone. Neither was
morale helped by the Protectorate; and it attained a new
low after 1945 when the very people who were expected to
possess so much morality willingly collaborated with the
enemies of all morality.
The Czech nation will live even after communism. Its
tragedy was caused in 1918 by politicians who cared not
about national interests, a better future , solidarity and moral strength, but in the first place sought to satisfy their
own ambitions (Benes) and their own glorification (Masaryk), etc. Of course, indirectly our entire nation is responsible for the development that took place from 1918
to 1948. It allowed itself to be deceived by false slogans,
legends, hypocritical propaganda, and failed to heed the
warnings of really devoted politicians (Kramar, Dyk, Machar, etc.). Masaryk's slogan "evolution is going to the
left" and Benes's collaboration with the Reds greatly facilitated the government of the Communists.
Some of those responsi1ble for our national tragedy
are still among us in exile; they have the brazen impertinence to organize circles of Czech interests (The Council
of Free Czecho-Slovakia, the Czech National Socialist Party in exile, etc.) with feelers in American societies for
exiles, such as Radio Free Europe (RFE), Assembly of
Captive European Nations (ACEN), and American Czech
societies. To the wide masses of our countrymen in exile
they cannot serve as an exemplary model, and, therefore,
we notice in our exile increasing influences of materialism,
national callousness, egocentrism, chicanery and intrigue,
hypocrisy and fraud. Of course, not in our entire exile, but
in a good part of it. And it is the question of our morality
that will decide whether our exile will be a,ble to live
through the next several years which will be according to
all indications, very tough and ruthless years.
(Vladimir Pekelsky, a Crech in exile, is the editor ,an/cl pu/bli,s her
o'f the CzOC'h peniodidal "Sbornik Bohemia" which is pulblislh~d in
Koln,Ehrenfold, W. Germany.)
�
SLOVAKIA
27
CZECHO-SWVAKIA YESTERDAY AND TODAY
BY VLADIMiR PEKEILSKY
In the past several years some writers of our Czech
exile have attempted to diagnose the tragedy of us all at
home and in foreign lands. But they have had little success
with it. J. M. Kolar, for example, is today already forgotten
and the more actual Dr. Radimsky has been elevated particularly by publishers and the Czech National Socialists.
Both authors came out with much that was true, but they
either did not want to or did not know how to express the
whole truth. Perhaps they feared the consequences. And
fear has big eyes. Nevertheless, many times it is not only
fear, but opportunism and various other interests which
prevent authors from writing about matters that might
interest readers the most. It was just this that inspired me
to touch upon problems which still are strictly taboo in
most Czech exile publications.
Czecho-Slovakia 1918-1938
Today very few of our people want to recall the whole
truth about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Without regard to nationality and political affiliation, that is. The
younger generation, born after 1925, did not know the first
Repu blic and, therefore, cannot make any judgments of it
from personal experiences. For us oldsters it meant much,
though only 20 years in the thousand-year history of our
Czech nation, and the judgment of history may arouse only
criticism, because with the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia the road for modern dictatorships into Central Europe was facilitated. In exile we have become accustomed
to read - from articles of former collaborators of Dr.
Edward Benes - nothing but praise about the first republic. The writers deliberately fail to see the state bankruptcies of 1938-1939 and 1945-1948, the internal causes
thereof. They blame everything on outside intervention.
The first Republic was presented to the world as a
model of democracy, freedom, state order and welfare, and,
were it not - according to them - for the bad Germans
1
�28
SLOVAKIA
and Russians, it still could have been the "perfection" it
was. Not a word is said a'bout the patronage of France.
Thus they continue to falsify the facts, just as they did
during the time of Masaryk and Benes w'hen huge sums
were paid out to foreign journals and journalists to sing
nothing but praises aibout the first Republic.
Of course, we can and we should recall the many
good things about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Yet it
would be irresponsible of us if we did not look into the
causes of the bankruptcy and collapse of democratic Czecho-Slovakia within ourselves and in internal circumstances. Dr. Vaclav Boucek, principal defender of Masaryk and
Benes, did not flatter the state system of Czecho-Slovakia
when he described it as a "quasi-democracy with a quasiparliamentary system."
A multitude of good people, financially well-founded
groups, investors, state officers, but also political barterers
were satisfied with the then Prague ·r egime. The propertyless groups of inhabitants, the indebted peasants and
home owners, the unemployed and the adherents of nonCzech nationalities (e.g., the greater unemployment in the
German sectors and the vain attempts of the new Slovak
intelligentsia to fill positions in the public life of Slovakia)
looked upon the state system with more or less criticism.
And today very few of our people want to admit that comIJ11mism had a significant voice in our political life from
the very first years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But
the fact is that it did. The following statistics show the
results of three elections, the mandates won by the respective parties:
Politica•l Party
cs Social Demo.c ratic (1)
cs People's Party (2)
c.s
A1grarian ORepulblioam,) (3)
C"'5 Na:ti,o nal Socialist (4)
C-S Niattiona,l Democratic (5)
C,S Tradesmen's
C-S Progressive Socialist
Slovak Na-tionail (6)
(Hlinka's) Slovak People's (7)
Czech Na,tcional Fascist
'Mand-at-es won by tihe Parties
1920
1925
1-935
33
29
3'1
28
415
24
28
113'
13
74
1,9
6
3
1~
23
38
22
45
28
17
l:'7
22
6
�29
SLOVAKIA
German Sociialist Democratic
German Community
German Nationalist
German Nat'io.n1al So,ci,a iist
German Agrariain
German Christian Socialists
German Democraili:c
Sudeten Germ-run,
Magyar Agrarian
Miaigyar-Germain Soc. Dem.
Magy,a r Christian Socia,Jist
Ma,gyair Bloc
GS Communist (8)
Others
Tota,] Number of Mandates
17
111
1-0
7
1,1
24
10
5
1,3
5
6
44
1
4
5
4
9
30
285
300
300
(1) The main worker's Gsocialist) party founded in 11878.
(2) Hliruka's Slovak People's Party voted with this party in the
19!20 elec1Jiions and was allowed 12 manda:tes, 1while the resp.
Czeoho,Slovak P,e ople's Pa,r ty (Sra1mek's) got 21. The largest
Slovak politi'c al p,arty in Slovakia.
(3) Founded by Amltonin Svehla in 1899.
(4) Founded by Czeclh soci-a.Jists in 1896. Dr. Edward Benes later
lbecame its leader.
(5) Fiounded tby Dr. Kramar in 19118 ; comlbi·n ed witlh the Dle'c.h
Nation/al Union Party (Strilbrny's) be!fo,r e the 19315 elections.
(6) Founded be'fore fhe 1872 elections. In 19315 it voted wiith
Hlinka's party as the Autonomist BJ.oc.
(7) The Slovatk People's (Populist) :Party was founded by !Father
Andrew Hlinika, Dec. 5, 1905.
(8) The Czecho-'SJ,o,v ak (iread "Cm;)OH") Communist Party was
fuunijed Nov. 2, 1920, after .brea~ing with the So'Ci-a•l Democrats; the deputies joining it: 23 Czeeho..Slovak S1oci1al Democraits, 3 German Social Democrats, aind 1· Ma,g;yar Soci,al
Democrat.
(The parties qualified as "Czecho-Slovak" were in fact
Czech-dominated parties · with affiliates in Slovakia. There
were only two genuine SLOVAK political parties: the IDinka Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National Party;
both supported autonomy for Slovakia, the Pittsburgh Pact
of May 30, 1918. - Ed. note).
The municipal election in Prague, May 29, 1938, showed
the following five parties. with the largest vote: Cze<:h National Socialists - 151,600; Communists - 99,900; Social
Democrats - 75,809; National Unity - 68,007; Czech Populist - 37,749.
In the 1925 parliamentary elections the Communist
�30
SLOVAKIA
Party received 933,711 votes; ten years later (1935) it
got 849,0000 votes.
Do the above statistics warrant the frequently used
phrase "Masaryk's or Benes's Republic" and calling the citizens of Czecho-Slovakia "the children of Masaryk"?
Would any Czech want to say that the communists, Henleinists, Magyars, Poles, and Slovaks considered themselves "children of Masaryk"? It is a fact that even the
Czech rightists criticized or repudiated Masaryk in a
large measure. Not only the extreme groups but even a
large part of the Czech National Democrats, Agrarians, and
adherents of the Czech People's Party in Moravia.
We know that during the rule of Masaryk and Benes
many things were done which were not honorable. For example, already in 1924 freedom of the press was limited
by Law No. 124, and the freedom of the press in the "democratic Czecho-:Slovak Republic," so highly praised by
Radio Free Europe even today, in reality looked much
less free than in France, the United States and England.
Various publications, not only those of the opposition,
were frequently confiscated and censored and were issued
with "white windows" or as "corrected" issues after censorship. At that time it was said that the journalists
were thereby trained "to worship at the willows."
,'
Corruption was extensive, but no law could be promulgated to wipe it out because political parties and many
government people were against passing such a law. Hundreds of millions of crowns thus disappeared in bottomless
pockets. We still remember the alcohol case, the gasoline
affair, the corruption in the sugar business, in the construction of the electrical plant in Ervenice and the Fenix
Insurance affair, and the corruption connected with the
land reform, the parceling out of surplus estates.
In tlhe first Republic even the elections cannot be
called- truly democratic. The broad masses of the people
were not satisfied with the electoral system, because: they
were not allowed to choose candidates. The law, however,
ordered all citizens .to take part in the elections and to vote
for the political parties and their selected candidates. Ob-
�SLOVAKIA
31
viously many incapable people thus became members of
the parliament, interested not in the welfare of the people
and the country, but in the first place in the welfare and
power of their respective parties. Corruption flourished.
Only the political key was used in forming a government
and qualifications for a ministerial position meant practically nothing. The parties controlled all public service
jobs in the State on the national and local levels. Since one
had a large selection of political parties, quite a few citizens carried memib ership cards of several political parties.
Thus was the first Czecho-Slovak Republic undermined, as well as confidence in the State and the democratic system which hypocritically bore the slogan "Truth
prevails" on its escutcheon - which even the present communist regime has allowed to remain on the State insignia.
The enthusiasm with which the Slovaks and Czechs
welcomed the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
in 1918 soon cooled and forced many hot heads into opposition. The am1bitious Dr. Benes, however, knew how to deal
with the opposition: he liquidated it ruthlessly. To this
end he used his secret archive which he had made up for
opportune moments, even doctors' opinions, as in the case
of Stnbrny. Democracy became limited during the lifetime
of T. G. Masaryk, and more so during the presidency of
Dr. Benes.
Masaryk did not seek the support of political parties;
he was above all parties. Benes, on the other hand, depended on the support of t!he National Socialists, who, in 1935
tried, though unsuccessfully, to promulgate a law to dissolve all political parties and to establish a new uniform
State party with himself at its head. The National Socialists must be regard~d as the grave-diggers of CzechoSlovakia and democracy; their active collaboration with
the communists during the war and after is still fresh in
our memories.
The parasites of Benes's political clique refuse to admit their guilt in the catastrophe. They still sing praises
to Bene~ with the help of whose name they hope to find
favor with Czech settlers in Canada and the United States.
�32
SLOVAKIA
Ruthenia illustrate s Benes's political character quite clearly. During a visit to that country in May, 1934, when he
was still Foreign Minister, Benes said: "Czecho-S lovakia,
having become the holder (trustee) of Sub-Carp athian Russia by the decision of the Peace Conferenc e, will never give
up this land, it will never allow any revisionism in this
question and shall defend this land with you to its last
drop of blood" (Narodna Politika: May 6, 1924) .
We know just how Benes defended Ruthenia : he negotiated with Soviet Ambassa dor Majsky in London, in
1941, to sell out that hapless country.
On July 4, 1938, Dr. Benes prophesie d to a deputatio n
of Sokols: "Nothing will happen tha,t might harm our State,
our Republic and our democrat ic regime; in this jubilee
year of our Republic, with our sincere effort for just colla:boratio n with all citizens of all nationalit ies, we shall demonstrat e anew to the world that our State is just, solid,
ready to resist aggressio n, mature and peace-lov ing." The
result: Munich!
To complem ent the shameles s character of Benes in
his statemen t, published in the "Wiedom osci polskie" (June
15, 1941): "And when a man thinks of it, we Czechs nevertheless did foresee actually everythin g!" When a Polish
journalis t asked him whether he really meant everythin g,
Benes replied: "Yes, I mean everythin g!"
The Munich catastrop he, the capitulati on and flight
of Dr. Benes into foreign lands did away for the time being with any remnants of sympafili y the Czech nation had
for Benes (the Slovaks and others had none for him). In
1945, the Czech nation welcomed his return, but the enthusiasm displayed was not for him but rather an expressio n
of joy that the war and Nazi occupatio n had ended.
The Second Republic
Post-Mun ich Czecho-S lovakia, the second Republic, was
of short duration. It was still free, but betrayed by all its
foreign friends; it was smaller in area and without great
!hopes of preservat ion. It was also without Benes, who had
voluntari ly resigned from the presidenc y and, after his
�SLOVAKIA
33
flight from Czecho-Slovakia, had even wished much success to the new, constitutionally elected, President, Dr.
Emil Ha.cha. With the voluntary joining of the parties of
the right in the Party of National Unity and the parties
of the left in the Labor Party, an effort was expressed to
simplify and cure the ills of political life.
The relations of the first Republic, particularly the
person and environment of Dr. Benes, were the target of
wide criticism, especially from the Party of National Unity
which, surprisingly enough, even the National Socialists
joined. The party renounced Benes and favored the right.
Its chairman, J. V. Klofac, identifying Czech National Socialism with Hitler's National Socialism, said: "We must
not only catch up with Germany and its National Socialism,
but surpass it .... In Central Europe we must give a model
example of coexistence of the Slovanic peoples and Germans, which is all the easier for us, since we are also connected by blood. My Father's mother was a full-blooded
German." And referring to Benes quite obviously, Klofac
proclaimed: "We must repudiate everyone who prattles
like a child about the approaching moment that shall return to us everything we lost in October - and which is
definitely lost." No Czech political party so completely reversed itself up to that time.
The conflict with the Slovaks and Hitler's intervention
liquidated the second Republic; the Czech lands became
the "Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia."
The Protectorat.e of Bohemia and Moravia
The burden of the German occupation was felt not
only in public life, but also by every society and family.
German pressure was terrific; aJbout 300,000 Czechs proclaimed themselves Germans. Children were taught German and sang German songs. The attempt to unite the
parties and groups of the right, which after March 15, 1939,
formed the so-called "National Committee," failed and the
party of the so-called "National Alliance" was formed. Various rightist and fascist groups existed too, illegally but
tolerated, which had little or practically no influence with
the Germans. Opportunistic servants and functionaries of
�34
SLOVAKIA
former political parties better served the purposes of the
Germans than the nationalistic groups. Even though no one
wants to admit it, the fact is that, after the arrival of the
German Army in Pilsen, among the first to be arrested and
liquidated, along with the students, on November 17, 1939,
were also fascists and Vlajkists.
Collaboration with the Germans was ratlher common;
it was rather a question of the personal character of individuals without regard to political belief. Opportunism
played a significant role until the defeat of the Germans at
Stalingrad. Czech resistance against nazism grew with the
approaching end of the war. One of the most notorious
collaborators was Emanuel Moravec, Minister of Enlightenment, former co-worker of Stransky's "Lidove Noviny"
and Benes's Military propagandist (alias Stanislav Yester).
We remember, too, Arno Baise, former communist, who
held the leading position in the trade organization NO-OZ;
and Emanuel Slechta, designated in the Records of the London Department of the Interior as a collaborator, who nevertheless was given a place in the presidium of the Czech
National Socialists and, in 1948, became the chairman of
the communized Czech socialists.
Benes's decrees, prepared by Dr. Jaroslav Stransky in
London, often punishing with the tendency of personal vengeance (recall the cases of Stribrny, R. Beran, and others),
created the possibility of settling personal accounts and
were more or less a weapon for political blackmail. Benes
often assured the world that the Constitution of 1920 was
still valid during the war and after 1945, bu't he ruled by
decrees, flaunting ther~by the highest law of the land,
which he had sworn to uphold.
The Foreign Activity of Dr. Benes
. As an exile in London, Benes proclaimed himself president of Czecho-Slovakia, organized a government, proclaimed war against Hitler and all his allies, borrowed from
Britain for his. activity over fifty million pounds Sterling,
and covered with a veil of secrecy the fate of the gold
treasure that was in foreign lands. Benes welcomed the defeat of France, wlhich showed him no sympathy, organized
�SLOVAKIA
35
a foreign army of a!bout 4,000 men in England, and every
year prophesied the aproaching end of Hitler. Churchill was
criticized openly even during the war, but anyone who attempted to criticize Benes was ruthlessly denounced and liquidated. Benes's vanity and ambition knew no bounds; critics and opponents were arrested or politically isolated
(Gen. Lev Prchala, Deputy Fr. Schwarz, Ambassador Osusky, former Prime Minister M. Hod.fa, Rudolph Be~hyne,
leader of the Czech Social Democrats, Malim, president of
the State Bank,and others).
Benes had quite a bit of opposition not only among the
exiles, but even among the old settlers in the United States
and Canada. In 1940, Czech Catholics still backed Dr. Emil
Ha.cha, the duly elected president of Czecho-Slovakia; Slovak emigration was for the most part for the Slovak State.
While the freethinkers and socialists supported Benes at
the outset, the Communists adopted a wait-and-see attitude. In the United States, the most outspoken against
Benes was the Czech Monsignor F. Mikolasek, whose
scorching articles appeared in the St. Louis "Hlas," and
the "Katolicky Delnik." Many of us expected Dr. Charles
Pergler to openly stand against Benes, since he was evicted
from Czecho-Slovakia by Masaryk and Benes despite his
many merits for the Czecho-Slovak Republic and his deputorial mandate. But he remained silent like so many others.
In the London exile, Dr. Benes committed further
treason against the principles of freedom and democracy:
he prepared the liquidation of civic parties that were always strongly opposed to him. The National Socialists he
had in the palm of his hand; to the Social Democrats and
the Populists he sent his agents (B. Lausman, V. Majer,
P. Tigrid, I. Duch.a.eek, and others). The only problem that
Benes had, as far as the presidency of Czecho-Slovakia
was concerned, were the communists toward whom, however, he had had no internal opposition. In 1939, Benes
wrote in his "Democracy Today and Tomorrow": .
"On the other hand, Communism in its philosophy and morality
has a certain similarity with democracy. It also stands for equality
,of all peoples and nations. It is also humanitarian, : un.ivel"Salistiic,
intellectu-alistic and rationalistic. It is also pacifist, intemationalistic
�36
SLOVAKIA
and stands for a policy of United Nations. From this standpoint its
moral and phil050phical basis is the same as that of democracy."
The main supposition of Benes's agreement with the
Reds was the assurance that with their support he would
again become President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
and be able to rule dictatorially by means of "revolutionary" decrees. He turned his back cooly on the anti-communist Polish exiles with whom, when he needed them to
gain the support of the English, Benes concluded pacts of
friendship and close political and economical cooperation
in the future.
The People's Democracy 1945-1948
The events of 1945-1948 are well known to us. Benes's
decrees contributed to the socialization of Czecho-Slovakia, tJhe expulsion of the Sudeten Germans caused an economical vacuum for many years, and retributional decrees
helped to liquidate the anti-communist opposition.
The height of the immorality of Benes's regime was
the issuance of his decree of October 27, 1945, which amnestied all crimes against humanity during the "punishment of Germans and collaborators" after May 5, 1945. In
the history of justice this amnesty represents a singular
document wher~by a government sanctioned murder, violence, and thievery - something that no dictatorship, not
even the Nazi type, allowed itself up to that time.
Benes, his government, and the non-communist parties indisputably helped to bolshevize Czecho~Slovakia.
They tried to suripass the Reds in cruelty during the expulsion of Germans and Magyars and they out-trumped
them in chauvinism. On June 25, 1945, the National Socialists formed the so-called socialistic bloc with the Social
Democrats and Communists and then tried to create a common socialistic party - similar to the SED in East Germany - which, however, the Communists would not buy.
In 1945 there was no freedom of the press, the government controlling everything. There were a few exceptional
journalists who, from time to time, tried to criticize some
of the existing conditions, but to no avail. The Kosice Program, approved by all the political parties permitted to ex-
�SLOVAKIA
37
ist by Prague and united in the so-called National Front,
clearly stated the limits of post-war freedom for everyone
and was the program for the progressive bolshevization of
Czecho-Slovakia.
The first postwar elections, in May, 1946, brought victory for the Communists who received 38.1 per cent (in
Slovakia only 30.4 per cent) of the votes cast. During the
election campaign the solidarity of the National Front was
not violated in the new government of Klement Gottwald.
All political leaders vowed to remain loyal to the Soviet
Union and unanimously approved the two-year economic
plan which was on the order of the Soviet five-year..plan.
Dr. Hubert Ripka, the National Socialist Minister, zealously propagated the Czecho-Slovak-Soviet Treaty of colla1boration (Dec. 13, 1943) and tied the economy of the country to that of the Soviet Union.
When Stalin forced Prague not to participate in the
Marshall Plan, in 1947, the non-Communist Ministers had
more cause to resign then than they had in February 1948.
At that time, however, the Ministers still speculated that
they would be able to continue to share power with the
Reds. They were not concerned about the principle of freedom, democracy, or western orientation; they simply
wanted to remain in power.
The resignation of twelve non-communist Ministers
(out of a total of 26), headed by Dr. Peter Zenkl, on February 20, 1948, helped only the Communists to gain all
positions which tJhey did not occupy up to that time. The
Reds were completely prepared for t 1he events of February
1948, whereas the non-communist parties were not. In
fact they played into the hands of the Reds. In the fall of
1947, several anti-Communist deputies had been liquidated
by the National Front coalition of Benes-Gottwald. The
Reds had no trouble in finding quislings and informers to
oust the resigned ministers and their adherents from the
parties and replacing them with "reliaible" people. Dr.
Zenkl and company - after President Benes did what
Gottwald asked him to do - then realized that they were
through governing. Some were arrested but many of them
departed to the West, the Reds doing practically nothing
�38
SLOVAKIA
to stop them. The blackguards had done their work, they
were free to go.
The Present Communist Czecho-Slovakia
After February, 1948, political persecution had free
reign, the decisions of the People's Courts from the years
1945-1948 were revised and new processes initiated. Tens
of thousands citizens left the Republic. The Communist
Party took over all positions; the Social Democrats united
with the Communists on June 27, 1948; the National Socialists, changing their name to "Czech Socialists," recognized the leading role of the Communists and today are
criticizing themselves for their "bourgeois past"; Sramek's
Populists became the party of Catholic Socialism with the
task of completing the collectivization of agriculture. 'Dhe
Communist Party and its secret police ruthlessly liquidated all non-communist influence and practically all possibility of resistance, including that of the ecclesiastical
hierachy, which could perhaps hinder their progress toward socialism and communism. Small industrial enterprises, up to 1948 not affected by Benes's decrees, were nationalized, as were gradually even the smaller businesses
and trades. At the same time the industrialization of the
Czech lands and Slovakia was increased, costing billions of
crowns which lowered the living standard of the inhabitants to a minimum.
The Communist party purged itself of "undesirable"
elements, deviationists and nationalists, thus ridding itself
of pre-war malcontents. In the end Rudolph Slansky, Secretary-General of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party,
and ten other leading Reds were executed November 27,
1952. They were charged with "anti-State activities, espionage, Zionism, and economic sa!botage." Gottwald's group
within the party was victorious over the Slansky faction,
•b ut Gottwald did not enjoy his victory very long. He
died nine days after Stalin in 1953 (March 14). After a
t!hree year purge the situation within the Communist Party
became sta!bilized in 1953.
The money reform of June 1, 1953, with which some
dissatisfaction was displayed in various places, was sup-
�SLOVAKIA
39
posed to raise the living standard of the people and improve the economical situation. The buying power of the
Czecho-Slovak crown was restored and the quality of products became better. Prices of commodities and wages of
workers were adjusted, swelling the ranks of the people
who had little. From 1956 the Red regime has been using
more refined methods of psychological persuasion with the
peasants, so that by October 1, 1959, only 19 per cent of
the land remained in private hands. All sectors of political
and economical life have been patterned after the Soviet
model. Industrial production, according to official statistics, was four times higher in 1959 than in 1938, and by
1965 it is supposed to be sixteen times higher. In Slovakia, industrial production increased seven times over that
in 1937. The standard of living, however, has not been keeping up with increased production. Prices on many necessities are still rather higih.
A large majority of the population is not communist,
nor is it happy with the communist regime. Annually,
however, people who knew better times are dying; their
places are being taken over by the younger generation
which knows little else than "people's democracy." The successes of the Red regimes with sputniks and luniks has
influenced the thinking of many; as has also the policy of
appeasement and containment of the West. Active resistance against the Reds is practically nil. To hold onto what
people have and perhaps for more material advantage,
many people are cooperating with the Reds.
In 1960 we saw new changes and reorganization. Some
200,000 employees in the administration of the State were
made available for industry and agriculture with the dissolution of the provincial system which was replaced by
ten larger economic regions. Great changes took place also
in the organization of work; gradually two shifts are being instituted in all the larger enterprises. A new Constitution has been adopted to replace the Constitution of 1920.
If we criticize the "golden times" of the First Republic and do not mention the many positive deeds of that
period, it is because the First Republic did not fulfill the
promises of the Castle propaganda. Worse, however, is
�40
SLOVAKIA
the fact that the representative s of the First Republic
could not strengthen the morale of the people which was
shaken by the long hegemony of the Habsburgs, and Benes' s capitulation broke many a backbone. Neither was
morale helped by the Protectorate; and it attained a new
low after 1945 when the very people who were expected to
possess so much morality willingly collaborated with the
enemies of all morality.
The Czech nation will live even after communism. Its
tragedy was caused in 1918 by politicians who cared not
about national interests, a better future , solidarity and moral strength, but in the first place sought to satisfy their
own ambitions (Benes) and their own glorification (Masaryk), etc. Of course, indirectly our entire nation is responsible for the development that took place from 1918
to 1948. It allowed itself to be deceived by false slogans,
legends, hypocritical propaganda, and failed to heed the
warnings of really devoted politicians (Kramar, Dyk, Machar, etc.). Masaryk's slogan "evolution is going to the
left" and Benes's collaboration with the Reds greatly facilitated the government of the Communists.
Some of those responsi1ble for our national tragedy
are still among us in exile; they have the brazen impertinence to organize circles of Czech interests (The Council
of Free Czecho-Slovakia, the Czech National Socialist Party in exile, etc.) with feelers in American societies for
exiles, such as Radio Free Europe (RFE), Assembly of
Captive European Nations (ACEN), and American Czech
societies. To the wide masses of our countrymen in exile
they cannot serve as an exemplary model, and, therefore,
we notice in our exile increasing influences of materialism,
national callousness, egocentrism, chicanery and intrigue,
hypocrisy and fraud. Of course, not in our entire exile, but
in a good part of it. And it is the question of our morality
that will decide whether our exile will be a,ble to live
through the next several years which will be according to
all indications, very tough and ruthless years.
(Vladimir Pekelsky, a Crech in exile, is the editor ,an/cl pu/bli,s her
o'f the CzOC'h peniodidal "Sbornik Bohemia" which is pulblislh~d in
Koln,Ehrenfold, W. Germany.)
�
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
27
CZECHO-SWVAKIA YESTERDAY AND TODAY
BY VLADIMiR PEKEILSKY
In the past several years some writers of our Czech
exile have attempted to diagnose the tragedy of us all at
home and in foreign lands. But they have had little success
with it. J. M. Kolar, for example, is today already forgotten
and the more actual Dr. Radimsky has been elevated particularly by publishers and the Czech National Socialists.
Both authors came out with much that was true, but they
either did not want to or did not know how to express the
whole truth. Perhaps they feared the consequences. And
fear has big eyes. Nevertheless, many times it is not only
fear, but opportunism and various other interests which
prevent authors from writing about matters that might
interest readers the most. It was just this that inspired me
to touch upon problems which still are strictly taboo in
most Czech exile publications.
Czecho-Slovakia 1918-1938
Today very few of our people want to recall the whole
truth about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Without regard to nationality and political affiliation, that is. The
younger generation, born after 1925, did not know the first
Repu blic and, therefore, cannot make any judgments of it
from personal experiences. For us oldsters it meant much,
though only 20 years in the thousand-year history of our
Czech nation, and the judgment of history may arouse only
criticism, because with the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia the road for modern dictatorships into Central Europe was facilitated. In exile we have become accustomed
to read - from articles of former collaborators of Dr.
Edward Benes - nothing but praise about the first republic. The writers deliberately fail to see the state bankruptcies of 1938-1939 and 1945-1948, the internal causes
thereof. They blame everything on outside intervention.
The first Republic was presented to the world as a
model of democracy, freedom, state order and welfare, and,
were it not - according to them - for the bad Germans
1
28
SLOVAKIA
and Russians, it still could have been the "perfection" it
was. Not a word is said a'bout the patronage of France.
Thus they continue to falsify the facts, just as they did
during the time of Masaryk and Benes w'hen huge sums
were paid out to foreign journals and journalists to sing
nothing but praises aibout the first Republic.
Of course, we can and we should recall the many
good things about the first Czecho-Slovak Republic. Yet it
would be irresponsible of us if we did not look into the
causes of the bankruptcy and collapse of democratic Czecho-Slovakia within ourselves and in internal circumstances. Dr. Vaclav Boucek, principal defender of Masaryk and
Benes, did not flatter the state system of Czecho-Slovakia
when he described it as a "quasi-democracy with a quasiparliamentary system."
A multitude of good people, financially well-founded
groups, investors, state officers, but also political barterers
were satisfied with the then Prague ·r egime. The propertyless groups of inhabitants, the indebted peasants and
home owners, the unemployed and the adherents of nonCzech nationalities (e.g., the greater unemployment in the
German sectors and the vain attempts of the new Slovak
intelligentsia to fill positions in the public life of Slovakia)
looked upon the state system with more or less criticism.
And today very few of our people want to admit that comIJ11mism had a significant voice in our political life from
the very first years of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But
the fact is that it did. The following statistics show the
results of three elections, the mandates won by the respective parties:
Politica•l Party
cs Social Demo.c ratic (1)
cs People's Party (2)
c.s
A1grarian ORepulblioam,) (3)
C"'5 Na:ti,o nal Socialist (4)
C-S Niattiona,l Democratic (5)
C,S Tradesmen's
C-S Progressive Socialist
Slovak Na-tionail (6)
(Hlinka's) Slovak People's (7)
Czech Na,tcional Fascist
'Mand-at-es won by tihe Parties
1920
1925
1-935
33
29
3'1
28
415
24
28
113'
13
74
1,9
6
3
1~
23
38
22
45
28
17
l:'7
22
6
29
SLOVAKIA
German Sociialist Democratic
German Community
German Nationalist
German Nat'io.n1al So,ci,a iist
German Agrariain
German Christian Socialists
German Democraili:c
Sudeten Germ-run,
Magyar Agrarian
Miaigyar-Germain Soc. Dem.
Magy,a r Christian Socia,Jist
Ma,gyair Bloc
GS Communist (8)
Others
Tota,] Number of Mandates
17
111
1-0
7
1,1
24
10
5
1,3
5
6
44
1
4
5
4
9
30
285
300
300
(1) The main worker's Gsocialist) party founded in 11878.
(2) Hliruka's Slovak People's Party voted with this party in the
19!20 elec1Jiions and was allowed 12 manda:tes, 1while the resp.
Czeoho,Slovak P,e ople's Pa,r ty (Sra1mek's) got 21. The largest
Slovak politi'c al p,arty in Slovakia.
(3) Founded by Amltonin Svehla in 1899.
(4) Founded by Czeclh soci-a.Jists in 1896. Dr. Edward Benes later
lbecame its leader.
(5) Fiounded tby Dr. Kramar in 19118 ; comlbi·n ed witlh the Dle'c.h
Nation/al Union Party (Strilbrny's) be!fo,r e the 19315 elections.
(6) Founded be'fore fhe 1872 elections. In 19315 it voted wiith
Hlinka's party as the Autonomist BJ.oc.
(7) The Slovatk People's (Populist) :Party was founded by !Father
Andrew Hlinika, Dec. 5, 1905.
(8) The Czecho-'SJ,o,v ak (iread "Cm;)OH") Communist Party was
fuunijed Nov. 2, 1920, after .brea~ing with the So'Ci-a•l Democrats; the deputies joining it: 23 Czeeho..Slovak S1oci1al Democraits, 3 German Social Democrats, aind 1· Ma,g;yar Soci,al
Democrat.
(The parties qualified as "Czecho-Slovak" were in fact
Czech-dominated parties · with affiliates in Slovakia. There
were only two genuine SLOVAK political parties: the IDinka Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National Party;
both supported autonomy for Slovakia, the Pittsburgh Pact
of May 30, 1918. - Ed. note).
The municipal election in Prague, May 29, 1938, showed
the following five parties. with the largest vote: Cze<:h National Socialists - 151,600; Communists - 99,900; Social
Democrats - 75,809; National Unity - 68,007; Czech Populist - 37,749.
In the 1925 parliamentary elections the Communist
30
SLOVAKIA
Party received 933,711 votes; ten years later (1935) it
got 849,0000 votes.
Do the above statistics warrant the frequently used
phrase "Masaryk's or Benes's Republic" and calling the citizens of Czecho-Slovakia "the children of Masaryk"?
Would any Czech want to say that the communists, Henleinists, Magyars, Poles, and Slovaks considered themselves "children of Masaryk"? It is a fact that even the
Czech rightists criticized or repudiated Masaryk in a
large measure. Not only the extreme groups but even a
large part of the Czech National Democrats, Agrarians, and
adherents of the Czech People's Party in Moravia.
We know that during the rule of Masaryk and Benes
many things were done which were not honorable. For example, already in 1924 freedom of the press was limited
by Law No. 124, and the freedom of the press in the "democratic Czecho-:Slovak Republic," so highly praised by
Radio Free Europe even today, in reality looked much
less free than in France, the United States and England.
Various publications, not only those of the opposition,
were frequently confiscated and censored and were issued
with "white windows" or as "corrected" issues after censorship. At that time it was said that the journalists
were thereby trained "to worship at the willows."
,'
Corruption was extensive, but no law could be promulgated to wipe it out because political parties and many
government people were against passing such a law. Hundreds of millions of crowns thus disappeared in bottomless
pockets. We still remember the alcohol case, the gasoline
affair, the corruption in the sugar business, in the construction of the electrical plant in Ervenice and the Fenix
Insurance affair, and the corruption connected with the
land reform, the parceling out of surplus estates.
In tlhe first Republic even the elections cannot be
called- truly democratic. The broad masses of the people
were not satisfied with the electoral system, because: they
were not allowed to choose candidates. The law, however,
ordered all citizens .to take part in the elections and to vote
for the political parties and their selected candidates. Ob-
SLOVAKIA
31
viously many incapable people thus became members of
the parliament, interested not in the welfare of the people
and the country, but in the first place in the welfare and
power of their respective parties. Corruption flourished.
Only the political key was used in forming a government
and qualifications for a ministerial position meant practically nothing. The parties controlled all public service
jobs in the State on the national and local levels. Since one
had a large selection of political parties, quite a few citizens carried memib ership cards of several political parties.
Thus was the first Czecho-Slovak Republic undermined, as well as confidence in the State and the democratic system which hypocritically bore the slogan "Truth
prevails" on its escutcheon - which even the present communist regime has allowed to remain on the State insignia.
The enthusiasm with which the Slovaks and Czechs
welcomed the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
in 1918 soon cooled and forced many hot heads into opposition. The am1bitious Dr. Benes, however, knew how to deal
with the opposition: he liquidated it ruthlessly. To this
end he used his secret archive which he had made up for
opportune moments, even doctors' opinions, as in the case
of Stnbrny. Democracy became limited during the lifetime
of T. G. Masaryk, and more so during the presidency of
Dr. Benes.
Masaryk did not seek the support of political parties;
he was above all parties. Benes, on the other hand, depended on the support of t!he National Socialists, who, in 1935
tried, though unsuccessfully, to promulgate a law to dissolve all political parties and to establish a new uniform
State party with himself at its head. The National Socialists must be regard~d as the grave-diggers of CzechoSlovakia and democracy; their active collaboration with
the communists during the war and after is still fresh in
our memories.
The parasites of Benes's political clique refuse to admit their guilt in the catastrophe. They still sing praises
to Bene~ with the help of whose name they hope to find
favor with Czech settlers in Canada and the United States.
32
SLOVAKIA
Ruthenia illustrate s Benes's political character quite clearly. During a visit to that country in May, 1934, when he
was still Foreign Minister, Benes said: "Czecho-S lovakia,
having become the holder (trustee) of Sub-Carp athian Russia by the decision of the Peace Conferenc e, will never give
up this land, it will never allow any revisionism in this
question and shall defend this land with you to its last
drop of blood" (Narodna Politika: May 6, 1924) .
We know just how Benes defended Ruthenia : he negotiated with Soviet Ambassa dor Majsky in London, in
1941, to sell out that hapless country.
On July 4, 1938, Dr. Benes prophesie d to a deputatio n
of Sokols: "Nothing will happen tha,t might harm our State,
our Republic and our democrat ic regime; in this jubilee
year of our Republic, with our sincere effort for just colla:boratio n with all citizens of all nationalit ies, we shall demonstrat e anew to the world that our State is just, solid,
ready to resist aggressio n, mature and peace-lov ing." The
result: Munich!
To complem ent the shameles s character of Benes in
his statemen t, published in the "Wiedom osci polskie" (June
15, 1941): "And when a man thinks of it, we Czechs nevertheless did foresee actually everythin g!" When a Polish
journalis t asked him whether he really meant everythin g,
Benes replied: "Yes, I mean everythin g!"
The Munich catastrop he, the capitulati on and flight
of Dr. Benes into foreign lands did away for the time being with any remnants of sympafili y the Czech nation had
for Benes (the Slovaks and others had none for him). In
1945, the Czech nation welcomed his return, but the enthusiasm displayed was not for him but rather an expressio n
of joy that the war and Nazi occupatio n had ended.
The Second Republic
Post-Mun ich Czecho-S lovakia, the second Republic, was
of short duration. It was still free, but betrayed by all its
foreign friends; it was smaller in area and without great
!hopes of preservat ion. It was also without Benes, who had
voluntari ly resigned from the presidenc y and, after his
SLOVAKIA
33
flight from Czecho-Slovakia, had even wished much success to the new, constitutionally elected, President, Dr.
Emil Ha.cha. With the voluntary joining of the parties of
the right in the Party of National Unity and the parties
of the left in the Labor Party, an effort was expressed to
simplify and cure the ills of political life.
The relations of the first Republic, particularly the
person and environment of Dr. Benes, were the target of
wide criticism, especially from the Party of National Unity
which, surprisingly enough, even the National Socialists
joined. The party renounced Benes and favored the right.
Its chairman, J. V. Klofac, identifying Czech National Socialism with Hitler's National Socialism, said: "We must
not only catch up with Germany and its National Socialism,
but surpass it .... In Central Europe we must give a model
example of coexistence of the Slovanic peoples and Germans, which is all the easier for us, since we are also connected by blood. My Father's mother was a full-blooded
German." And referring to Benes quite obviously, Klofac
proclaimed: "We must repudiate everyone who prattles
like a child about the approaching moment that shall return to us everything we lost in October - and which is
definitely lost." No Czech political party so completely reversed itself up to that time.
The conflict with the Slovaks and Hitler's intervention
liquidated the second Republic; the Czech lands became
the "Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia."
The Protectorat.e of Bohemia and Moravia
The burden of the German occupation was felt not
only in public life, but also by every society and family.
German pressure was terrific; aJbout 300,000 Czechs proclaimed themselves Germans. Children were taught German and sang German songs. The attempt to unite the
parties and groups of the right, which after March 15, 1939,
formed the so-called "National Committee," failed and the
party of the so-called "National Alliance" was formed. Various rightist and fascist groups existed too, illegally but
tolerated, which had little or practically no influence with
the Germans. Opportunistic servants and functionaries of
34
SLOVAKIA
former political parties better served the purposes of the
Germans than the nationalistic groups. Even though no one
wants to admit it, the fact is that, after the arrival of the
German Army in Pilsen, among the first to be arrested and
liquidated, along with the students, on November 17, 1939,
were also fascists and Vlajkists.
Collaboration with the Germans was ratlher common;
it was rather a question of the personal character of individuals without regard to political belief. Opportunism
played a significant role until the defeat of the Germans at
Stalingrad. Czech resistance against nazism grew with the
approaching end of the war. One of the most notorious
collaborators was Emanuel Moravec, Minister of Enlightenment, former co-worker of Stransky's "Lidove Noviny"
and Benes's Military propagandist (alias Stanislav Yester).
We remember, too, Arno Baise, former communist, who
held the leading position in the trade organization NO-OZ;
and Emanuel Slechta, designated in the Records of the London Department of the Interior as a collaborator, who nevertheless was given a place in the presidium of the Czech
National Socialists and, in 1948, became the chairman of
the communized Czech socialists.
Benes's decrees, prepared by Dr. Jaroslav Stransky in
London, often punishing with the tendency of personal vengeance (recall the cases of Stribrny, R. Beran, and others),
created the possibility of settling personal accounts and
were more or less a weapon for political blackmail. Benes
often assured the world that the Constitution of 1920 was
still valid during the war and after 1945, bu't he ruled by
decrees, flaunting ther~by the highest law of the land,
which he had sworn to uphold.
The Foreign Activity of Dr. Benes
. As an exile in London, Benes proclaimed himself president of Czecho-Slovakia, organized a government, proclaimed war against Hitler and all his allies, borrowed from
Britain for his. activity over fifty million pounds Sterling,
and covered with a veil of secrecy the fate of the gold
treasure that was in foreign lands. Benes welcomed the defeat of France, wlhich showed him no sympathy, organized
SLOVAKIA
35
a foreign army of a!bout 4,000 men in England, and every
year prophesied the aproaching end of Hitler. Churchill was
criticized openly even during the war, but anyone who attempted to criticize Benes was ruthlessly denounced and liquidated. Benes's vanity and ambition knew no bounds; critics and opponents were arrested or politically isolated
(Gen. Lev Prchala, Deputy Fr. Schwarz, Ambassador Osusky, former Prime Minister M. Hod.fa, Rudolph Be~hyne,
leader of the Czech Social Democrats, Malim, president of
the State Bank,and others).
Benes had quite a bit of opposition not only among the
exiles, but even among the old settlers in the United States
and Canada. In 1940, Czech Catholics still backed Dr. Emil
Ha.cha, the duly elected president of Czecho-Slovakia; Slovak emigration was for the most part for the Slovak State.
While the freethinkers and socialists supported Benes at
the outset, the Communists adopted a wait-and-see attitude. In the United States, the most outspoken against
Benes was the Czech Monsignor F. Mikolasek, whose
scorching articles appeared in the St. Louis "Hlas," and
the "Katolicky Delnik." Many of us expected Dr. Charles
Pergler to openly stand against Benes, since he was evicted
from Czecho-Slovakia by Masaryk and Benes despite his
many merits for the Czecho-Slovak Republic and his deputorial mandate. But he remained silent like so many others.
In the London exile, Dr. Benes committed further
treason against the principles of freedom and democracy:
he prepared the liquidation of civic parties that were always strongly opposed to him. The National Socialists he
had in the palm of his hand; to the Social Democrats and
the Populists he sent his agents (B. Lausman, V. Majer,
P. Tigrid, I. Duch.a.eek, and others). The only problem that
Benes had, as far as the presidency of Czecho-Slovakia
was concerned, were the communists toward whom, however, he had had no internal opposition. In 1939, Benes
wrote in his "Democracy Today and Tomorrow": .
"On the other hand, Communism in its philosophy and morality
has a certain similarity with democracy. It also stands for equality
,of all peoples and nations. It is also humanitarian, : un.ivel"Salistiic,
intellectu-alistic and rationalistic. It is also pacifist, intemationalistic
36
SLOVAKIA
and stands for a policy of United Nations. From this standpoint its
moral and phil050phical basis is the same as that of democracy."
The main supposition of Benes's agreement with the
Reds was the assurance that with their support he would
again become President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic
and be able to rule dictatorially by means of "revolutionary" decrees. He turned his back cooly on the anti-communist Polish exiles with whom, when he needed them to
gain the support of the English, Benes concluded pacts of
friendship and close political and economical cooperation
in the future.
The People's Democracy 1945-1948
The events of 1945-1948 are well known to us. Benes's
decrees contributed to the socialization of Czecho-Slovakia, tJhe expulsion of the Sudeten Germans caused an economical vacuum for many years, and retributional decrees
helped to liquidate the anti-communist opposition.
The height of the immorality of Benes's regime was
the issuance of his decree of October 27, 1945, which amnestied all crimes against humanity during the "punishment of Germans and collaborators" after May 5, 1945. In
the history of justice this amnesty represents a singular
document wher~by a government sanctioned murder, violence, and thievery - something that no dictatorship, not
even the Nazi type, allowed itself up to that time.
Benes, his government, and the non-communist parties indisputably helped to bolshevize Czecho~Slovakia.
They tried to suripass the Reds in cruelty during the expulsion of Germans and Magyars and they out-trumped
them in chauvinism. On June 25, 1945, the National Socialists formed the so-called socialistic bloc with the Social
Democrats and Communists and then tried to create a common socialistic party - similar to the SED in East Germany - which, however, the Communists would not buy.
In 1945 there was no freedom of the press, the government controlling everything. There were a few exceptional
journalists who, from time to time, tried to criticize some
of the existing conditions, but to no avail. The Kosice Program, approved by all the political parties permitted to ex-
SLOVAKIA
37
ist by Prague and united in the so-called National Front,
clearly stated the limits of post-war freedom for everyone
and was the program for the progressive bolshevization of
Czecho-Slovakia.
The first postwar elections, in May, 1946, brought victory for the Communists who received 38.1 per cent (in
Slovakia only 30.4 per cent) of the votes cast. During the
election campaign the solidarity of the National Front was
not violated in the new government of Klement Gottwald.
All political leaders vowed to remain loyal to the Soviet
Union and unanimously approved the two-year economic
plan which was on the order of the Soviet five-year..plan.
Dr. Hubert Ripka, the National Socialist Minister, zealously propagated the Czecho-Slovak-Soviet Treaty of colla1boration (Dec. 13, 1943) and tied the economy of the country to that of the Soviet Union.
When Stalin forced Prague not to participate in the
Marshall Plan, in 1947, the non-Communist Ministers had
more cause to resign then than they had in February 1948.
At that time, however, the Ministers still speculated that
they would be able to continue to share power with the
Reds. They were not concerned about the principle of freedom, democracy, or western orientation; they simply
wanted to remain in power.
The resignation of twelve non-communist Ministers
(out of a total of 26), headed by Dr. Peter Zenkl, on February 20, 1948, helped only the Communists to gain all
positions which tJhey did not occupy up to that time. The
Reds were completely prepared for t 1he events of February
1948, whereas the non-communist parties were not. In
fact they played into the hands of the Reds. In the fall of
1947, several anti-Communist deputies had been liquidated
by the National Front coalition of Benes-Gottwald. The
Reds had no trouble in finding quislings and informers to
oust the resigned ministers and their adherents from the
parties and replacing them with "reliaible" people. Dr.
Zenkl and company - after President Benes did what
Gottwald asked him to do - then realized that they were
through governing. Some were arrested but many of them
departed to the West, the Reds doing practically nothing
38
SLOVAKIA
to stop them. The blackguards had done their work, they
were free to go.
The Present Communist Czecho-Slovakia
After February, 1948, political persecution had free
reign, the decisions of the People's Courts from the years
1945-1948 were revised and new processes initiated. Tens
of thousands citizens left the Republic. The Communist
Party took over all positions; the Social Democrats united
with the Communists on June 27, 1948; the National Socialists, changing their name to "Czech Socialists," recognized the leading role of the Communists and today are
criticizing themselves for their "bourgeois past"; Sramek's
Populists became the party of Catholic Socialism with the
task of completing the collectivization of agriculture. 'Dhe
Communist Party and its secret police ruthlessly liquidated all non-communist influence and practically all possibility of resistance, including that of the ecclesiastical
hierachy, which could perhaps hinder their progress toward socialism and communism. Small industrial enterprises, up to 1948 not affected by Benes's decrees, were nationalized, as were gradually even the smaller businesses
and trades. At the same time the industrialization of the
Czech lands and Slovakia was increased, costing billions of
crowns which lowered the living standard of the inhabitants to a minimum.
The Communist party purged itself of "undesirable"
elements, deviationists and nationalists, thus ridding itself
of pre-war malcontents. In the end Rudolph Slansky, Secretary-General of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party,
and ten other leading Reds were executed November 27,
1952. They were charged with "anti-State activities, espionage, Zionism, and economic sa!botage." Gottwald's group
within the party was victorious over the Slansky faction,
•b ut Gottwald did not enjoy his victory very long. He
died nine days after Stalin in 1953 (March 14). After a
t!hree year purge the situation within the Communist Party
became sta!bilized in 1953.
The money reform of June 1, 1953, with which some
dissatisfaction was displayed in various places, was sup-
SLOVAKIA
39
posed to raise the living standard of the people and improve the economical situation. The buying power of the
Czecho-Slovak crown was restored and the quality of products became better. Prices of commodities and wages of
workers were adjusted, swelling the ranks of the people
who had little. From 1956 the Red regime has been using
more refined methods of psychological persuasion with the
peasants, so that by October 1, 1959, only 19 per cent of
the land remained in private hands. All sectors of political
and economical life have been patterned after the Soviet
model. Industrial production, according to official statistics, was four times higher in 1959 than in 1938, and by
1965 it is supposed to be sixteen times higher. In Slovakia, industrial production increased seven times over that
in 1937. The standard of living, however, has not been keeping up with increased production. Prices on many necessities are still rather higih.
A large majority of the population is not communist,
nor is it happy with the communist regime. Annually,
however, people who knew better times are dying; their
places are being taken over by the younger generation
which knows little else than "people's democracy." The successes of the Red regimes with sputniks and luniks has
influenced the thinking of many; as has also the policy of
appeasement and containment of the West. Active resistance against the Reds is practically nil. To hold onto what
people have and perhaps for more material advantage,
many people are cooperating with the Reds.
In 1960 we saw new changes and reorganization. Some
200,000 employees in the administration of the State were
made available for industry and agriculture with the dissolution of the provincial system which was replaced by
ten larger economic regions. Great changes took place also
in the organization of work; gradually two shifts are being instituted in all the larger enterprises. A new Constitution has been adopted to replace the Constitution of 1920.
If we criticize the "golden times" of the First Republic and do not mention the many positive deeds of that
period, it is because the First Republic did not fulfill the
promises of the Castle propaganda. Worse, however, is
40
SLOVAKIA
the fact that the representative s of the First Republic
could not strengthen the morale of the people which was
shaken by the long hegemony of the Habsburgs, and Benes' s capitulation broke many a backbone. Neither was
morale helped by the Protectorate; and it attained a new
low after 1945 when the very people who were expected to
possess so much morality willingly collaborated with the
enemies of all morality.
The Czech nation will live even after communism. Its
tragedy was caused in 1918 by politicians who cared not
about national interests, a better future , solidarity and moral strength, but in the first place sought to satisfy their
own ambitions (Benes) and their own glorification (Masaryk), etc. Of course, indirectly our entire nation is responsible for the development that took place from 1918
to 1948. It allowed itself to be deceived by false slogans,
legends, hypocritical propaganda, and failed to heed the
warnings of really devoted politicians (Kramar, Dyk, Machar, etc.). Masaryk's slogan "evolution is going to the
left" and Benes's collaboration with the Reds greatly facilitated the government of the Communists.
Some of those responsi1ble for our national tragedy
are still among us in exile; they have the brazen impertinence to organize circles of Czech interests (The Council
of Free Czecho-Slovakia, the Czech National Socialist Party in exile, etc.) with feelers in American societies for
exiles, such as Radio Free Europe (RFE), Assembly of
Captive European Nations (ACEN), and American Czech
societies. To the wide masses of our countrymen in exile
they cannot serve as an exemplary model, and, therefore,
we notice in our exile increasing influences of materialism,
national callousness, egocentrism, chicanery and intrigue,
hypocrisy and fraud. Of course, not in our entire exile, but
in a good part of it. And it is the question of our morality
that will decide whether our exile will be a,ble to live
through the next several years which will be according to
all indications, very tough and ruthless years.
(Vladimir Pekelsky, a Crech in exile, is the editor ,an/cl pu/bli,s her
o'f the CzOC'h peniodidal "Sbornik Bohemia" which is pulblislh~d in
Koln,Ehrenfold, W. Germany.)
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 Yesterday and Today
Description
An account of the resource
Vladimír Pekelský
Slovakia, Vol. 11, No. 2 (34), September-December 1961
pp. 27-40
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Pekelský, Vladimír
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/a21d54db609ec35b652b11a433b72aa5.pdf
a4cf2e12e8894cac1637514bfacdde6a
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKJA
CZEOHOSWVAK ROMANTICISM
JOHN F. GLEI MAN
Modern propaganda has attalned great perfectlon. Applying the
attalnment of mass psychology, falslfylng hlstory and statlstlcs, twist•
Ing economlc theorles and other polltlcal sclences, modern psychology
rs able to prove that black 1s whlte. That ls the propaganda that ls
used especlally by the to talltarlan states. But even the "Czechoslovak
democracy" of Masaryk and Beneš resorted to such propaganda, especlally wlth regard to the Slovak questlon. Little wonder that world
dlplomacy, ignorant as it was about the Slovaks, believed it, nay, that
some Slovaks were taken in by it. But truth will out sooner or later,
and wh en misled people (Ind it out, they wlll discard false fictions
and wlll follow the truth. The fiction a bout "Czečhoslovak unlty" -whether national or state union - is the product of the subtle propaganda machlne of Masaryk and Beneš. lt wrui born of the falslfication
of hlstory and other "scientlfic" researches. The Czechoslovak republic 1s a structure bullt on lies.
But what 1s the truth?
Modern natlons developed fľom the cohabitation of many tribes.
'ľhe bistorlc fact is that during 1500 years of Slovak hlstory the
Slovaks did not live in a common state wlth the Czechs until 1918.
The fact that a Czech prince pald trlbute for several years to the
ruler of Great Moravia has fallen into the sea or years wlthout a
trace. The Ozechs lived for centuries in the Czech klngdom, in the
Roman-Germanlc empire, and they lived in Austrla. The Slovaks
llved their separate llves In Hungary. The fact that some Slovaks
used the Czech language as a m edium of writing does not prove
tbat Slovak is a dialect of tbe Czech. Tbe Serbs and Bulgarians used
the old Slovanic cburcb language up to the 19th century just llke the
Russlans, but that did not make them Russians.
But a century ago, wben romanticism was in (lower, the Czecb
publlclst Charles Havl!ček appeared on the scene with a typlcally
romantic idea that tbe Slovaks really are Czechs. He himself openly
revealed what had led him to that concluslon. The Czechs, he said,
are surrounded on three sides by tbe Germans. So that Grmany would
not strangle them, they needed a b ridge to the Slovanlc natlons and
to international navigatlon on the Danube. But tbe only brldge Jed
through Slovakia. So. cost what lt may, they needed Slovakla. To
have some legal clalm to the !and of the Slovaks, he said - referring
to tbe temporary literary assoclatlon - that the Slovaks are a CzP.cb
trl be.
True, t his fiction was discarded by the generation of Štúr, Daxuer and Hurban Vajanský. Even the Czecb generatlon of •Rleger discarded lt. But lt was revlved by Masaryk and then by hls understudy
Beneš. Wben tbe Slovaks would not digest tbat story, they flrst called
1t "CzecbOBlovanic" (Czechoslavic); wben that dld not work out, tbey
called 1t "Czecboslovak." No matter how tbey cbanged the name, the
substance of lt always remalned tbe same. And that was utterly Czeťh
- Czech national imperlallsm.
�61
SLOVAKIA
Industry was falrly well developed durlng Masaryk's llfetime.
Bohemla became an Industria! country. Industria! countries were
looking for raw matreials and markets for their Industria! products.
They found these in their colonles. Because Bohemla 1s not a coastal
s tate, Masaryk "dlscovered" Slovakla for Czech colonlzatlon. He took
Havliček's romantic theory off the shelf, dusted lt off and peddled
it to the world. He fooled qulte a few people, even some Slovaks.
The Allies fell for the story at the Parls Conference in 1919. Thaťs
how the Czechoslovak republic orlglnated.
Americans or Slovak origin saw more clearly in•to ,the matter than
thelr brethren in the old country and tried to guarantee a federative
autonomy for Slovakia with the Cleveland and then the Plttsburgh
Pact. But Masaryk, once he was in the driver's seat, proclalmed the
bilateral agreements null and void, and proceeded to make Slovakia
a Czech colony. Of course, the Slovaks did not relish that. They
fought for their inherent and God•given rlghts for twenty years and
then declared S lovakla Independent on March 14, 1939.
The most unreal "realist" - Beneš - heated up this old romantlc
soup or HavUook and Masaryk during World Waľ ii. When he saw
that nobody had an appetite for sour soup, he hooked up wlth t he
Communlsts so that he could keep the Czech hold on the Slovaks.
Commun!.sm, whlch 1s also a creation of Hegelian romantlcism, readily
understood Havlícek's and Masaryk's romanticism, lnterpreted by
Beneš, and in 1943 they came to an agreement, especlally slnce the
Communists knew how to " realize" romanticlsm. Tbey took thelr
fishlng line and balted lt for the Slovaks with the "Program of Košice." Lettrich and his followers sn a.pped at the balt - hook, line
and slnker. Since t hat time the Czechs are agaln explolting Slovakla
and murderlng the Slovaks. But the bolsheviks also came into their
own. They swallowed the whole Czechoslovak republic a11 well as
Czech romantlcism.
The period of romanticism 1s, bowever, inadvertently comlng to a
close. Tbe by•products of politlcal romanticism, Fascism an<l Nazism,
have already dlsappeared. The tlme is not far distant when romantlc
socialism, Communism, too, shall dlsappear. Wlth lt shall go to the
devll even Czech natlonalism, called Czechoslovakism. Tbat !s the
unalterable Joglc of h!story.
Tbe Slovak nation wants to live. It does not walllt to ,perish as
the victlm of Czecboslovak romantlcism. Therefore, it shall go torward to meet the ideas or the future wlth all the strength of lts
vitality to take over the place in the new rational order of the world
that rlghtfully belongs to lt accordlng to God•glven natural right and
accordlng to the Atlantlc Charter.
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT ? - "The lmportance of our treaty wlth the U. S.
S. R. ls selr-evldent. Soviet Russla 1s rapldly freelng Europe trom
Nazl tyranny. Cloae tl ea have always exiated between Ruaala and
Czechoalovakia, and they have now been atrengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, whlch ls bound to play the leading
ľole In Europe after the war." (Jan Masaryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944).
�
SLOVAKJA
CZEOHOSWVAK ROMANTICISM
JOHN F. GLEI MAN
Modern propaganda has attalned great perfectlon. Applying the
attalnment of mass psychology, falslfylng hlstory and statlstlcs, twist•
Ing economlc theorles and other polltlcal sclences, modern psychology
rs able to prove that black 1s whlte. That ls the propaganda that ls
used especlally by the to talltarlan states. But even the "Czechoslovak
democracy" of Masaryk and Beneš resorted to such propaganda, especlally wlth regard to the Slovak questlon. Little wonder that world
dlplomacy, ignorant as it was about the Slovaks, believed it, nay, that
some Slovaks were taken in by it. But truth will out sooner or later,
and wh en misled people (Ind it out, they wlll discard false fictions
and wlll follow the truth. The fiction a bout "Czečhoslovak unlty" -whether national or state union - is the product of the subtle propaganda machlne of Masaryk and Beneš. lt wrui born of the falslfication
of hlstory and other "scientlfic" researches. The Czechoslovak republic 1s a structure bullt on lies.
But what 1s the truth?
Modern natlons developed fľom the cohabitation of many tribes.
'ľhe bistorlc fact is that during 1500 years of Slovak hlstory the
Slovaks did not live in a common state wlth the Czechs until 1918.
The fact that a Czech prince pald trlbute for several years to the
ruler of Great Moravia has fallen into the sea or years wlthout a
trace. The Ozechs lived for centuries in the Czech klngdom, in the
Roman-Germanlc empire, and they lived in Austrla. The Slovaks
llved their separate llves In Hungary. The fact that some Slovaks
used the Czech language as a m edium of writing does not prove
tbat Slovak is a dialect of tbe Czech. Tbe Serbs and Bulgarians used
the old Slovanic cburcb language up to the 19th century just llke the
Russlans, but that did not make them Russians.
But a century ago, wben romanticism was in (lower, the Czecb
publlclst Charles Havl!ček appeared on the scene with a typlcally
romantic idea that tbe Slovaks really are Czechs. He himself openly
revealed what had led him to that concluslon. The Czechs, he said,
are surrounded on three sides by tbe Germans. So that Grmany would
not strangle them, they needed a b ridge to the Slovanlc natlons and
to international navigatlon on the Danube. But tbe only brldge Jed
through Slovakia. So. cost what lt may, they needed Slovakla. To
have some legal clalm to the !and of the Slovaks, he said - referring
to tbe temporary literary assoclatlon - that the Slovaks are a CzP.cb
trl be.
True, t his fiction was discarded by the generation of Štúr, Daxuer and Hurban Vajanský. Even the Czecb generatlon of •Rleger discarded lt. But lt was revlved by Masaryk and then by hls understudy
Beneš. Wben tbe Slovaks would not digest tbat story, they flrst called
1t "CzecbOBlovanic" (Czechoslavic); wben that dld not work out, tbey
called 1t "Czecboslovak." No matter how tbey cbanged the name, the
substance of lt always remalned tbe same. And that was utterly Czeťh
- Czech national imperlallsm.
�61
SLOVAKIA
Industry was falrly well developed durlng Masaryk's llfetime.
Bohemla became an Industria! country. Industria! countries were
looking for raw matreials and markets for their Industria! products.
They found these in their colonles. Because Bohemla 1s not a coastal
s tate, Masaryk "dlscovered" Slovakla for Czech colonlzatlon. He took
Havliček's romantic theory off the shelf, dusted lt off and peddled
it to the world. He fooled qulte a few people, even some Slovaks.
The Allies fell for the story at the Parls Conference in 1919. Thaťs
how the Czechoslovak republic orlglnated.
Americans or Slovak origin saw more clearly in•to ,the matter than
thelr brethren in the old country and tried to guarantee a federative
autonomy for Slovakia with the Cleveland and then the Plttsburgh
Pact. But Masaryk, once he was in the driver's seat, proclalmed the
bilateral agreements null and void, and proceeded to make Slovakia
a Czech colony. Of course, the Slovaks did not relish that. They
fought for their inherent and God•given rlghts for twenty years and
then declared S lovakla Independent on March 14, 1939.
The most unreal "realist" - Beneš - heated up this old romantlc
soup or HavUook and Masaryk during World Waľ ii. When he saw
that nobody had an appetite for sour soup, he hooked up wlth t he
Communlsts so that he could keep the Czech hold on the Slovaks.
Commun!.sm, whlch 1s also a creation of Hegelian romantlcism, readily
understood Havlícek's and Masaryk's romanticism, lnterpreted by
Beneš, and in 1943 they came to an agreement, especlally slnce the
Communists knew how to " realize" romanticlsm. Tbey took thelr
fishlng line and balted lt for the Slovaks with the "Program of Košice." Lettrich and his followers sn a.pped at the balt - hook, line
and slnker. Since t hat time the Czechs are agaln explolting Slovakla
and murderlng the Slovaks. But the bolsheviks also came into their
own. They swallowed the whole Czechoslovak republic a11 well as
Czech romantlcism.
The period of romanticism 1s, bowever, inadvertently comlng to a
close. Tbe by•products of politlcal romanticism, Fascism an<l Nazism,
have already dlsappeared. The tlme is not far distant when romantlc
socialism, Communism, too, shall dlsappear. Wlth lt shall go to the
devll even Czech natlonalism, called Czechoslovakism. Tbat !s the
unalterable Joglc of h!story.
Tbe Slovak nation wants to live. It does not walllt to ,perish as
the victlm of Czecboslovak romantlcism. Therefore, it shall go torward to meet the ideas or the future wlth all the strength of lts
vitality to take over the place in the new rational order of the world
that rlghtfully belongs to lt accordlng to God•glven natural right and
accordlng to the Atlantlc Charter.
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT ? - "The lmportance of our treaty wlth the U. S.
S. R. ls selr-evldent. Soviet Russla 1s rapldly freelng Europe trom
Nazl tyranny. Cloae tl ea have always exiated between Ruaala and
Czechoalovakia, and they have now been atrengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, whlch ls bound to play the leading
ľole In Europe after the war." (Jan Masaryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944).
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
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
SLOVAKJA
CZEOHOSWVAK ROMANTICISM
JOHN F. GLEI MAN
Modern propaganda has attalned great perfectlon. Applying the
attalnment of mass psychology, falslfylng hlstory and statlstlcs, twist•
Ing economlc theorles and other polltlcal sclences, modern psychology
rs able to prove that black 1s whlte. That ls the propaganda that ls
used especlally by the to talltarlan states. But even the "Czechoslovak
democracy" of Masaryk and Beneš resorted to such propaganda, especlally wlth regard to the Slovak questlon. Little wonder that world
dlplomacy, ignorant as it was about the Slovaks, believed it, nay, that
some Slovaks were taken in by it. But truth will out sooner or later,
and wh en misled people (Ind it out, they wlll discard false fictions
and wlll follow the truth. The fiction a bout "Czečhoslovak unlty" -whether national or state union - is the product of the subtle propaganda machlne of Masaryk and Beneš. lt wrui born of the falslfication
of hlstory and other "scientlfic" researches. The Czechoslovak republic 1s a structure bullt on lies.
But what 1s the truth?
Modern natlons developed fľom the cohabitation of many tribes.
'ľhe bistorlc fact is that during 1500 years of Slovak hlstory the
Slovaks did not live in a common state wlth the Czechs until 1918.
The fact that a Czech prince pald trlbute for several years to the
ruler of Great Moravia has fallen into the sea or years wlthout a
trace. The Ozechs lived for centuries in the Czech klngdom, in the
Roman-Germanlc empire, and they lived in Austrla. The Slovaks
llved their separate llves In Hungary. The fact that some Slovaks
used the Czech language as a m edium of writing does not prove
tbat Slovak is a dialect of tbe Czech. Tbe Serbs and Bulgarians used
the old Slovanic cburcb language up to the 19th century just llke the
Russlans, but that did not make them Russians.
But a century ago, wben romanticism was in (lower, the Czecb
publlclst Charles Havl!ček appeared on the scene with a typlcally
romantic idea that tbe Slovaks really are Czechs. He himself openly
revealed what had led him to that concluslon. The Czechs, he said,
are surrounded on three sides by tbe Germans. So that Grmany would
not strangle them, they needed a b ridge to the Slovanlc natlons and
to international navigatlon on the Danube. But tbe only brldge Jed
through Slovakia. So. cost what lt may, they needed Slovakla. To
have some legal clalm to the !and of the Slovaks, he said - referring
to tbe temporary literary assoclatlon - that the Slovaks are a CzP.cb
trl be.
True, t his fiction was discarded by the generation of Štúr, Daxuer and Hurban Vajanský. Even the Czecb generatlon of •Rleger discarded lt. But lt was revlved by Masaryk and then by hls understudy
Beneš. Wben tbe Slovaks would not digest tbat story, they flrst called
1t "CzecbOBlovanic" (Czechoslavic); wben that dld not work out, tbey
called 1t "Czecboslovak." No matter how tbey cbanged the name, the
substance of lt always remalned tbe same. And that was utterly Czeťh
- Czech national imperlallsm.
61
SLOVAKIA
Industry was falrly well developed durlng Masaryk's llfetime.
Bohemla became an Industria! country. Industria! countries were
looking for raw matreials and markets for their Industria! products.
They found these in their colonles. Because Bohemla 1s not a coastal
s tate, Masaryk "dlscovered" Slovakla for Czech colonlzatlon. He took
Havliček's romantic theory off the shelf, dusted lt off and peddled
it to the world. He fooled qulte a few people, even some Slovaks.
The Allies fell for the story at the Parls Conference in 1919. Thaťs
how the Czechoslovak republic orlglnated.
Americans or Slovak origin saw more clearly in•to ,the matter than
thelr brethren in the old country and tried to guarantee a federative
autonomy for Slovakia with the Cleveland and then the Plttsburgh
Pact. But Masaryk, once he was in the driver's seat, proclalmed the
bilateral agreements null and void, and proceeded to make Slovakia
a Czech colony. Of course, the Slovaks did not relish that. They
fought for their inherent and God•given rlghts for twenty years and
then declared S lovakla Independent on March 14, 1939.
The most unreal "realist" - Beneš - heated up this old romantlc
soup or HavUook and Masaryk during World Waľ ii. When he saw
that nobody had an appetite for sour soup, he hooked up wlth t he
Communlsts so that he could keep the Czech hold on the Slovaks.
Commun!.sm, whlch 1s also a creation of Hegelian romantlcism, readily
understood Havlícek's and Masaryk's romanticism, lnterpreted by
Beneš, and in 1943 they came to an agreement, especlally slnce the
Communists knew how to " realize" romanticlsm. Tbey took thelr
fishlng line and balted lt for the Slovaks with the "Program of Košice." Lettrich and his followers sn a.pped at the balt - hook, line
and slnker. Since t hat time the Czechs are agaln explolting Slovakla
and murderlng the Slovaks. But the bolsheviks also came into their
own. They swallowed the whole Czechoslovak republic a11 well as
Czech romantlcism.
The period of romanticism 1s, bowever, inadvertently comlng to a
close. Tbe by•products of politlcal romanticism, Fascism an<l Nazism,
have already dlsappeared. The tlme is not far distant when romantlc
socialism, Communism, too, shall dlsappear. Wlth lt shall go to the
devll even Czech natlonalism, called Czechoslovakism. Tbat !s the
unalterable Joglc of h!story.
Tbe Slovak nation wants to live. It does not walllt to ,perish as
the victlm of Czecboslovak romantlcism. Therefore, it shall go torward to meet the ideas or the future wlth all the strength of lts
vitality to take over the place in the new rational order of the world
that rlghtfully belongs to lt accordlng to God•glven natural right and
accordlng to the Atlantlc Charter.
•
•
•
•
WHO SAID IT ? - "The lmportance of our treaty wlth the U. S.
S. R. ls selr-evldent. Soviet Russla 1s rapldly freelng Europe trom
Nazl tyranny. Cloae tl ea have always exiated between Ruaala and
Czechoalovakia, and they have now been atrengthened. We are proud
to be an ally of that great power, whlch ls bound to play the leading
ľole In Europe after the war." (Jan Masaryk to "Overseas News
Agency," February 6, 1944).
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Czechoslovak Romanticism
Description
An account of the resource
John F. Gleiman
Slovakia, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2), December 1951
pp. 60-61
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Gleiman, John F.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
December 1951
name
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/5b30d7c559730fe0284be847504b1c99.pdf
e38a1fce9cdd2c89b02a9d4a53163b52
PDF Text
Text
50
SLOVAKIA
CZECHOSLOVAKIA 1945-1950:
A FAILURE OF INTELLIGENCE
Igor Lukes
The outcome of the Czechoslovak political crisis from the end of
World War II via the communist Machtergreifung in February 1948,
and into the early fifties was not a preordained conclusion . It was not
determined solely by the weight of the emerging blocs, it was not
driven by the map, nor was it simply for the Kremlin to dictate.
On the Czech side, it was mainly the product of unfounded hope
(faith in an untested "socialism"), misplaced trust (deification of the
Soviet Union and its leaders), and pathological fear of Germany. But
the west also contributed to the communist victory by political blunders and amateurism in other field s. This papers focu ses on the U.S.
intelligence community in postwar Prague.
Looking at Czechoslovakia before the end of the war, and seeking to predict its political course in postwar Europe cou ld lead one to
imagine a variety of scenarios. A minority saw the future in dark colors: they thought the country was destined to become a colony of
the Soviet Union . They noted that the Czechoslovak political elite,
punch-drunk from the Munich catastrophe, had taken steps that tied
their country with Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union. No one in the west
doubted that President Edvard Benes and most of his colleagues in
London were ideologically on their side, but it was clear that they
still felt deep resentment over the manner in which their diplomatic
alliances were imploded by the western appeasers of the Third Reich.
They moved closer toward the Soviet Union because of the Munich
experience and in order to show the British Foreign Office that when
it came to coalitions in the postwar setting they no longer depended
exclusively on the west; they had the Soviet card and they wou ld
play it as needed to prevent "another Munich".
An even greater factor for the pessimists was the country's location on the map and the situation at the front. The Red Army crossed
the Czechoslovak border on 6 October 1944, while the allies were
recovering from the disastrous Operation Market-Garden . Stalin was
inside Czechoslovakia, but the western allies were stil l far away
�SLOVAKIA
51
(U.S. Army units would cross onto Czech territory only on 18 April
1945). This led Ambassador William C. Bullitt to predict that after
the war the Kremlin would "domin ate Finland, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland , Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia." Bullitt speculated that Moscow had learned from its defeat in
Hungary after World War I and would therefore apply different strategies in different countries located in the space between Germany
and Ru ssia. 1 The Soviet Union might come with cold steel into the
Baltics and Poland, but with treaties and patience to Finland and
Czechoslovakia. Two wartime U.S. intelligence analysts observed
years later that after the signing of the Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement of December 1943 they had no illusions about the way Stalin
was setting forth his policy toward all the countries of Eastern Europe, including Czechoslovakia. 2
The political course of Czechoslovakia inspired lots of optimists
in the fall of 1944. The allied press was beaming with good new s,
predicting that the country's postwar political life would simply pick
up where "it was ruthlessly interrupted by the Munich Agreement of
September 1938." Some American journalists celebrated a " pattern
of cooperation" among the allied governments and proposed that the
December 1943 Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement was a " model " for
others to follow. 3 Some suggested that the May 1944 Dutch, Belgian,
and Norwegian agreements with the British and the Americans regarding the restoration of their sovereign status after liberation followed
in the path originally established by the exiled Czechoslovak
government, which had signed half a year before a treaty with the
Soviet Union addressing matters of sovereignty and postwar administration. 4 When the country 's President Edvard Benes turned sixty
on 28 May 1944, he received telegrams from many leaders of the
1
Willi am C. Bullitt, "The World From Rome: The Ete rn al C ity Fears a Struggle
Between Christianity and Comm uni sm," Life Magazine, 4 September 1944. For a
Soviet reaction to Bullitt' s ana lysis, see K. Demidov, "Obankrotivshiisia razvedch ik,
,. Pra vda, 4 September 1944. Note the dates.
2
Interview wi th Spencer L. Taggart, Logan, Utah, 23 April 1999 and interview with
Paul Zinner, 5 Apri l 2005 , Washington .
3
No au thor, "The Pattern of Cooperati on," New York Times, 18 May 1944.
4
J. Emlyn Williams, " Smaller Allies in Europe Differ in Peace Readiness," Christian Science Monitor. IO May 1944.
�52
SLOVAKIA
anti-Nazi alliance, and New York Times called him a " prophet of a
great cause" and a "fine champion" of democracy.5
Among the optimists was the influential C. L. Sulzberger who
summed up the geopolitical situation in the east at the end of August
1944. The future borders of Finland , the Baltic republics, Poland,
Hungary and others were at the mercy of Joseph Stalin. But "Mr.
Benes has already got - he obtained it three years ago - a Soviet
guarantee that Czechoslovakia 's pre-Munich frontiers will be re-established." 6 No doubt, thi s flattered President Benes enormously and
reaffirmed him in his determination to establish hi s country as a
friend of both the blocs and a bridge between them.
The optimistic view that Czechoslovakia, balancing precariously
between east and west, would maintain its sovereignty persisted even
in the face of hard evidence that its political scene was undergoing
dramatic changes in the direction of a gloomy scenario. In early April 1945, when the composition of the new Czechoslovak Government became known, Paul Zinner, an OSS (Office of Strategic Services) analyst in Washington , took the list of its members to the
Department of State. He hoped to explain that the new Prime Minister had gained a reputation for being an apologist for even the most
odious Soviet foreign policy deci sions. Zinner was di sturbed that the
Czechoslovak Ministry of Interior was to be headed by a communist,
and the same was true for the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Information, Ministry of Agriculture, and de facto, the Ministry of Defense . All in all, he thought that the government' s composition was a
bad omen.
But Zinner's State Department colleagues thou ght there was no
reaso n to be concerned. They glanced at the list and learned that the
country would have Edvard Benes as president and Jan Masaryk as
foreign minister. " What could go wrong with such friends at the
helm ?" they asked . " We have nothing to fear, " they concluded,
di smisssed Zinner's concerns and turned their attention to other matters, including the imminent opening of the United States Embassy in
Prague. Zinner recalls leaving the Czech affairs desk with a sense of
foreboding and frustration: there seemed little he could do to
5
No author, "Benes at 60," New York Times, 28 May 1944.
C. L. Sulzberger, " Frontier Policies of Russia Emerge," New York Times, 28
August 1944.
6
�SLOVAKIA
53
persuade the optimists that the Czechs might ultimately share the fate
of the Poles, Hungarians and others in the region. 7
Finally, there were the reali sts, who staked out their territory in
the space between the optimists and pessimists. They did not believe
it was possible in 1944 to predict Czechoslovakia's future political
orientation and course. But they were prepared to say that the country was the most important laboratory for testing east-west relations
in the region. Charles E . Bohlen rejected the view expressed by his
colleagues that Poland was the country to study in order to discern
whether the west could coexist with Stalin. Poland's fate had been
sealed, he thought. The real test, Bohlen went on to argue, was Czechoslovakia. Benes had signed the December 1943 treaty with Stalin
despite opposition from his British hosts. " If the USSR really implemented that treaty and did not violate it then we would have an indication that it might be possible to get along with the Soviet Union after all. If the Soviet Union should break the treaty - the Czechs having gone as far as anybody could expect them to go - this might be
an indication that cooperation with the Soviet Union would not be
possible." 8 Other Americans, for instance, Averell Harrimann, shaed
thi s view. 9
Bohlen ' s analysis carried the day. The United States would henceforth treat Prague as a testing ground and an observation post. Although it was in Eastern Europe and the spires of the Kremlin cast a
shadow over it, the city had the atmosphere of a western outpost. It
welcomed the Americans who came to reopen the United States
Embassy in May 1945. And Washington reciprocated by building up
its diplomatic and intelligence presence in postwar Czechoslovakia
to unprecedented levels. In short order, the embassy at the Schoenborn Palace had a staff of more than two hundred employees.
There were several reasons why U.S. intelligence in postwar
Czechoslovakia could have performed well during the crisis leading
up to the Communist Machtergreifung of February 1948. The first
7
Interview with Paul Zinner, 5 April 2005 , Washington.
The Harry S. Truman Library . Harry N. Howard , "Oral Hi story Interview ," 7-8
October 1976. lnterview by Richard D. McKinzie.
9
Eduard Mark, "Charles Bohlen and the Acceptable Limits of Soviet Hegemony in
Eastern Europe: A Memorandum of 18 October 1945," Diplomatic History 3, 2
(Spring 1979): I05.
8
�54
SLOVAKIA
has to do with time and opportunity to launch intelligence operations.
The U.S. Army had not played any direct role in the liberation of
Poland from Nazism, and the imposition of Soviet rule over the
country was violent and rapid. The same was true - with significant
regional variations - in Hungary and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
When American diplomats and intelligence officers arrived in postwar Warsaw they had little or no time to get to know the terrain and
to establish contacts to be exploited in the future. Right from the start
they operated under significant or even extreme counterintelligence
pressure from the domestic and Soviet special services.
The opposite was true in Czechoslovakia, where the American
intelligence community had plenty of time to prepare for the co ming
crisis. Small elements of the U.S. Army had arrived in Prague some
two days before the Russians, the U.S. military liberated several prominent Czech cities, and the G.l.s remained deployed in Western
Bohemi a for seven months. During thi s time and later - until the
spri ng of 1948 - Americans could freely travel in and out of Prague,
and U.S. intelligence thus had countless opportunities to set down its
roots in Czech soil.
Moreover, the Czech co mmunists took until February 1948 to establish their dictatorship. Throughout thi s time each branch of the
Prague government included individuals who were happy to provide
confidential information to the Americans. President Edvard Benes
set the tone when he met with such known U.S. intelligence officials
as Allen Dulles, the Englishman Robert Bruce Lockhart, and others.
Many other high-ranking government officials, including cabinet
ministers, scores of military officers, policemen, secret police agents,
and intellige nce service officials were willing to provide information
to U.S. intelligence operatives in Prague. These individuals were not
agents in the formal meaning of the word. They had not been formally recruited, handled in a clandestine manner, and paid. They
provided the Americans with information from various denied areas
of official life because there was a community of interest between
the United States and their well positioned so urces in Czechoslovakia. From a spymaster's perspective a better environment was hard
to imagine.
American diplomats and intelligence officers came to postwar
Poland and other East European countries only after Russian tanks
�SLOVAKIA
55
had helped install a Moscow-vetted government in power. This
relegated them to the role of observers. But United States intelligence operatives in postwar Czechoslovakia had had plenty of time
to prepare for the Cold War milieu. How did they do in postwar
Czechoslovakia? This is the question this paper seeks to address.
The chief American diplomat in Prague was Ambassador Laurence A. Steinhardt, whose service in the Soviet Union included the
period of the Stalin-Hitler pact, and who had, as a result, a skeptical
view of all things Soviet. The Kremlin bosses had snubbed him
repeatedly, and he disliked them with passion. In Prague Steinhardt
surrounded himself with such like-minded anti -Stalinists as Colonel
(later General ) Joseph Anthony Michela, US Military Attache, and
others . The U.S. Embassy in Prague under Steinhardt had no intention of accommodating any communist or Soviet schemes. The ambassador's ideology and hi s can-do attitude combined to provide a
good working atmosphere for American intelligence in Prague.
U.S. Intelligence in Prague after the end of World War II was
organized around two separate pl atforms, the Military Mission and
the United States Embassy. The United States Military Mission was
established in Prague only a few weeks after the end of the war.
Even in that most abnormal era it was a very unorthodox operation.
The commaning officer of the Military Mission was Colonel Charles
Katek. 10 He was the first among several larger-than-life Americans
who descended upon Prague right after the war's end.
When Katek joined the Army, his Ph.D. in hi story from Northwestern University and hi s Czech and German language skills did
not go unnoticed. After an officer candidate course, the OSS was a
logical destination . Katek and his team of OSS operatives reached
Prague on IO May 1945, soon after the Red Army had arrived.
In Prague Katek found a luxurious apartment on Loretanske
Square, a most prestigious address. He and his colleagues developed
it into a salon where so me of the most interesting and influential
people gathered regularly. It was well known that Katek was keenly
10
Most of my infonnation is from the Prague archives and from Janet Edwards, Colone l Katek 's daughter, Interv iew, 19 Jul y 2000. The ori ginal name of the fami ly
was Kotek; it was changed to Katek in Chicago. Since "Kotek" does not sound particul arly Czech, it remains unclear whether the fam il y had come from Bohemia or
Slovakia.
�56
SLOVAKIA
interested in intelligence; he was remarkably open about it. Among
his guests were members of various noble families, such as Schwarzenberg, Lobkowitz, Czernin, Kolowrat, and Nadherny ; government
officials, for instance Minister Jan Masaryk, Minister Petr Zenk),
Minister Jaroslav Stransky , Minister Adolf Prochazka, and Minister
Frantisek Hala; at least a dozen members of parliament, including
lvo Duchacek; countless personalities from business circles, and
influential political journalists, such as Julius Firt, Ferdinand Peroutka and Pavel Tigrid.
Visitors were attracted to the Military Mission by the prospect of
friendly conversation and challenging political debates. Of course,
no one should underestimate the importance in postwar Prague of
good food, exotic alcohol, tobacco, and jazz records, all of which
were made plentiful by Colonel Katek 's regular truck deliveries from
a U.S. Army base in Nuremberg. Those who came and talked to the
Americans at Loretanske Square knew full well that their words
would be passed on to the authorities. Katek 's approach was to blur
the line between dinner parties and espionage. It made his life both
simple and pleasant.
The Military Mission had a few sources who were not invited to
join the parties on Loretanske Square. Even in such cases Colonel
Katek made no attempt to practice the kind of tradecraft that is
common in the world of intelligence. He met them durin g office
hours at the Mission. The activities around the Military Miss ion in
Prague were so notorious that other Americans who served in postwar Czechoslovakia were not quite sure what to think about the
situation. 11
They were right to be concerned. The Czech authorities paid
attention to what was happening around Colonel Katek. They quickly surmi sed that he was conducting military and political espionage.
An StB document notes that in November 1945 thirty-eight Czechs
were in the category of regular visitors at the Military Mission. In
January 1946 the OBZ insisted that the Mission with its 10 US Army
11
Interview with Louise Schaffner, 30 January 1999. Mrs. Schaffner was a Foreign
Service officer in the U. S. Embassy in Prague at the time of the communi st coup
d ' etat.
�SLOVAKIA
57
officers ran 109 agents. 12 On the basis of my interviews the claim
appears to be signifycantly exaggerated. But the Military Mission
under Colonel Katek 's direction was very active in gathering intelligence in postwar Prague. Its information came from willing and
well-placed sources, not recruited agents. Though it seemed like a
good idea at the time, the weakness of this manner of gathering intelligence would be revealed in February 1948.
From the summer of 1945 to February 1948, the Military Mission reported information from an impressive array of well-placed
sources: aristocrats, ministers, officials from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Mini stry of Interior, Ministry of Defense generals,
high-ranking soldiers and pilots, security officials, and businessmen .
It was easy to think that intelligence gathered from such knowledgeable and well-placed individuals was enough for analysts in
Washington to create a true and accurate picture of the political crisis
in Czechoslovakia.
The intelligence section in the Embassy was led by Spencer Taggart. He arrived in Prague in the Spring of 1945 with a clear mission :
"I was sent there with a long-term objective - to help the Czechs
guard their independence and to promote western democracy." 13
Seen in thi s light, Taggart came to protect and promote the values
that were agreeable to the majority of the political class and the population . Therefore, it was not difficult for him to gain access to a
number of sources that were both knowledgeable and well informed
- he was prepared to identify only four, Petr Zenk! , Major Jaromir
Nechansky, Jan Stransky and lvo Duchacek, but there were others.
For all their commitment, their well-placed so urces of information, and their knowledge of the terrain, the United States Embassy in Prague was consistently taken by surprise whenever a crisis
developed. The first such occasion involved the May 1946 elections
that resulted in a swee ping victory for the Communist Party of
Czechoslovakia. The OSS and State Department analysts took note
of it, of course, but as one member of Katek 's team put it "were we
smart enough to realize that thi s was the beginning of the end? I
12
Archives of the Ministry of Interi or, AMI Z-651, file 13. LT COL Bedrich Reicin
and CPT Kare l Vas, Main Directorate, OBZ, Ministry of Defense, 302-592-1, no.
150.457/secret report -2c-/ 1946, 24 January 1946.
13
Interview with Spencer L. Taggart, Logan , Utah , 23 April 1999.
�58
SLOVAKIA
doubt it. " 14 Ambassador Steinhardt had predicted an entirel y different outcome and he adopted an ostrich-like posture when faced with
the election results.
Another event that clearly and unmi stakabl y indicated th at the
Kremlin and the Czechoslovak communists were on the verge of seizing power took place in Ju ly 1947 . It involved the Marshall plan.
The Soviets had made clear in early July 1947 that they would take
part neither in the conference nor in the Marshall plan itself. But the
Czechs, including the leaders of the CPC, were planning to go as late
as 7 Jul y 1947. They were invited to the Kremlin , and two days later,
an official delegation from Prague was in Moscow. On 10 July 1947
Czechoslovakia announced that it would not be represented in Paris.
The American Embassy happened to be rudderless while the Prague Government was performing its backward so mersault on the
Marshall Plan : the Ambassador and hi s Deputy Chief of Miss ion ,
John Bruins, were attending a boar hunt organized by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and Katek and Taggart went with them. Two junior
diplomats found out about the reversal and informed Washington . 15
But hav ing arrived from the desk of a junior diplomat it left no lasting footprint in the halls of the Department of State.
The story was leaked also to the New York Times. An in-depth
article described the Marshall Plan fiasco and the current tense situation in Prague realistically and accurately. But then it quoted "observers here," a reference to U.S. diplomats in Prague, as being skeptical that the Ru ssians would try to impose upon Czechoslovakia " the
kind of communist state that preva il s in Rumani a, Bul garia and
Poland. " 16 The hopeful view, the paper reported , was that in following its tradition the Kremlin might in fact decide to withdraw altogether back to Ru ssia, lest its people become contaminated with the
west. This optimism was anchored in the views of the ambassador,
his deputy , but also Katek and Taggart.
The Embassy's record during the deci sive days of February 1948
is not impressive. Ambassador Steinhardt was in the United States
attending to business at the law firm Guggenheimer, Untermyer &
14
Interview with Walter Taub, Salzburg. Austria. 6 March 2000 .
Interview with George Bogardus, Washington, 3 June 1998.
16
James Reston, "Czechs Bow East Politicall y but Back West Inte llectuall y," New
York Times, 5 August 1947.
15
�SLOVAKIA
59
Marshall on Pine Street in New York City. He had joined it in 1920
and remained an active partner even after he started, in 1933, his diplomatic career as U. S. Ambassador in Stockholm. Spencer Taggart
was on a motoring tour of Italy with his wife. For the ambassador
and for Spencer Taggart to be out of the country at the time of the
coup was embarrassing. The game was lost now - when the opponent took to the field , the Americans were not even dressed to play.
The ambassador and the upper echelons at the Embassy had surrounded themselves primarily with the titled and propertied classes.
They failed to notice that the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia
had won real support not only among the working class and trade
unionists, but importantly among the intellectual s, traditionally a
crucial social group in the Czech lands. Neither the Embassy nor the
Military Mission had connections in those circles. The CPC had
saturated the democratic parties with its agents; it could anticipate
and neutralize their activities. The democrats had not imagined that
such conduct was possible. Neither they nor their American friends
at the Embassy or Mission had recruited any intelligence assets at the
level of the CPC Politburo or even the Central Committee apparat.
Steinhardt ' s optimism influenced others in the Embassy and
some in the State Department. But leading American diplomats, such
as George Kennan and Charles Bohlen, were not at all surprised by
the Prague coup. As we have seen, this was not thanks to reports of
the U. S. Embassy in Prague or thanks to information from U. S.
intelligence.
Among those who had been expecting a decisive communist
move against Czechoslovakia was Secretary of State Marshall. In his
November 1947 memorandum for President Truman he approached
the iss ue like a military strategist examining the map. He found that
Moscow " will probably have to clamp down on Czechoslovakia, for
a relatively free Czechoslovakia could become a threatening salient
in Moscow's political position. " 17 As it happened, the Prague coup
d'etat was played out as an internal affair, and Moscow could remain
in its comfortable position of a sympathetic observer. The result was
exactly as Marshall had predicted.
17
The Harry S. Truman Library, Papers of Harry S. Truman , Files of the White
House Nava l Aide, G. C. M., Secretary of State, Memorandum for the President, 7
November 1947 .
�60
SLOVAKIA
Marshall 's analysis, based on common sense and years of military experience, offered more insight into the crisis in Prague than
that provided by American diplomats and intelligence personnel
based in the city. It is a serious indictment of U.S. intelligence performance in postwar Prague that the sec retary of state should have
come up with a more accurate assessment of the evolving crisis than
trained intelligence personnel with language skills and sources at the
highest ranks of the Czechoslovak Government.
Even if the communist coup d 'etat in Czechoslovakia did not
surprise Secretary Marshall, like many others he considered it a watershed in east-west relations. On 10 March 1948 he stated that the
situation in Europe was "very , very serious" and ten days later he
called for " urgent and resolute action" if the United States was to
defend the west. The United States Embassy in Prague was not in a
position to contribute to the effort. The February coup d 'etat brutally
revealed the weaknesses of the overt style of intelligence gathering
employed by the Military Mission. Almost overnight, the former
guests of Colonel Katek had lost their posts in government, security,
the military, and the world of business. At least one was dead, some
in prison, the majority seeking to escape; the lucky ones were
already in the west; some of the prominent habitues of Loretanske
Square were under house arrest. None had access to information that
would be of interest to the Americans. Neither Katek nor Taggart
had thought of putting in place an intelligence-gathering network that
would become operational in case of a communist assumption of
power. Building one now was next to imposs ible: no Czech with
some official standing (except for StB agents) dared to come to the
Embassy, and few were willing to risk speaking with American
diplomats even in private.
Yet this was the time when intelligence was most desperately
needed. In June or July 1948, in the first weeks of the Berlin blockade, General Lucius Clay, Commanding General of U.S . Forces in
Europe and Military Governor of Germany, summoned Taggart and
told him to expect an outbreak of war with the Soviet Union within
four months. The general asked him to build in Czechoslovakia a
network of intelligence assets who would be equipped with radio
stations. It was to remain inactive during peacetime but spring into
action in case of hostilities between the United States and the Soviet
�SLOVAKIA
61
bloc. Their mission was to gather military intelligence and transmit it
to the Americans if the east-west tensions caused an evacuation of
the U.S. Embassy in Prague.
Taggart was eager to carry out his orders, but he was scheduled
to leave the Prague post in October 1948 at the latest. When he reviewed the list of people who might help him put together the kind of
network General Clay wanted, he selected Major Jaromir Nechansky
(born I 916). It was not a lucky choice. Nechansky was a brave,
highly motivated , British-trained commando and intelligence officer,
but his wartime service in the west, his activities in occupied
Czechoslovakia from February to May 1945, and his frequent social
contacts with the Americans before the communist take-over made
him an obvious target of the Czechoslovak Military Counter
Intelligence, Obranne zpravodajstvi, OBZ. In 1946 it concluded:
"Nechansky is in frequent contact with Katek ; he most likely works
for the Americans." 18
The Americans decided to recruit also Veleslav Wahl. This
young man - he was born in 1922 - came from a well-known family
that had already experienced more than its share of tragedy: his father, Veleslav, and uncle, Karel, were executed by the Nazis in 1942;
his future wife ' s father, Josef Ruzicka, was killed at the Mauthausen
concentration camp in 1943. It was unhelpful that Nechansky and
Wahl were known to be very close friends since the war. The
discovery of one would automatically lead to the arrest of the other.
First Nechansky, then Wahl and all the other agents whom the
two leaders had recruited on behalf of the Americans, were arrested
in early September 1949. They never had a chance. All - men and
women - were severely tortured; even the police photographer who
took their pictures for the court did not bother to cover up this fact.
The trial in April 1950 became an orgy of anti-American propaganda, played out in the communist daily Rude Pravo, but also in
other papers. The names of Taggart, hi s assistant Samuel Meryn, and
others from the Embassy appeared repeatedly in the manipulated
press, accompanied by photographs of radio stations and weapons
the StB uncovered in the houses of the would-be agents. The outcome of the tri al had been determined in advance. Nechansky and
18
AMI , Z-651 , fil e 13, OBZ (Main Directorate), Ministry of Defen se, Summary of
Reports 302-592- 1.
�62
SLOVAKIA
Wahl were sentenced to death and executed on I 6 Jul y I 950. All
other sentences were draconian.
When American intelligence officers arrived in Czechoslovakia
in May 1945 it see med th at the cause of western democracy was
dealt a lucky hand. They were educated and motivated, they understood the country, its language and hi story , they had time to prepare
for the comi ng confrontation with their Soviet opponent, and they
enjoyed the unqualified support of Ambassador Steinhardt.
Importantly, many in the Czech political and military elites, and
significant numbers in the sec urity appara t were approachable by US
intelligence personnel seeking classified information. The Americans
who were in the business of collecting political, military, and comercial secrets in Prague had access to some of the highest ranking personalities in the Office of the President and Government, including
the Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, and Ministry of Interior.
Some Czechoslovak officials were eager to provide Americans with
classified information. Leaking information to American officials
was neither dishonorable nor unpatriotic. It was a contribution to the
cause of democracy. It would be hard to imagine any other country
where there existed such a harmony of interest between American
intelligence collectors and their sources. All these factors put
together make the swift defeat of democracy in Czechoslovakia and
the totalitarian victory in February 1948 all the more humiliating.
�
50
SLOVAKIA
CZECHOSLOVAKIA 1945-1950:
A FAILURE OF INTELLIGENCE
Igor Lukes
The outcome of the Czechoslovak political crisis from the end of
World War II via the communist Machtergreifung in February 1948,
and into the early fifties was not a preordained conclusion . It was not
determined solely by the weight of the emerging blocs, it was not
driven by the map, nor was it simply for the Kremlin to dictate.
On the Czech side, it was mainly the product of unfounded hope
(faith in an untested "socialism"), misplaced trust (deification of the
Soviet Union and its leaders), and pathological fear of Germany. But
the west also contributed to the communist victory by political blunders and amateurism in other field s. This papers focu ses on the U.S.
intelligence community in postwar Prague.
Looking at Czechoslovakia before the end of the war, and seeking to predict its political course in postwar Europe cou ld lead one to
imagine a variety of scenarios. A minority saw the future in dark colors: they thought the country was destined to become a colony of
the Soviet Union . They noted that the Czechoslovak political elite,
punch-drunk from the Munich catastrophe, had taken steps that tied
their country with Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union. No one in the west
doubted that President Edvard Benes and most of his colleagues in
London were ideologically on their side, but it was clear that they
still felt deep resentment over the manner in which their diplomatic
alliances were imploded by the western appeasers of the Third Reich.
They moved closer toward the Soviet Union because of the Munich
experience and in order to show the British Foreign Office that when
it came to coalitions in the postwar setting they no longer depended
exclusively on the west; they had the Soviet card and they wou ld
play it as needed to prevent "another Munich".
An even greater factor for the pessimists was the country's location on the map and the situation at the front. The Red Army crossed
the Czechoslovak border on 6 October 1944, while the allies were
recovering from the disastrous Operation Market-Garden . Stalin was
inside Czechoslovakia, but the western allies were stil l far away
�SLOVAKIA
51
(U.S. Army units would cross onto Czech territory only on 18 April
1945). This led Ambassador William C. Bullitt to predict that after
the war the Kremlin would "domin ate Finland, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland , Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia." Bullitt speculated that Moscow had learned from its defeat in
Hungary after World War I and would therefore apply different strategies in different countries located in the space between Germany
and Ru ssia. 1 The Soviet Union might come with cold steel into the
Baltics and Poland, but with treaties and patience to Finland and
Czechoslovakia. Two wartime U.S. intelligence analysts observed
years later that after the signing of the Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement of December 1943 they had no illusions about the way Stalin
was setting forth his policy toward all the countries of Eastern Europe, including Czechoslovakia. 2
The political course of Czechoslovakia inspired lots of optimists
in the fall of 1944. The allied press was beaming with good new s,
predicting that the country's postwar political life would simply pick
up where "it was ruthlessly interrupted by the Munich Agreement of
September 1938." Some American journalists celebrated a " pattern
of cooperation" among the allied governments and proposed that the
December 1943 Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement was a " model " for
others to follow. 3 Some suggested that the May 1944 Dutch, Belgian,
and Norwegian agreements with the British and the Americans regarding the restoration of their sovereign status after liberation followed
in the path originally established by the exiled Czechoslovak
government, which had signed half a year before a treaty with the
Soviet Union addressing matters of sovereignty and postwar administration. 4 When the country 's President Edvard Benes turned sixty
on 28 May 1944, he received telegrams from many leaders of the
1
Willi am C. Bullitt, "The World From Rome: The Ete rn al C ity Fears a Struggle
Between Christianity and Comm uni sm," Life Magazine, 4 September 1944. For a
Soviet reaction to Bullitt' s ana lysis, see K. Demidov, "Obankrotivshiisia razvedch ik,
,. Pra vda, 4 September 1944. Note the dates.
2
Interview wi th Spencer L. Taggart, Logan, Utah, 23 April 1999 and interview with
Paul Zinner, 5 Apri l 2005 , Washington .
3
No au thor, "The Pattern of Cooperati on," New York Times, 18 May 1944.
4
J. Emlyn Williams, " Smaller Allies in Europe Differ in Peace Readiness," Christian Science Monitor. IO May 1944.
�52
SLOVAKIA
anti-Nazi alliance, and New York Times called him a " prophet of a
great cause" and a "fine champion" of democracy.5
Among the optimists was the influential C. L. Sulzberger who
summed up the geopolitical situation in the east at the end of August
1944. The future borders of Finland , the Baltic republics, Poland,
Hungary and others were at the mercy of Joseph Stalin. But "Mr.
Benes has already got - he obtained it three years ago - a Soviet
guarantee that Czechoslovakia 's pre-Munich frontiers will be re-established." 6 No doubt, thi s flattered President Benes enormously and
reaffirmed him in his determination to establish hi s country as a
friend of both the blocs and a bridge between them.
The optimistic view that Czechoslovakia, balancing precariously
between east and west, would maintain its sovereignty persisted even
in the face of hard evidence that its political scene was undergoing
dramatic changes in the direction of a gloomy scenario. In early April 1945, when the composition of the new Czechoslovak Government became known, Paul Zinner, an OSS (Office of Strategic Services) analyst in Washington , took the list of its members to the
Department of State. He hoped to explain that the new Prime Minister had gained a reputation for being an apologist for even the most
odious Soviet foreign policy deci sions. Zinner was di sturbed that the
Czechoslovak Ministry of Interior was to be headed by a communist,
and the same was true for the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Information, Ministry of Agriculture, and de facto, the Ministry of Defense . All in all, he thought that the government' s composition was a
bad omen.
But Zinner's State Department colleagues thou ght there was no
reaso n to be concerned. They glanced at the list and learned that the
country would have Edvard Benes as president and Jan Masaryk as
foreign minister. " What could go wrong with such friends at the
helm ?" they asked . " We have nothing to fear, " they concluded,
di smisssed Zinner's concerns and turned their attention to other matters, including the imminent opening of the United States Embassy in
Prague. Zinner recalls leaving the Czech affairs desk with a sense of
foreboding and frustration: there seemed little he could do to
5
No author, "Benes at 60," New York Times, 28 May 1944.
C. L. Sulzberger, " Frontier Policies of Russia Emerge," New York Times, 28
August 1944.
6
�SLOVAKIA
53
persuade the optimists that the Czechs might ultimately share the fate
of the Poles, Hungarians and others in the region. 7
Finally, there were the reali sts, who staked out their territory in
the space between the optimists and pessimists. They did not believe
it was possible in 1944 to predict Czechoslovakia's future political
orientation and course. But they were prepared to say that the country was the most important laboratory for testing east-west relations
in the region. Charles E . Bohlen rejected the view expressed by his
colleagues that Poland was the country to study in order to discern
whether the west could coexist with Stalin. Poland's fate had been
sealed, he thought. The real test, Bohlen went on to argue, was Czechoslovakia. Benes had signed the December 1943 treaty with Stalin
despite opposition from his British hosts. " If the USSR really implemented that treaty and did not violate it then we would have an indication that it might be possible to get along with the Soviet Union after all. If the Soviet Union should break the treaty - the Czechs having gone as far as anybody could expect them to go - this might be
an indication that cooperation with the Soviet Union would not be
possible." 8 Other Americans, for instance, Averell Harrimann, shaed
thi s view. 9
Bohlen ' s analysis carried the day. The United States would henceforth treat Prague as a testing ground and an observation post. Although it was in Eastern Europe and the spires of the Kremlin cast a
shadow over it, the city had the atmosphere of a western outpost. It
welcomed the Americans who came to reopen the United States
Embassy in May 1945. And Washington reciprocated by building up
its diplomatic and intelligence presence in postwar Czechoslovakia
to unprecedented levels. In short order, the embassy at the Schoenborn Palace had a staff of more than two hundred employees.
There were several reasons why U.S. intelligence in postwar
Czechoslovakia could have performed well during the crisis leading
up to the Communist Machtergreifung of February 1948. The first
7
Interview with Paul Zinner, 5 April 2005 , Washington.
The Harry S. Truman Library . Harry N. Howard , "Oral Hi story Interview ," 7-8
October 1976. lnterview by Richard D. McKinzie.
9
Eduard Mark, "Charles Bohlen and the Acceptable Limits of Soviet Hegemony in
Eastern Europe: A Memorandum of 18 October 1945," Diplomatic History 3, 2
(Spring 1979): I05.
8
�54
SLOVAKIA
has to do with time and opportunity to launch intelligence operations.
The U.S. Army had not played any direct role in the liberation of
Poland from Nazism, and the imposition of Soviet rule over the
country was violent and rapid. The same was true - with significant
regional variations - in Hungary and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
When American diplomats and intelligence officers arrived in postwar Warsaw they had little or no time to get to know the terrain and
to establish contacts to be exploited in the future. Right from the start
they operated under significant or even extreme counterintelligence
pressure from the domestic and Soviet special services.
The opposite was true in Czechoslovakia, where the American
intelligence community had plenty of time to prepare for the co ming
crisis. Small elements of the U.S. Army had arrived in Prague some
two days before the Russians, the U.S. military liberated several prominent Czech cities, and the G.l.s remained deployed in Western
Bohemi a for seven months. During thi s time and later - until the
spri ng of 1948 - Americans could freely travel in and out of Prague,
and U.S. intelligence thus had countless opportunities to set down its
roots in Czech soil.
Moreover, the Czech co mmunists took until February 1948 to establish their dictatorship. Throughout thi s time each branch of the
Prague government included individuals who were happy to provide
confidential information to the Americans. President Edvard Benes
set the tone when he met with such known U.S. intelligence officials
as Allen Dulles, the Englishman Robert Bruce Lockhart, and others.
Many other high-ranking government officials, including cabinet
ministers, scores of military officers, policemen, secret police agents,
and intellige nce service officials were willing to provide information
to U.S. intelligence operatives in Prague. These individuals were not
agents in the formal meaning of the word. They had not been formally recruited, handled in a clandestine manner, and paid. They
provided the Americans with information from various denied areas
of official life because there was a community of interest between
the United States and their well positioned so urces in Czechoslovakia. From a spymaster's perspective a better environment was hard
to imagine.
American diplomats and intelligence officers came to postwar
Poland and other East European countries only after Russian tanks
�SLOVAKIA
55
had helped install a Moscow-vetted government in power. This
relegated them to the role of observers. But United States intelligence operatives in postwar Czechoslovakia had had plenty of time
to prepare for the Cold War milieu. How did they do in postwar
Czechoslovakia? This is the question this paper seeks to address.
The chief American diplomat in Prague was Ambassador Laurence A. Steinhardt, whose service in the Soviet Union included the
period of the Stalin-Hitler pact, and who had, as a result, a skeptical
view of all things Soviet. The Kremlin bosses had snubbed him
repeatedly, and he disliked them with passion. In Prague Steinhardt
surrounded himself with such like-minded anti -Stalinists as Colonel
(later General ) Joseph Anthony Michela, US Military Attache, and
others . The U.S. Embassy in Prague under Steinhardt had no intention of accommodating any communist or Soviet schemes. The ambassador's ideology and hi s can-do attitude combined to provide a
good working atmosphere for American intelligence in Prague.
U.S. Intelligence in Prague after the end of World War II was
organized around two separate pl atforms, the Military Mission and
the United States Embassy. The United States Military Mission was
established in Prague only a few weeks after the end of the war.
Even in that most abnormal era it was a very unorthodox operation.
The commaning officer of the Military Mission was Colonel Charles
Katek. 10 He was the first among several larger-than-life Americans
who descended upon Prague right after the war's end.
When Katek joined the Army, his Ph.D. in hi story from Northwestern University and hi s Czech and German language skills did
not go unnoticed. After an officer candidate course, the OSS was a
logical destination . Katek and his team of OSS operatives reached
Prague on IO May 1945, soon after the Red Army had arrived.
In Prague Katek found a luxurious apartment on Loretanske
Square, a most prestigious address. He and his colleagues developed
it into a salon where so me of the most interesting and influential
people gathered regularly. It was well known that Katek was keenly
10
Most of my infonnation is from the Prague archives and from Janet Edwards, Colone l Katek 's daughter, Interv iew, 19 Jul y 2000. The ori ginal name of the fami ly
was Kotek; it was changed to Katek in Chicago. Since "Kotek" does not sound particul arly Czech, it remains unclear whether the fam il y had come from Bohemia or
Slovakia.
�56
SLOVAKIA
interested in intelligence; he was remarkably open about it. Among
his guests were members of various noble families, such as Schwarzenberg, Lobkowitz, Czernin, Kolowrat, and Nadherny ; government
officials, for instance Minister Jan Masaryk, Minister Petr Zenk),
Minister Jaroslav Stransky , Minister Adolf Prochazka, and Minister
Frantisek Hala; at least a dozen members of parliament, including
lvo Duchacek; countless personalities from business circles, and
influential political journalists, such as Julius Firt, Ferdinand Peroutka and Pavel Tigrid.
Visitors were attracted to the Military Mission by the prospect of
friendly conversation and challenging political debates. Of course,
no one should underestimate the importance in postwar Prague of
good food, exotic alcohol, tobacco, and jazz records, all of which
were made plentiful by Colonel Katek 's regular truck deliveries from
a U.S. Army base in Nuremberg. Those who came and talked to the
Americans at Loretanske Square knew full well that their words
would be passed on to the authorities. Katek 's approach was to blur
the line between dinner parties and espionage. It made his life both
simple and pleasant.
The Military Mission had a few sources who were not invited to
join the parties on Loretanske Square. Even in such cases Colonel
Katek made no attempt to practice the kind of tradecraft that is
common in the world of intelligence. He met them durin g office
hours at the Mission. The activities around the Military Miss ion in
Prague were so notorious that other Americans who served in postwar Czechoslovakia were not quite sure what to think about the
situation. 11
They were right to be concerned. The Czech authorities paid
attention to what was happening around Colonel Katek. They quickly surmi sed that he was conducting military and political espionage.
An StB document notes that in November 1945 thirty-eight Czechs
were in the category of regular visitors at the Military Mission. In
January 1946 the OBZ insisted that the Mission with its 10 US Army
11
Interview with Louise Schaffner, 30 January 1999. Mrs. Schaffner was a Foreign
Service officer in the U. S. Embassy in Prague at the time of the communi st coup
d ' etat.
�SLOVAKIA
57
officers ran 109 agents. 12 On the basis of my interviews the claim
appears to be signifycantly exaggerated. But the Military Mission
under Colonel Katek 's direction was very active in gathering intelligence in postwar Prague. Its information came from willing and
well-placed sources, not recruited agents. Though it seemed like a
good idea at the time, the weakness of this manner of gathering intelligence would be revealed in February 1948.
From the summer of 1945 to February 1948, the Military Mission reported information from an impressive array of well-placed
sources: aristocrats, ministers, officials from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Mini stry of Interior, Ministry of Defense generals,
high-ranking soldiers and pilots, security officials, and businessmen .
It was easy to think that intelligence gathered from such knowledgeable and well-placed individuals was enough for analysts in
Washington to create a true and accurate picture of the political crisis
in Czechoslovakia.
The intelligence section in the Embassy was led by Spencer Taggart. He arrived in Prague in the Spring of 1945 with a clear mission :
"I was sent there with a long-term objective - to help the Czechs
guard their independence and to promote western democracy." 13
Seen in thi s light, Taggart came to protect and promote the values
that were agreeable to the majority of the political class and the population . Therefore, it was not difficult for him to gain access to a
number of sources that were both knowledgeable and well informed
- he was prepared to identify only four, Petr Zenk! , Major Jaromir
Nechansky, Jan Stransky and lvo Duchacek, but there were others.
For all their commitment, their well-placed so urces of information, and their knowledge of the terrain, the United States Embassy in Prague was consistently taken by surprise whenever a crisis
developed. The first such occasion involved the May 1946 elections
that resulted in a swee ping victory for the Communist Party of
Czechoslovakia. The OSS and State Department analysts took note
of it, of course, but as one member of Katek 's team put it "were we
smart enough to realize that thi s was the beginning of the end? I
12
Archives of the Ministry of Interi or, AMI Z-651, file 13. LT COL Bedrich Reicin
and CPT Kare l Vas, Main Directorate, OBZ, Ministry of Defense, 302-592-1, no.
150.457/secret report -2c-/ 1946, 24 January 1946.
13
Interview with Spencer L. Taggart, Logan , Utah , 23 April 1999.
�58
SLOVAKIA
doubt it. " 14 Ambassador Steinhardt had predicted an entirel y different outcome and he adopted an ostrich-like posture when faced with
the election results.
Another event that clearly and unmi stakabl y indicated th at the
Kremlin and the Czechoslovak communists were on the verge of seizing power took place in Ju ly 1947 . It involved the Marshall plan.
The Soviets had made clear in early July 1947 that they would take
part neither in the conference nor in the Marshall plan itself. But the
Czechs, including the leaders of the CPC, were planning to go as late
as 7 Jul y 1947. They were invited to the Kremlin , and two days later,
an official delegation from Prague was in Moscow. On 10 July 1947
Czechoslovakia announced that it would not be represented in Paris.
The American Embassy happened to be rudderless while the Prague Government was performing its backward so mersault on the
Marshall Plan : the Ambassador and hi s Deputy Chief of Miss ion ,
John Bruins, were attending a boar hunt organized by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and Katek and Taggart went with them. Two junior
diplomats found out about the reversal and informed Washington . 15
But hav ing arrived from the desk of a junior diplomat it left no lasting footprint in the halls of the Department of State.
The story was leaked also to the New York Times. An in-depth
article described the Marshall Plan fiasco and the current tense situation in Prague realistically and accurately. But then it quoted "observers here," a reference to U.S. diplomats in Prague, as being skeptical that the Ru ssians would try to impose upon Czechoslovakia " the
kind of communist state that preva il s in Rumani a, Bul garia and
Poland. " 16 The hopeful view, the paper reported , was that in following its tradition the Kremlin might in fact decide to withdraw altogether back to Ru ssia, lest its people become contaminated with the
west. This optimism was anchored in the views of the ambassador,
his deputy , but also Katek and Taggart.
The Embassy's record during the deci sive days of February 1948
is not impressive. Ambassador Steinhardt was in the United States
attending to business at the law firm Guggenheimer, Untermyer &
14
Interview with Walter Taub, Salzburg. Austria. 6 March 2000 .
Interview with George Bogardus, Washington, 3 June 1998.
16
James Reston, "Czechs Bow East Politicall y but Back West Inte llectuall y," New
York Times, 5 August 1947.
15
�SLOVAKIA
59
Marshall on Pine Street in New York City. He had joined it in 1920
and remained an active partner even after he started, in 1933, his diplomatic career as U. S. Ambassador in Stockholm. Spencer Taggart
was on a motoring tour of Italy with his wife. For the ambassador
and for Spencer Taggart to be out of the country at the time of the
coup was embarrassing. The game was lost now - when the opponent took to the field , the Americans were not even dressed to play.
The ambassador and the upper echelons at the Embassy had surrounded themselves primarily with the titled and propertied classes.
They failed to notice that the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia
had won real support not only among the working class and trade
unionists, but importantly among the intellectual s, traditionally a
crucial social group in the Czech lands. Neither the Embassy nor the
Military Mission had connections in those circles. The CPC had
saturated the democratic parties with its agents; it could anticipate
and neutralize their activities. The democrats had not imagined that
such conduct was possible. Neither they nor their American friends
at the Embassy or Mission had recruited any intelligence assets at the
level of the CPC Politburo or even the Central Committee apparat.
Steinhardt ' s optimism influenced others in the Embassy and
some in the State Department. But leading American diplomats, such
as George Kennan and Charles Bohlen, were not at all surprised by
the Prague coup. As we have seen, this was not thanks to reports of
the U. S. Embassy in Prague or thanks to information from U. S.
intelligence.
Among those who had been expecting a decisive communist
move against Czechoslovakia was Secretary of State Marshall. In his
November 1947 memorandum for President Truman he approached
the iss ue like a military strategist examining the map. He found that
Moscow " will probably have to clamp down on Czechoslovakia, for
a relatively free Czechoslovakia could become a threatening salient
in Moscow's political position. " 17 As it happened, the Prague coup
d'etat was played out as an internal affair, and Moscow could remain
in its comfortable position of a sympathetic observer. The result was
exactly as Marshall had predicted.
17
The Harry S. Truman Library, Papers of Harry S. Truman , Files of the White
House Nava l Aide, G. C. M., Secretary of State, Memorandum for the President, 7
November 1947 .
�60
SLOVAKIA
Marshall 's analysis, based on common sense and years of military experience, offered more insight into the crisis in Prague than
that provided by American diplomats and intelligence personnel
based in the city. It is a serious indictment of U.S. intelligence performance in postwar Prague that the sec retary of state should have
come up with a more accurate assessment of the evolving crisis than
trained intelligence personnel with language skills and sources at the
highest ranks of the Czechoslovak Government.
Even if the communist coup d 'etat in Czechoslovakia did not
surprise Secretary Marshall, like many others he considered it a watershed in east-west relations. On 10 March 1948 he stated that the
situation in Europe was "very , very serious" and ten days later he
called for " urgent and resolute action" if the United States was to
defend the west. The United States Embassy in Prague was not in a
position to contribute to the effort. The February coup d 'etat brutally
revealed the weaknesses of the overt style of intelligence gathering
employed by the Military Mission. Almost overnight, the former
guests of Colonel Katek had lost their posts in government, security,
the military, and the world of business. At least one was dead, some
in prison, the majority seeking to escape; the lucky ones were
already in the west; some of the prominent habitues of Loretanske
Square were under house arrest. None had access to information that
would be of interest to the Americans. Neither Katek nor Taggart
had thought of putting in place an intelligence-gathering network that
would become operational in case of a communist assumption of
power. Building one now was next to imposs ible: no Czech with
some official standing (except for StB agents) dared to come to the
Embassy, and few were willing to risk speaking with American
diplomats even in private.
Yet this was the time when intelligence was most desperately
needed. In June or July 1948, in the first weeks of the Berlin blockade, General Lucius Clay, Commanding General of U.S . Forces in
Europe and Military Governor of Germany, summoned Taggart and
told him to expect an outbreak of war with the Soviet Union within
four months. The general asked him to build in Czechoslovakia a
network of intelligence assets who would be equipped with radio
stations. It was to remain inactive during peacetime but spring into
action in case of hostilities between the United States and the Soviet
�SLOVAKIA
61
bloc. Their mission was to gather military intelligence and transmit it
to the Americans if the east-west tensions caused an evacuation of
the U.S. Embassy in Prague.
Taggart was eager to carry out his orders, but he was scheduled
to leave the Prague post in October 1948 at the latest. When he reviewed the list of people who might help him put together the kind of
network General Clay wanted, he selected Major Jaromir Nechansky
(born I 916). It was not a lucky choice. Nechansky was a brave,
highly motivated , British-trained commando and intelligence officer,
but his wartime service in the west, his activities in occupied
Czechoslovakia from February to May 1945, and his frequent social
contacts with the Americans before the communist take-over made
him an obvious target of the Czechoslovak Military Counter
Intelligence, Obranne zpravodajstvi, OBZ. In 1946 it concluded:
"Nechansky is in frequent contact with Katek ; he most likely works
for the Americans." 18
The Americans decided to recruit also Veleslav Wahl. This
young man - he was born in 1922 - came from a well-known family
that had already experienced more than its share of tragedy: his father, Veleslav, and uncle, Karel, were executed by the Nazis in 1942;
his future wife ' s father, Josef Ruzicka, was killed at the Mauthausen
concentration camp in 1943. It was unhelpful that Nechansky and
Wahl were known to be very close friends since the war. The
discovery of one would automatically lead to the arrest of the other.
First Nechansky, then Wahl and all the other agents whom the
two leaders had recruited on behalf of the Americans, were arrested
in early September 1949. They never had a chance. All - men and
women - were severely tortured; even the police photographer who
took their pictures for the court did not bother to cover up this fact.
The trial in April 1950 became an orgy of anti-American propaganda, played out in the communist daily Rude Pravo, but also in
other papers. The names of Taggart, hi s assistant Samuel Meryn, and
others from the Embassy appeared repeatedly in the manipulated
press, accompanied by photographs of radio stations and weapons
the StB uncovered in the houses of the would-be agents. The outcome of the tri al had been determined in advance. Nechansky and
18
AMI , Z-651 , fil e 13, OBZ (Main Directorate), Ministry of Defen se, Summary of
Reports 302-592- 1.
�62
SLOVAKIA
Wahl were sentenced to death and executed on I 6 Jul y I 950. All
other sentences were draconian.
When American intelligence officers arrived in Czechoslovakia
in May 1945 it see med th at the cause of western democracy was
dealt a lucky hand. They were educated and motivated, they understood the country, its language and hi story , they had time to prepare
for the comi ng confrontation with their Soviet opponent, and they
enjoyed the unqualified support of Ambassador Steinhardt.
Importantly, many in the Czech political and military elites, and
significant numbers in the sec urity appara t were approachable by US
intelligence personnel seeking classified information. The Americans
who were in the business of collecting political, military, and comercial secrets in Prague had access to some of the highest ranking personalities in the Office of the President and Government, including
the Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, and Ministry of Interior.
Some Czechoslovak officials were eager to provide Americans with
classified information. Leaking information to American officials
was neither dishonorable nor unpatriotic. It was a contribution to the
cause of democracy. It would be hard to imagine any other country
where there existed such a harmony of interest between American
intelligence collectors and their sources. All these factors put
together make the swift defeat of democracy in Czechoslovakia and
the totalitarian victory in February 1948 all the more humiliating.
�
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
2007, Vol. 39
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 39 (No. 72-73), 2007.
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
2007
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
50
SLOVAKIA
CZECHOSLOVAKIA 1945-1950:
A FAILURE OF INTELLIGENCE
Igor Lukes
The outcome of the Czechoslovak political crisis from the end of
World War II via the communist Machtergreifung in February 1948,
and into the early fifties was not a preordained conclusion . It was not
determined solely by the weight of the emerging blocs, it was not
driven by the map, nor was it simply for the Kremlin to dictate.
On the Czech side, it was mainly the product of unfounded hope
(faith in an untested "socialism"), misplaced trust (deification of the
Soviet Union and its leaders), and pathological fear of Germany. But
the west also contributed to the communist victory by political blunders and amateurism in other field s. This papers focu ses on the U.S.
intelligence community in postwar Prague.
Looking at Czechoslovakia before the end of the war, and seeking to predict its political course in postwar Europe cou ld lead one to
imagine a variety of scenarios. A minority saw the future in dark colors: they thought the country was destined to become a colony of
the Soviet Union . They noted that the Czechoslovak political elite,
punch-drunk from the Munich catastrophe, had taken steps that tied
their country with Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union. No one in the west
doubted that President Edvard Benes and most of his colleagues in
London were ideologically on their side, but it was clear that they
still felt deep resentment over the manner in which their diplomatic
alliances were imploded by the western appeasers of the Third Reich.
They moved closer toward the Soviet Union because of the Munich
experience and in order to show the British Foreign Office that when
it came to coalitions in the postwar setting they no longer depended
exclusively on the west; they had the Soviet card and they wou ld
play it as needed to prevent "another Munich".
An even greater factor for the pessimists was the country's location on the map and the situation at the front. The Red Army crossed
the Czechoslovak border on 6 October 1944, while the allies were
recovering from the disastrous Operation Market-Garden . Stalin was
inside Czechoslovakia, but the western allies were stil l far away
SLOVAKIA
51
(U.S. Army units would cross onto Czech territory only on 18 April
1945). This led Ambassador William C. Bullitt to predict that after
the war the Kremlin would "domin ate Finland, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland , Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia." Bullitt speculated that Moscow had learned from its defeat in
Hungary after World War I and would therefore apply different strategies in different countries located in the space between Germany
and Ru ssia. 1 The Soviet Union might come with cold steel into the
Baltics and Poland, but with treaties and patience to Finland and
Czechoslovakia. Two wartime U.S. intelligence analysts observed
years later that after the signing of the Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement of December 1943 they had no illusions about the way Stalin
was setting forth his policy toward all the countries of Eastern Europe, including Czechoslovakia. 2
The political course of Czechoslovakia inspired lots of optimists
in the fall of 1944. The allied press was beaming with good new s,
predicting that the country's postwar political life would simply pick
up where "it was ruthlessly interrupted by the Munich Agreement of
September 1938." Some American journalists celebrated a " pattern
of cooperation" among the allied governments and proposed that the
December 1943 Czechoslovak-Soviet Agreement was a " model " for
others to follow. 3 Some suggested that the May 1944 Dutch, Belgian,
and Norwegian agreements with the British and the Americans regarding the restoration of their sovereign status after liberation followed
in the path originally established by the exiled Czechoslovak
government, which had signed half a year before a treaty with the
Soviet Union addressing matters of sovereignty and postwar administration. 4 When the country 's President Edvard Benes turned sixty
on 28 May 1944, he received telegrams from many leaders of the
1
Willi am C. Bullitt, "The World From Rome: The Ete rn al C ity Fears a Struggle
Between Christianity and Comm uni sm," Life Magazine, 4 September 1944. For a
Soviet reaction to Bullitt' s ana lysis, see K. Demidov, "Obankrotivshiisia razvedch ik,
,. Pra vda, 4 September 1944. Note the dates.
2
Interview wi th Spencer L. Taggart, Logan, Utah, 23 April 1999 and interview with
Paul Zinner, 5 Apri l 2005 , Washington .
3
No au thor, "The Pattern of Cooperati on," New York Times, 18 May 1944.
4
J. Emlyn Williams, " Smaller Allies in Europe Differ in Peace Readiness," Christian Science Monitor. IO May 1944.
52
SLOVAKIA
anti-Nazi alliance, and New York Times called him a " prophet of a
great cause" and a "fine champion" of democracy.5
Among the optimists was the influential C. L. Sulzberger who
summed up the geopolitical situation in the east at the end of August
1944. The future borders of Finland , the Baltic republics, Poland,
Hungary and others were at the mercy of Joseph Stalin. But "Mr.
Benes has already got - he obtained it three years ago - a Soviet
guarantee that Czechoslovakia 's pre-Munich frontiers will be re-established." 6 No doubt, thi s flattered President Benes enormously and
reaffirmed him in his determination to establish hi s country as a
friend of both the blocs and a bridge between them.
The optimistic view that Czechoslovakia, balancing precariously
between east and west, would maintain its sovereignty persisted even
in the face of hard evidence that its political scene was undergoing
dramatic changes in the direction of a gloomy scenario. In early April 1945, when the composition of the new Czechoslovak Government became known, Paul Zinner, an OSS (Office of Strategic Services) analyst in Washington , took the list of its members to the
Department of State. He hoped to explain that the new Prime Minister had gained a reputation for being an apologist for even the most
odious Soviet foreign policy deci sions. Zinner was di sturbed that the
Czechoslovak Ministry of Interior was to be headed by a communist,
and the same was true for the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Information, Ministry of Agriculture, and de facto, the Ministry of Defense . All in all, he thought that the government' s composition was a
bad omen.
But Zinner's State Department colleagues thou ght there was no
reaso n to be concerned. They glanced at the list and learned that the
country would have Edvard Benes as president and Jan Masaryk as
foreign minister. " What could go wrong with such friends at the
helm ?" they asked . " We have nothing to fear, " they concluded,
di smisssed Zinner's concerns and turned their attention to other matters, including the imminent opening of the United States Embassy in
Prague. Zinner recalls leaving the Czech affairs desk with a sense of
foreboding and frustration: there seemed little he could do to
5
No author, "Benes at 60," New York Times, 28 May 1944.
C. L. Sulzberger, " Frontier Policies of Russia Emerge," New York Times, 28
August 1944.
6
SLOVAKIA
53
persuade the optimists that the Czechs might ultimately share the fate
of the Poles, Hungarians and others in the region. 7
Finally, there were the reali sts, who staked out their territory in
the space between the optimists and pessimists. They did not believe
it was possible in 1944 to predict Czechoslovakia's future political
orientation and course. But they were prepared to say that the country was the most important laboratory for testing east-west relations
in the region. Charles E . Bohlen rejected the view expressed by his
colleagues that Poland was the country to study in order to discern
whether the west could coexist with Stalin. Poland's fate had been
sealed, he thought. The real test, Bohlen went on to argue, was Czechoslovakia. Benes had signed the December 1943 treaty with Stalin
despite opposition from his British hosts. " If the USSR really implemented that treaty and did not violate it then we would have an indication that it might be possible to get along with the Soviet Union after all. If the Soviet Union should break the treaty - the Czechs having gone as far as anybody could expect them to go - this might be
an indication that cooperation with the Soviet Union would not be
possible." 8 Other Americans, for instance, Averell Harrimann, shaed
thi s view. 9
Bohlen ' s analysis carried the day. The United States would henceforth treat Prague as a testing ground and an observation post. Although it was in Eastern Europe and the spires of the Kremlin cast a
shadow over it, the city had the atmosphere of a western outpost. It
welcomed the Americans who came to reopen the United States
Embassy in May 1945. And Washington reciprocated by building up
its diplomatic and intelligence presence in postwar Czechoslovakia
to unprecedented levels. In short order, the embassy at the Schoenborn Palace had a staff of more than two hundred employees.
There were several reasons why U.S. intelligence in postwar
Czechoslovakia could have performed well during the crisis leading
up to the Communist Machtergreifung of February 1948. The first
7
Interview with Paul Zinner, 5 April 2005 , Washington.
The Harry S. Truman Library . Harry N. Howard , "Oral Hi story Interview ," 7-8
October 1976. lnterview by Richard D. McKinzie.
9
Eduard Mark, "Charles Bohlen and the Acceptable Limits of Soviet Hegemony in
Eastern Europe: A Memorandum of 18 October 1945," Diplomatic History 3, 2
(Spring 1979): I05.
8
54
SLOVAKIA
has to do with time and opportunity to launch intelligence operations.
The U.S. Army had not played any direct role in the liberation of
Poland from Nazism, and the imposition of Soviet rule over the
country was violent and rapid. The same was true - with significant
regional variations - in Hungary and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
When American diplomats and intelligence officers arrived in postwar Warsaw they had little or no time to get to know the terrain and
to establish contacts to be exploited in the future. Right from the start
they operated under significant or even extreme counterintelligence
pressure from the domestic and Soviet special services.
The opposite was true in Czechoslovakia, where the American
intelligence community had plenty of time to prepare for the co ming
crisis. Small elements of the U.S. Army had arrived in Prague some
two days before the Russians, the U.S. military liberated several prominent Czech cities, and the G.l.s remained deployed in Western
Bohemi a for seven months. During thi s time and later - until the
spri ng of 1948 - Americans could freely travel in and out of Prague,
and U.S. intelligence thus had countless opportunities to set down its
roots in Czech soil.
Moreover, the Czech co mmunists took until February 1948 to establish their dictatorship. Throughout thi s time each branch of the
Prague government included individuals who were happy to provide
confidential information to the Americans. President Edvard Benes
set the tone when he met with such known U.S. intelligence officials
as Allen Dulles, the Englishman Robert Bruce Lockhart, and others.
Many other high-ranking government officials, including cabinet
ministers, scores of military officers, policemen, secret police agents,
and intellige nce service officials were willing to provide information
to U.S. intelligence operatives in Prague. These individuals were not
agents in the formal meaning of the word. They had not been formally recruited, handled in a clandestine manner, and paid. They
provided the Americans with information from various denied areas
of official life because there was a community of interest between
the United States and their well positioned so urces in Czechoslovakia. From a spymaster's perspective a better environment was hard
to imagine.
American diplomats and intelligence officers came to postwar
Poland and other East European countries only after Russian tanks
SLOVAKIA
55
had helped install a Moscow-vetted government in power. This
relegated them to the role of observers. But United States intelligence operatives in postwar Czechoslovakia had had plenty of time
to prepare for the Cold War milieu. How did they do in postwar
Czechoslovakia? This is the question this paper seeks to address.
The chief American diplomat in Prague was Ambassador Laurence A. Steinhardt, whose service in the Soviet Union included the
period of the Stalin-Hitler pact, and who had, as a result, a skeptical
view of all things Soviet. The Kremlin bosses had snubbed him
repeatedly, and he disliked them with passion. In Prague Steinhardt
surrounded himself with such like-minded anti -Stalinists as Colonel
(later General ) Joseph Anthony Michela, US Military Attache, and
others . The U.S. Embassy in Prague under Steinhardt had no intention of accommodating any communist or Soviet schemes. The ambassador's ideology and hi s can-do attitude combined to provide a
good working atmosphere for American intelligence in Prague.
U.S. Intelligence in Prague after the end of World War II was
organized around two separate pl atforms, the Military Mission and
the United States Embassy. The United States Military Mission was
established in Prague only a few weeks after the end of the war.
Even in that most abnormal era it was a very unorthodox operation.
The commaning officer of the Military Mission was Colonel Charles
Katek. 10 He was the first among several larger-than-life Americans
who descended upon Prague right after the war's end.
When Katek joined the Army, his Ph.D. in hi story from Northwestern University and hi s Czech and German language skills did
not go unnoticed. After an officer candidate course, the OSS was a
logical destination . Katek and his team of OSS operatives reached
Prague on IO May 1945, soon after the Red Army had arrived.
In Prague Katek found a luxurious apartment on Loretanske
Square, a most prestigious address. He and his colleagues developed
it into a salon where so me of the most interesting and influential
people gathered regularly. It was well known that Katek was keenly
10
Most of my infonnation is from the Prague archives and from Janet Edwards, Colone l Katek 's daughter, Interv iew, 19 Jul y 2000. The ori ginal name of the fami ly
was Kotek; it was changed to Katek in Chicago. Since "Kotek" does not sound particul arly Czech, it remains unclear whether the fam il y had come from Bohemia or
Slovakia.
56
SLOVAKIA
interested in intelligence; he was remarkably open about it. Among
his guests were members of various noble families, such as Schwarzenberg, Lobkowitz, Czernin, Kolowrat, and Nadherny ; government
officials, for instance Minister Jan Masaryk, Minister Petr Zenk),
Minister Jaroslav Stransky , Minister Adolf Prochazka, and Minister
Frantisek Hala; at least a dozen members of parliament, including
lvo Duchacek; countless personalities from business circles, and
influential political journalists, such as Julius Firt, Ferdinand Peroutka and Pavel Tigrid.
Visitors were attracted to the Military Mission by the prospect of
friendly conversation and challenging political debates. Of course,
no one should underestimate the importance in postwar Prague of
good food, exotic alcohol, tobacco, and jazz records, all of which
were made plentiful by Colonel Katek 's regular truck deliveries from
a U.S. Army base in Nuremberg. Those who came and talked to the
Americans at Loretanske Square knew full well that their words
would be passed on to the authorities. Katek 's approach was to blur
the line between dinner parties and espionage. It made his life both
simple and pleasant.
The Military Mission had a few sources who were not invited to
join the parties on Loretanske Square. Even in such cases Colonel
Katek made no attempt to practice the kind of tradecraft that is
common in the world of intelligence. He met them durin g office
hours at the Mission. The activities around the Military Miss ion in
Prague were so notorious that other Americans who served in postwar Czechoslovakia were not quite sure what to think about the
situation. 11
They were right to be concerned. The Czech authorities paid
attention to what was happening around Colonel Katek. They quickly surmi sed that he was conducting military and political espionage.
An StB document notes that in November 1945 thirty-eight Czechs
were in the category of regular visitors at the Military Mission. In
January 1946 the OBZ insisted that the Mission with its 10 US Army
11
Interview with Louise Schaffner, 30 January 1999. Mrs. Schaffner was a Foreign
Service officer in the U. S. Embassy in Prague at the time of the communi st coup
d ' etat.
SLOVAKIA
57
officers ran 109 agents. 12 On the basis of my interviews the claim
appears to be signifycantly exaggerated. But the Military Mission
under Colonel Katek 's direction was very active in gathering intelligence in postwar Prague. Its information came from willing and
well-placed sources, not recruited agents. Though it seemed like a
good idea at the time, the weakness of this manner of gathering intelligence would be revealed in February 1948.
From the summer of 1945 to February 1948, the Military Mission reported information from an impressive array of well-placed
sources: aristocrats, ministers, officials from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Mini stry of Interior, Ministry of Defense generals,
high-ranking soldiers and pilots, security officials, and businessmen .
It was easy to think that intelligence gathered from such knowledgeable and well-placed individuals was enough for analysts in
Washington to create a true and accurate picture of the political crisis
in Czechoslovakia.
The intelligence section in the Embassy was led by Spencer Taggart. He arrived in Prague in the Spring of 1945 with a clear mission :
"I was sent there with a long-term objective - to help the Czechs
guard their independence and to promote western democracy." 13
Seen in thi s light, Taggart came to protect and promote the values
that were agreeable to the majority of the political class and the population . Therefore, it was not difficult for him to gain access to a
number of sources that were both knowledgeable and well informed
- he was prepared to identify only four, Petr Zenk! , Major Jaromir
Nechansky, Jan Stransky and lvo Duchacek, but there were others.
For all their commitment, their well-placed so urces of information, and their knowledge of the terrain, the United States Embassy in Prague was consistently taken by surprise whenever a crisis
developed. The first such occasion involved the May 1946 elections
that resulted in a swee ping victory for the Communist Party of
Czechoslovakia. The OSS and State Department analysts took note
of it, of course, but as one member of Katek 's team put it "were we
smart enough to realize that thi s was the beginning of the end? I
12
Archives of the Ministry of Interi or, AMI Z-651, file 13. LT COL Bedrich Reicin
and CPT Kare l Vas, Main Directorate, OBZ, Ministry of Defense, 302-592-1, no.
150.457/secret report -2c-/ 1946, 24 January 1946.
13
Interview with Spencer L. Taggart, Logan , Utah , 23 April 1999.
58
SLOVAKIA
doubt it. " 14 Ambassador Steinhardt had predicted an entirel y different outcome and he adopted an ostrich-like posture when faced with
the election results.
Another event that clearly and unmi stakabl y indicated th at the
Kremlin and the Czechoslovak communists were on the verge of seizing power took place in Ju ly 1947 . It involved the Marshall plan.
The Soviets had made clear in early July 1947 that they would take
part neither in the conference nor in the Marshall plan itself. But the
Czechs, including the leaders of the CPC, were planning to go as late
as 7 Jul y 1947. They were invited to the Kremlin , and two days later,
an official delegation from Prague was in Moscow. On 10 July 1947
Czechoslovakia announced that it would not be represented in Paris.
The American Embassy happened to be rudderless while the Prague Government was performing its backward so mersault on the
Marshall Plan : the Ambassador and hi s Deputy Chief of Miss ion ,
John Bruins, were attending a boar hunt organized by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and Katek and Taggart went with them. Two junior
diplomats found out about the reversal and informed Washington . 15
But hav ing arrived from the desk of a junior diplomat it left no lasting footprint in the halls of the Department of State.
The story was leaked also to the New York Times. An in-depth
article described the Marshall Plan fiasco and the current tense situation in Prague realistically and accurately. But then it quoted "observers here," a reference to U.S. diplomats in Prague, as being skeptical that the Ru ssians would try to impose upon Czechoslovakia " the
kind of communist state that preva il s in Rumani a, Bul garia and
Poland. " 16 The hopeful view, the paper reported , was that in following its tradition the Kremlin might in fact decide to withdraw altogether back to Ru ssia, lest its people become contaminated with the
west. This optimism was anchored in the views of the ambassador,
his deputy , but also Katek and Taggart.
The Embassy's record during the deci sive days of February 1948
is not impressive. Ambassador Steinhardt was in the United States
attending to business at the law firm Guggenheimer, Untermyer &
14
Interview with Walter Taub, Salzburg. Austria. 6 March 2000 .
Interview with George Bogardus, Washington, 3 June 1998.
16
James Reston, "Czechs Bow East Politicall y but Back West Inte llectuall y," New
York Times, 5 August 1947.
15
SLOVAKIA
59
Marshall on Pine Street in New York City. He had joined it in 1920
and remained an active partner even after he started, in 1933, his diplomatic career as U. S. Ambassador in Stockholm. Spencer Taggart
was on a motoring tour of Italy with his wife. For the ambassador
and for Spencer Taggart to be out of the country at the time of the
coup was embarrassing. The game was lost now - when the opponent took to the field , the Americans were not even dressed to play.
The ambassador and the upper echelons at the Embassy had surrounded themselves primarily with the titled and propertied classes.
They failed to notice that the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia
had won real support not only among the working class and trade
unionists, but importantly among the intellectual s, traditionally a
crucial social group in the Czech lands. Neither the Embassy nor the
Military Mission had connections in those circles. The CPC had
saturated the democratic parties with its agents; it could anticipate
and neutralize their activities. The democrats had not imagined that
such conduct was possible. Neither they nor their American friends
at the Embassy or Mission had recruited any intelligence assets at the
level of the CPC Politburo or even the Central Committee apparat.
Steinhardt ' s optimism influenced others in the Embassy and
some in the State Department. But leading American diplomats, such
as George Kennan and Charles Bohlen, were not at all surprised by
the Prague coup. As we have seen, this was not thanks to reports of
the U. S. Embassy in Prague or thanks to information from U. S.
intelligence.
Among those who had been expecting a decisive communist
move against Czechoslovakia was Secretary of State Marshall. In his
November 1947 memorandum for President Truman he approached
the iss ue like a military strategist examining the map. He found that
Moscow " will probably have to clamp down on Czechoslovakia, for
a relatively free Czechoslovakia could become a threatening salient
in Moscow's political position. " 17 As it happened, the Prague coup
d'etat was played out as an internal affair, and Moscow could remain
in its comfortable position of a sympathetic observer. The result was
exactly as Marshall had predicted.
17
The Harry S. Truman Library, Papers of Harry S. Truman , Files of the White
House Nava l Aide, G. C. M., Secretary of State, Memorandum for the President, 7
November 1947 .
60
SLOVAKIA
Marshall 's analysis, based on common sense and years of military experience, offered more insight into the crisis in Prague than
that provided by American diplomats and intelligence personnel
based in the city. It is a serious indictment of U.S. intelligence performance in postwar Prague that the sec retary of state should have
come up with a more accurate assessment of the evolving crisis than
trained intelligence personnel with language skills and sources at the
highest ranks of the Czechoslovak Government.
Even if the communist coup d 'etat in Czechoslovakia did not
surprise Secretary Marshall, like many others he considered it a watershed in east-west relations. On 10 March 1948 he stated that the
situation in Europe was "very , very serious" and ten days later he
called for " urgent and resolute action" if the United States was to
defend the west. The United States Embassy in Prague was not in a
position to contribute to the effort. The February coup d 'etat brutally
revealed the weaknesses of the overt style of intelligence gathering
employed by the Military Mission. Almost overnight, the former
guests of Colonel Katek had lost their posts in government, security,
the military, and the world of business. At least one was dead, some
in prison, the majority seeking to escape; the lucky ones were
already in the west; some of the prominent habitues of Loretanske
Square were under house arrest. None had access to information that
would be of interest to the Americans. Neither Katek nor Taggart
had thought of putting in place an intelligence-gathering network that
would become operational in case of a communist assumption of
power. Building one now was next to imposs ible: no Czech with
some official standing (except for StB agents) dared to come to the
Embassy, and few were willing to risk speaking with American
diplomats even in private.
Yet this was the time when intelligence was most desperately
needed. In June or July 1948, in the first weeks of the Berlin blockade, General Lucius Clay, Commanding General of U.S . Forces in
Europe and Military Governor of Germany, summoned Taggart and
told him to expect an outbreak of war with the Soviet Union within
four months. The general asked him to build in Czechoslovakia a
network of intelligence assets who would be equipped with radio
stations. It was to remain inactive during peacetime but spring into
action in case of hostilities between the United States and the Soviet
SLOVAKIA
61
bloc. Their mission was to gather military intelligence and transmit it
to the Americans if the east-west tensions caused an evacuation of
the U.S. Embassy in Prague.
Taggart was eager to carry out his orders, but he was scheduled
to leave the Prague post in October 1948 at the latest. When he reviewed the list of people who might help him put together the kind of
network General Clay wanted, he selected Major Jaromir Nechansky
(born I 916). It was not a lucky choice. Nechansky was a brave,
highly motivated , British-trained commando and intelligence officer,
but his wartime service in the west, his activities in occupied
Czechoslovakia from February to May 1945, and his frequent social
contacts with the Americans before the communist take-over made
him an obvious target of the Czechoslovak Military Counter
Intelligence, Obranne zpravodajstvi, OBZ. In 1946 it concluded:
"Nechansky is in frequent contact with Katek ; he most likely works
for the Americans." 18
The Americans decided to recruit also Veleslav Wahl. This
young man - he was born in 1922 - came from a well-known family
that had already experienced more than its share of tragedy: his father, Veleslav, and uncle, Karel, were executed by the Nazis in 1942;
his future wife ' s father, Josef Ruzicka, was killed at the Mauthausen
concentration camp in 1943. It was unhelpful that Nechansky and
Wahl were known to be very close friends since the war. The
discovery of one would automatically lead to the arrest of the other.
First Nechansky, then Wahl and all the other agents whom the
two leaders had recruited on behalf of the Americans, were arrested
in early September 1949. They never had a chance. All - men and
women - were severely tortured; even the police photographer who
took their pictures for the court did not bother to cover up this fact.
The trial in April 1950 became an orgy of anti-American propaganda, played out in the communist daily Rude Pravo, but also in
other papers. The names of Taggart, hi s assistant Samuel Meryn, and
others from the Embassy appeared repeatedly in the manipulated
press, accompanied by photographs of radio stations and weapons
the StB uncovered in the houses of the would-be agents. The outcome of the tri al had been determined in advance. Nechansky and
18
AMI , Z-651 , fil e 13, OBZ (Main Directorate), Ministry of Defen se, Summary of
Reports 302-592- 1.
62
SLOVAKIA
Wahl were sentenced to death and executed on I 6 Jul y I 950. All
other sentences were draconian.
When American intelligence officers arrived in Czechoslovakia
in May 1945 it see med th at the cause of western democracy was
dealt a lucky hand. They were educated and motivated, they understood the country, its language and hi story , they had time to prepare
for the comi ng confrontation with their Soviet opponent, and they
enjoyed the unqualified support of Ambassador Steinhardt.
Importantly, many in the Czech political and military elites, and
significant numbers in the sec urity appara t were approachable by US
intelligence personnel seeking classified information. The Americans
who were in the business of collecting political, military, and comercial secrets in Prague had access to some of the highest ranking personalities in the Office of the President and Government, including
the Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, and Ministry of Interior.
Some Czechoslovak officials were eager to provide Americans with
classified information. Leaking information to American officials
was neither dishonorable nor unpatriotic. It was a contribution to the
cause of democracy. It would be hard to imagine any other country
where there existed such a harmony of interest between American
intelligence collectors and their sources. All these factors put
together make the swift defeat of democracy in Czechoslovakia and
the totalitarian victory in February 1948 all the more humiliating.
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
Czechoslovakia 1945-1950: A Failure of Intelligence
Description
An account of the resource
Igor Lukes
Slovakia, Vol. 39 (No. 72-73), 2007
pp. 50-62
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Lukes, Igor
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2007
LCNAF
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ac676f26d9bccebffe071ba5dbbb8c3e.pdf
6ed8b369e24e99e25b74347fae78df41
PDF Text
Text
SLOVAKIA
61
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka's
Hortulus Animae Piae
G erald J . Sabo
In Slovak areas during the seventeenth ce ntury , n ation ali st ic turmoil and religious strife were prominent features of life a nd society. Ethnic
consciousness and religious commitment so pe rvaded political r elations
that they pitted Hungarian s, Germans, and Slovaks against o ne another
in shifting alliances. R eli gion, though, remain ed the " leadin g force"
for virtually the entire ce ntury. 1 Indeed , the writings of thi s period Slovak and L a tin - clearly bear this out. 2 Hymnals, hom il etic writing,
religious disputa tion s, doctrinal a nd d evo tion al lite ra ture, school plays
related to religious formation, as well as accounts of imprisonment and/or
ex ile for religious r eason s occupy a promin ent place among the
Slovak/Latin writin gs of this e ra.
Among the distinctive cultural figures of thi s century is the Lutheran family of Sinapius-Horcicka. 3 The father Mi chal a nd two of his sons ,
Jan a nd D ani el, stand out n ot only for their religiou s zeal but esp ec ially
for their eruditio n and writin gs. 4 Indeed , a numbe r of these writings
have earned them a significant place in Slovak cultural history. The father
Michal (d. 1653) was a pastor in Hricov and Sucany a nd a prominent
church elder in the Tre ncfn ecclesiastical (Lutheran) district. During
his studies at Wittenberg as a young man , he presented two public Latin
di sputatio n s: one on the definition and divisio n of m etaphysics and
another on the intell ect a nd w ill of intelli ge nt be in gs. 5 Mi ch al's commi tmen t to eruditio n must ce r tainly have influ en c~d his so n s J a n a nd
D aniel as evidenced by th e latter's activities and writin gs. Like their
fath er , th e sons devoted the ir scholarl y training to serv in g their fellow
Lutheran s as p astors a nd sc hool offi cials, in exile as well as in Slovak
areas. It is their wr itin gs, however, th at have establi shed th e ir places
in Slovak cultu ral history. Virtually all of J an 's extan t writings are written
in Latin o r German. 6 Among them are: 1. a Latin d evo tional work for
stu dents, H orologium sacrum (Sacred H o urs or C lock),7 where eve ry
hour of the day is directed to religious form ation ; 2. a L a tin play 8 H enoch
(E noch) ; an d Ornithica sacra (Sacred Ornithology) written in German
�62
SLOVAKIA
about birds with religious significance. 9 The writings of D aniel are composed in Latin or a vernacular Slovak 10 that shows the influence of and
commitment to Kralice-Biblical-Czech in his reli giou s training and
liturgical practice.
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka was born around 1640 in Sucany. 11 H e
was rector of the Lutheran school in J elsava from 1663-65, 12 a pastor
in K am enan/ 3 from 1665-67, 14 and from 1667-70 in Liptovska Tepla,
and finally from 1670 in R advan. In September, 1673 , Daniel was among
thirty-two Lutheran pastors summoned to trial befo re the Catholic Archbishop of E sztergom . 1~ After the trial , he went into exile first to Brieg
(today Brzeg) and then in the winter of 16 74 to Breslau (Wroclaw) , and
finally in November, 1677 16 to a certain Bojanowo in P oland , 17 where
he was rector of a school. 18 H orcicka returned from exi le some time in
1683, fir st to his former pastorate in R ad van, then in 1684 to a pastorate and position of school official in L evoca. H e remained in Levoca
un ti! his death in 1688.
Some eighteen works 19 are attributed to D aniel Sinapius-Horcicka.
Am ong the writings prominent in Slovak cultural history are : 1. H orcicka' s 1684 enlarged edition of the Lutheran hymnal Cithara sanctorum
(Zither of the Saints), also known as Tran osciu s after its compiler Ju raj
Tranovsky;2° 2. the 1682 wedding verse-composition in Latin, Coelum
Bojan ovien se (Bojanowo H eaven);2 1 3. Neoforum latino-slavonicum
(New L atin-Slavonic Forum) , a 1678 coll ection of popular/folk sayings
in L atin and Slovak;2 2 4. Perlicka ditek Bozich (The Little Pearl of God's
Children), a 1685 devotional work segm ented on the basis of the fi ve
divisions in Luther's catechi sm; 23 and 5. H ortulu s animae piae (The
Little Garden of the Piou s Soul), a 1676 devotional work and the subject of this article. 24
The L atin title of H orc icka 's 1676 work - H ortulu s animae piae
is intri guing. H ortulu s (Hortus) animae is the title for a
type of[Latin and/or German] devotional book of praye rs intended for the [Catholic] laity , that was widespread in Germany in the early sixteenth century .... The H ortuli .. . were
similar in general content and arrangement to many of the
L atin H orae or book of hours, or to the English primers , from
which they developed; howeve r , they were more popular in
character. The H ortuli contain ed the Little Office of Our
L ad y, extracts from the Gospel accounts of the passion, the
�SLOVAKIA
63
Penitential Psalms, and the Litany of the Saints , with a large
selection of supplementary d evotional matter. This material
of private prayer had the tendency to increase size and in extravagan ce. For example, promises of spurious indulgences
and complete forgiveness of sins became attached to man y
prayers . . . The Council of Trent legislated against the accretions , the false promises of indulgences, and the incorrect versions of the Little Office of Our Lady. A bull of Pius V (March
11, 1571) demanded rigorous censorship of all editions. 25
The article on " Hortus/ Hortulus " in Dictionnaire de Spiritualite traces
the extensive number of devotional works associated with this title and
type of writing. 26 The phrase " Hortulus animae" is derived not from
the aesthetic but from the utilitarian aspects of a garden as is evident
from three Latin distichs that usually prefixed many such writings. The
first two lines are as follows:
Ortulus exiguus varias ut saepe salubres Herbas producit, quas
medicina probat. (A small garden often produces a variety
of salutary herbs of which medicine knows the value.) 21
In his articles on the Hortulus animae , Herbert Thurston notes that
in 1569, a certain Lu the ran adaptation was published and called Der
Lustgarten der Seelen (The Pleasure Garden of the Soul). 28 F. Wulf,
though , notes that a Georg Rhaw (Rhau) produced a Lutheran version
in 154 7, in Wittenberg; it was published in 1559 and was composed on
the basis of printed Hortuli forbidden by the Spanish lnquisition . 29
Among the d evotional literature written by Slovak Lutherans , the title
for Horcicka 's composition - Hortulus animae piae - is unique. Nor
is the title Der Lustgarten der Seelen or some Slovak rendition to be
found among Slovak Lutheran writings_ Jo Thus , it remains an open question why Horcicka cho se a title more closely associated with Catholic
devotional writing rather than one from his own Lutheran tradition. JI
The introdu ctory portion of Horcicka ' s HortulusJ 2 has several divisions. On the title page, the full title reads: Hortulu s Animae Piae,
Zahradka Dussicky pobozne, Wkterez se clowek Krestiansky Suzitkem
prochazeti muze (The Little Garden of the Pi ou s Soul in Which a Christian Person Can Walk w ith Usefulness/ Profit). After the title page com es
that with Horcicka 's dedication of the book to "P . Markowy Hor vv
(w) ath-Stansith of Gradetz/Hradec? in the Stolica (Cou nty) of Spis and
�64
SLOVAKIA
to hi s w ife Zoffy, n ee M a riasse/M a ri asove? from Markussowic/Markusovce,'' whom H o rcicka calls Km otrum (God pare nt s) a nd
Dobrodin cu m (Be n efactors) . 33 In the fourt ee n pages that follow, H orcicka es ta blishes in Slovak th e basis or rationale for writing his Hortulus. H e d raws on Scriptu re as well as classical literature for refe ren ce
material. Two further p ages ( 15 and 16 in sequ e nce as these p ages a re
unnumbered) are devoted to the " Laskawemu Ctenari (Dear R eader). "
After these sixteen pages of basically Slovak prose, in the version studied
by m e there foll ow twelve pages in L a tin with dist inct parts. On p age
seventeen (in sequ en ce), H orcicka's brothe r J a n comm ents on the Hortulu s. Then, a close friend , P etr Sext ius, 34 addresses Daniel himself as
the form e r speaks on the H ortulus (pages 17-20). J a n Milochovinsky, 35
elder in the Zilina ecclesiastical district , h as a on e- page, addressed comm ent for D a ni el (page 21 ) . In the course of his comme n ts on the H ortulus, J a n Sextius, 36 called an "amico pectore ( close fri end)" by D a niel ,
addresses the '' P a nn onian offspring' ' and en courages them to show
gratitude to God an d the author of the Hortulu s (pages 22-23). In hi s
nearly three- page co mmentary , Jan Buriu s 37 draws on a number of
sources, theological a nd classical litera ry (pages 23-25). On pages 26
and 2 7 of this introdu ctory portion, Horcicka addresses a certain M a tthias Albrecht whom he d esignates as ''Pas. in Elect. Dresda ... Vallens
Hung. " 38 Fin all y, o n the final page of the int roducto ry portion (28),
the author of the H ortulu s addresses the b ook itself: 39 "A uthor ad
Libellum (Author to th e Little Book .)" At the bottom of this page, a
plaited wreath illu stration encompasses the following: '' D omini Sum us,
Dum Spiro Spero, D ominus Providebit (W e Are the Lord's, While I
Breathe, I Hope, The Lord Will Provide .)" With this succinct statem ent of purpose a nd ou tl ook , Horcicka concludes the in trod u ctory portion of his H ortulu s .
The m ain portion of the H ortulus consists of four hundred and eight
numbered pages virtually all in Slovak with some L atin wri ting and even
a few Greek words . (The Lat in and Greek are also transla ted into H orcicka 's vernacul ar Slovak.) H orcicka divid es the paginated portion into
twelve uneven sections. The division into twelve may have symbolic value
- twelve apostl es/twelve tri bes of Israel. 40 Each of these twelve sect ions
is called a " Prochadzka (Walk )."
Each ''Proch adzka '' begins in the same way . After the Roman
num eral indi cati ng the proper " Walk " are found the words: "wniZ
�SLOVAKIA
65
premyssluge pobozna dusse (in which the pious soul reflects)." In each
of the twelve ''walks ,'' the pious soul reflects on a different object: 1.
the garden in general; 2. the tree of this garden; 3. the well of this garden ;
4 . the dove in this garden; 5. the mirror hangin g in this garden; 6. the
winds that blow through this garden; 7. the palm (tree); 8. the vine
stock/ root; 9 . the fig (tree); 10. myrrh; 11. the rose; and 12 . the lily.
In his comments on these twelve objects for reflection, Horcicka engages
the senses of the reader. 41 Words that help conjure up "sense pictures"
of the objects for reflection enable the reader the better to assimilate the
theological truth presented in association with the objects . Indeed, in
the presentation order of his objects , H orcicka gradually refines the focus
of his reader from a garden in general to a small object like a flower.
After the object for a specific "walk " is named , Horcicka cites a
relevant passage from the Biblical book Song of Songs (also known as
th e Canticle of Canticles or Song of Solomon). In a comparison of H orcicka ' s citat ions from the Song of Songs with two editions of the Kralice
Bible (1579-93 and 161 3), 41 it is clear that Horcicka adapts the verses
somewhat, probably for the sake of better creating his verbal sense-picture of the object for reflection. 4 3 For "Walk X ," Horcicka' s verse quotation from the Song of So ngs is virtually an exact quotation of this verse
according to the 161 3 edition of the Kralice Bible. For " Walk II ," however, Horcicka' s citation see ms to be drawn from the 1579-93 editio n
of the Kralice Bible . At present, though, there is no way of de termining
whe ther Horci cka u sed these versions of the Bible, a nd , if so , which of
th e two , or som e othe r version. Horcicka ' s choi ce of th e Song of Songs
as the Biblical basis for the Hortulus seems natural , perhaps even predictabl e from the tradi tion of C hristian writings about thi s Biblical book.
F rom a s earl y as 200 AD , Christia n writers have commented on a nd
inte rpreted the Song of Songs, usually allegorically , even eroti cally. 44
Horcicka probably wa nted a Biblical work that is co n cern ed not only
wi th a garden , but contain s the various objects for refl ection tha t he cites.
Onl y th e Son g of Son gs co uld give him such varie ty .
In the co mm e nta ry th a t foll ows the verse(s) from the Son g of So ngs
in each " walk ," H o rcicka dra ws on a va ri ety of so urces fo r m a te rial s
to suppo rt hi s co mm ent s. As is to be ex pec ted , Script u re is a n a bundant so urce of ma teri al. R efe rence to ve rses from books of the O ld a nd
New T es ta m e nt can be fo und in eve ry " walk " in la r ge num be rs. 4 5 I ndeed , in " W alk V ," H orcicka gives som e two hun d red and twenty-six
�66
SLOVAKIA
distinct references from the Bible as authoritative corroboration for whatever interpretation and religious/moral instruction he has written.
Curiously, he cites verses from Sirach (some fifteen instances), from
Wisdom (some four instances) , and once each from the first and second
Book of Maccabees . None of these Old Testament books were considered
canonical enough for inclusion in any edition of the Kralice Bible or
probably any non-Catholic version through Horcicka's time. They are
found in Catholic versions of the Bible since well before Horcicka's time. 46
Horcicka refers to prominent Christian writers from early Christian times into his own era. References to various works by Augustine ,
to the writings of Luther, Gregory Nazianzus, Chrysostom, Tertullian ,
Origen, Ambrose, and to the history of Eusebius of Caesarea are noted
and footnoted, at times with even the folio/page numbers. References
to the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux, especially with regard to the
Song of Songs, are probably no surprise; Bernard wrote eighty-six sermons on the Song of Songs alone. Indeed, Horci cka notes sermon 61
where Bernard says that the Song's love pair are the Word of God and
a Soul. 47 Curiously, Horcicka notes two references from Cornelius a
Lapide, a Jesuit (d . 1637), a prolific Biblical exegete and interpreter.
Interestingly, Horcicka also has a single reference to a 1622 Czech translation of the Bible and to a Prague printing of Th e Imitation of Christ
by Thomas a Kempis (p. 171 ) . 48
In the Hortulus, there are a number of works noted and footnoted
that were probably well-known in Horcicka's time. (At the present time,
copies of some of these books are con sidered rare in many US libraries.)
Among these writings are: 1. Schola pietatis by Johann G erhard
(1582-1637), a Lutheran theologian; 49 2. Analecta sacra by J ohann
Heinrich Ursin (1608-67); 3. Arboretum biblicum, also by Ursin; and
4. "Hortus aromaticus," which is part 3 of U rsin 's Continuatio historiae
plantarum biblicae. I have found references for two authors whose names
resemble those footnoted by Horcicka but nothing about the works cited
as theirs. According to Horcicka, a certain Johann Michal Dilherr (a
poet and Lutheran theologian, 1604-69) wrote Welt, Feld, and
Gartenbetrachtung, 50 and a certain Johann Hu elsemann (Lutheran
theologian, 1602-61) is believed to have written Pentagonium
christian um. 51 With other books noted and footnoted by Horcicka , I
have been unable to find any reference for them or their authors. Among
these are: 1. Nicol(s) Roper's Helleuchtend Spiegel der Liebe ; 2. Mich(al)
�SLOVAKIA
67
Ba um a nn 's L exicon Allegorico Evangelicum; 3. Laur( entius)
Halvard(i/ us) ' s Speculum amoris; and 4 . Hist(oria) Boh(emica) by a
certain Dubrav( ius) . 51 In the Hortulus, there is also a good number of
books footnot ed only a few times or less .
The classical authors cited b y Horcicka are well-known figures from
Greek a nd Latin literature. From the Greeks, Herodotus, Homer,
X enophon , a nd Strabo, eve n Ari stotle provide supportive material for
Horcicka. Of the Latin writers , there are Cicero, Horace, Pliny, Plutarch,
Tacitus, Suetonius, and even the outstanding classical specialist, the Dutchman Joest Qustus) Lipsius (1547-1606) . Horcicka's use of these authors
in a d evotional wo rk is not unusual for his time; classical literature continued to provide exempla tive material for writers in Slovak areas through
the eighteenth century .
At the conclusion of each ''walk ,'' Horcicka places Slovak ' ' Modlitby (Prayers)." U sually there are three distinct prayers, except for " Walks
VII a nd XII ," with only two . These prayers are mostly in prose, though
some are in verse, i.e . distichs combined in paired or enclosing rhymes. 53
The various verse compositions in the Hortulus range from six to seventysix verses . Three of the shortest follow , with a literal tra nslation . To
my knowledge they h ave not elsewhere b een reprinted . 54
Ach prigd Pane gezissi
prigd zen ichu neykrazssi
Nawsstew wernu iwu du ssi
at ljby twug hlas slissi
A wmile Zahradce swe
Bud' odpocinuti twe (p. 14)
Com e oh Lord J esus
come most handsome bridegroom
Visit the tru e i va of the soul
May it hear your kind voice
And in your dear Garden
Be your rest
2
KR ys te deg nam wwjre stalost
odegmi ss kodn u wrtkawost
Bychom cyle wi ry dossli
Zsmni casne do Nebe ssli
Na to rjka m Amen/ Amen/
Spas nas Gezu Kryste Amen. (p. 245)
C hri st give us steadfastness in fa ith
take away harmful fickleness
That the goals of faith be attained
Went in time from death to H eaven
To this I say Amen/ Amen/
Save us J esus C hrist Am en .
3
Pos pess o ma dusse ho/sweho
Kwytanj ze nicha ct neho
Kteryz na dum tweho srdce
Ruku mi los ti swe tlu ce
Otewri swe brany gemu
Pekne promluw/ a rcy kn emu
Prigd mi ly mug/ fada m tebe
Nechcy ziti gs uc bez tebe. (p. 337)
H as ten o my sou l him/ of your
Flowerin g the honorable bridegroom
Who upon the house of your heart
With th e hand of his love knocks
Open your gates to him
Nicely speak/ a nd say to hi m :
Come my dear/ I beg you
I do not wish to live being without you .
�68
SLOVAKIA
Whil e the literary value of the verse compositi ons in the H ortulus is
limited , in the narrow sense, they can be considered examples of early
Slovak ve rse writing .
Each of the prayers at the end of the "walks" - verse or prose
- is designated for som e definite purpose ; for instan ce: " For the dear
presence of God; " "For the proper purity of heart , for sincerity, and
piety;" "For the recognition of people's woes and God ' s good acts;"
" For patience in crises and firmn ess in faith ;" and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful ," the last praye r and part of the Hortulus . According to Hurban, the H ortulu s had appended to it " M ensje
jeho basne (his/ Horcicka's/sm aller verses). " 55 Whether Hurban might
be referring to some of the verse compositions in the H ortulus or to some
other ve rses not part of the H ortulus in itself is not clear . In the version
of the Hortulus studied b y m e, the last two prayers (pages 404-408) are
'' For the forgiveness of forgetfulness which we allow while receiving God 's
gifts, " and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful. " For
H orcicka, these subjects may have seem ed an apt conclusion fo r his devotion al work . There is no reason to suspect that there was more writing
related to the Hortulu s which for some reason is not in the bound copy
in the Lycealna knizni ca. Indeed , Rizn er notes that the H ortulu s has
four hundred and eight numbered pages, as does Tablic - the number
found in the Lycealna copy of the H ortulus.
As a fi gure in Slovak cultural hi story, D ani el Sinapius-Horcicka
occupies a definite place. In his H ortulus animae piae, as in other
writings , he manifests a Slovak ethnic consciousness that stands out in
the seve nteenth ce ntury. 56 Through hi s religious zeal, erudition , and
talent , he also provides hi s fellow Lutherans wi th devo tion al writin g to
co nsole them in their time of exile and trials . In effect, he has composed
a notewo rthy example of early Slovak writing. Through not strictly
literary, the Slovak prose a nd verse of H orcicka's Hortulus m erit far
more attention and study th an they have rece ived - practicall y speaking, virtu ally none. It is hoped that thi s study is but the bare beginnin g
of research on the H ortulu s and its author, Daniel Sinapiu s-Horcicka .
NOTES
' J a n Du rov ic, Evanjelick a liceracura d o colerancie (Turcia nsky Sviity M a nin : M a ti ca
slove nska, 1940), p . 5 1.
' This is shown by a peru sal of th e following : J a n Durovic, Evangelicka liceracura a nd
�SLOVAKIA
'
'
'
6
1
'
'
'
0
69
also his Prehl'ad literarnych dejin slovenskych eva njelikov (Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas:
Tra noscius, 1948); " Barak ," D ejin y starsej slovenskej /iteratury (Bratislava:
V ydava tel'stvo Slovensk ej akademie vied , 1958), pp . 155 -298; Literarna rukovat',
2nd ed. (Bra tisl ava: Slove nske pedagogicke nak ladatel's tvo , 1981 ) pp. 72-97.
M an y Lutheran famili es adop ted Latin renditions of the family na mes as new surnames. This hyphena ted name is used for Horcicka family members in Slovak litera ry
hi stories and criti cism as well as in th e a rticl es on them in Encyklopedia Slovenska ,
V ( 198 1).
J an the younger , son of J a n th e elder - Daniel's brother - also wrote a number
of works: l'.udovft Rizner, Bibliogra fia pisomnictva slovenskeho , V (Turciansky Svaty
Martin: M a ri ca slova neka, 1933), 80-81. ( H ereafter , Rizn er , volume in Rom a n
numeral , page(s) in Arabic num eral(s) .) Also , J an Misianik, Doplnky k Rizn erovej
bib/iogra fii , 1946 , 2nd revised and enlarged edition (Martin : Matica slovenska, 1971),
pp. 252 -253 . Jan and Dani el' s sister Elena married into prominent Luthera n families
such as La ni a nd Lad ive r - Jan Slavik, D ejin y zvolenskeho evanjelickeh o a. v.
bra1s1va a senioratu (Banska Sti avn ica: NakJad vdovy a syna AugustaJoergesa, 1921 ),
p . 344.
Rizn er, V , 8 1; Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p. 62 , incompl ete Latin titles.
Rizn er , V , 79-80 ; Durovic, Evanje/ick a Iiteratura , pp. 142-43 , 348; Alexander Lomba rdini, "J a n Sina pi us (H orcicka), #38, " "Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovensk e pohl'ady,
7, No. 4 ( 1887), 82-83; Misia nik , D oplnky , P . 252.
Durovic , Evanje/icka literatura, p. 69
Durovic, Prehl'ad , p . 40 , a nd Evanjelicka literatura , pp . 9 1-92 has " play, " but Erce
(pseudonym of Celes tin R advany i) , Slovenska krv (Bratislava : Vydavatel'stvo lexikalneho di ela " Slovenska krv, " 1942), p. 160 calls it a " praye r book for intellect uals."
J an di ed in ex ile in H alle on August 4, 1682: Rizn er , V , 79 ; Bohuslav Tablic, Pameti
cesk o-slovenskych basnifuv an eb versovcuv , origin all y published in 1800' s,
Bi og raphi ca-Pra mene, zv. 1 (M a rtin : M a rica slovenska , 1972) , p . LXV (65) , and
in Pam ati cesko-slovenskych basnikov alebo versovcov, Rudo Brtai\, tr. (Bratislava :
T at ran , 1974), p. 57; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, V (1981) , sub verbo " SinapiusH orcicka, J a n , st. "
The ve rn acula r Slovak used by Daniel is called " Slovakized Czech " by Jozef Minarik
in Li1erarna rukova t', p. 72 , in both editions. Discussion a bout this la ngu age a nd
its prope r desc ripti ve na me co ntinu es. Fo r instance , l',ubomfr Durovic writes that
" throu gh th e increased use of Czech with local Slovak features in th e administration
of W es t Slova k town s (Bratislava , Trnava, Trencfn , Zilina , etc .), a kind of regional
administra tive koin e spo nt a neously developed in th e sixtee nth and seve ntee nth centuri es .. called ' cultural Wes tern Slova k' (kulturna zapadoslovencina)," in "Slovak,"
�70
SLOVAKIA
The Slavic Literary Languages: Formation and Development , Alexande r Schenker
a nd Edward Stankiewicz, eds. (New H ave n : Yale Concilium on International and
Area Studies, 1980), p . 2 12. Durovic' s a nalysis shows features of this koine th at a re
fou nd in H orcicka's H ortulu s , though how co nsisten tl y a nd exte nsively this is so is
a m a tt er fo r further study by histo ri cal lin gu ists. Durovic continu es:
Another language integrati on a rea in the seventeenth ce ntury was Central
Slovakia [the area of H orcicka's pastoral act ivity), where the Central Slovak
dialects became a basis for a new regional koine. The use of this "cultural
Central Slovak " is a ttested in city administrat ion , pri vate correspondence,
occasional poetry, and in some religious, non-liturgical fun ctions. This koine
was in m an y respec ts ve ry similar to the spoken literary Slovak of today.
(p. 2 12)
"
,i
"
"
"
The related but distinctive process of Slovak ethni c consciousness fo r the period
1620- 1750 must also have been play ing a role in the process of lin guistic development and systematization . After extensive documentary resea rch and study , Josef
M acu rek co nte nds that it was during thi s peri od that "the political and geographical
border , M oravian-Sl ovak .. . , becam e an ethn ographic boundary ," in " Ceske ze me
a Slovensko ( 1620-1750),'' Spisy university j. E . Purkyne v Brne: Filosoficka fakult a,
147 ( 1969), pp . 78-79 ; see also pp. 69-75 with related footnotes and appended
documents on pp . 83-3 I 3. On the basis of his study, M acurek shows that in this
border area , the co nsciousness of Slovaks and M oravians (Czechs) as di stin ct ethnic
groups was es peciall y developed , Thus, H orcicka says he is writing in "slowenskem
gazyku " (Cf note 56 below). For more on this point see also my article on Hu golfn
G avlovic in this issue of Slovakia , note 3.
1 have used the foll owing for the biogra ph y of Daniel Sina piu s- H orcicka: Bohu slav
Tablic, Pameti/ Pam aci , pp . LXI-LXXI (6 1-71)/55-62; Durovic, Evanjelicka
lit eratura, pp. 120-121, note 75 ; Lombard ini , " Daniel Sinapius ( H o rci cka ), #37 ,"
in " Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovenske pohl'ady , 7, No . 4 (1887), 80-82 ; Erce, p . 160 ;
J ozef Minarik , D ejin y starsej slovensk ej literatury, pp. 266-70 ; J ozef Hurba n ,
"Slovensko a jeho zivot litera rni ," Slovenskje pohladi na vedi, umenja a literaturu,
Djel I , Svazok 2 ( 1847), rpt. (Bratislava : Slovenske vydavatel'stvo krasnej literatury ,
1957), 6-9 (ori ginal pagination); En cyklop edia Slovenska, V ( 198 1), sub verbo
"Sinapius- H orcicka, D aniel"; and Misian ik , Doplnky , pp . 25 1-252. The date of
H o rcicka 's birth is given by Durovic as circa 1630 and th at of his death as 1706 b y
Durovic, Erce, and Lomba rdini , an d yet Minarik and En cyklopedia Slovenska give
l 640 a nd 1688 respec tively. I have accepted th e latter as evidence of more rece nt
scholarship on Sinapius-Horcicka .
These d ates a re in En cyklopedia Slovenska ( 198 1), sub verbo "Sin apius-Horcicka,
D a ni el. ''
Lomba rdini names K ameiian y by its Hun garia n appe llat ion (cf. Vlastivedny slovnik obci na Sloven sku ( 19 77) , sub verbo " K ameiiany. " )
Dates for years in K ameiiany and Liptovska T epla in Encyklopedia S/ovenska ( 198 1),
sub verbo "Sinapiu s- H o rcicka, Da niel"; T ablic, Pam eti/ Pam aci , P. LXII (62)/55.
Slav ik , Dejiny, p. 85 notes 33 pastors , but Jan Kvacala, D ejiny reformacie na Sloven -
�SLOVAKIA
"
17
"
19
'°
"
"
"
"
"
16
"
71
sku (Liptovsky Sviity Mikulas : Tranoscius , 1935), p . 235 writes 32 Lutheran pastors
and 1 Reformed pastor.
Tablic, Pameti/Pamiiti, P. LXII (62)/55.
Those authors who have written about Horcicka give variation s on the name of this
Polish town. Tablic (Pameti, PP. LXII-LXIII) has Bojanow(o) , Erce, Bojanov(o)
near Lesno/ Leszno , and Tablic (Pama.ti , pp . 55-56), Nov(y/e) Bojanow(-/o), and
Encyklopedia Slo venska, Nov(y/e) Boja nov (-/o) . On pp . 266-67, Minarik speaks
of a Nov(y/e) Bojanow(o) nea r Lesno/ Leszno . From my own resea rch, I have decided on presentday Bojanowo , southeast of Leszno. The Slownik nazv geograficznych po/ski zachodnej i polnocnej, Stanislaw Rospond, ed . (Warszawa and Wroclaw :
Polskie towarzystwo geografi czne, 195 1), p . 17 sub verbo " Bojanow" desc ribes a
village near R aciborz. H oweve r , two further reference works make me choose Boj anowo near Leszno . They are: Slownik geograficzny kr6lestwa polskiego , Filip
Sulimi ersky and Wl adyslaw Walewsky, ed . (Warszawa: Druk " Wieku ," 1880), pp.
292-294 , sub verbo " Bojanowo" ; and Wielka encyklopedia powszechna (1963), sub
verbo " Bojanowo." These two works mention that in this town's hi story there was/is
a significa nt evangeli cal/protestant background and that here th ere was a protestant
gymna zwm .
Hurba n , p . 6 (original pagination of article); Lomba rdini , p . 80 ; T ablic,
Pameti/ Pamiiti , p. LXII (62)/55 ; Minarik, p . 266: Encyklopedia Slovenska, sub verbo
" Sinap ius-H orcicka , Daniel. " Rudo Brtan in " Daniel Sinapius , '' Slovensky literarny
album (Bratislava: Obzor, 1968) , p . 44 notes that Sinapius-Horcicka stayed on th e
estate of th e Lords Leszczynski ( 1677-83) as rector of th e Latin school in ov(y/e)
Bojanow(-/o).
Rizn er , V, 77-79 , li sts twelve : Lombardini li sts fourt een ; Misianik , Doplnky , pp .
25 1-5 2 , add s six more; Misia ni k has two works listed by Lombardini but not by
Rizn er. They all sha re eleve n in common.
For so me co mm enta r y, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura , pp. 143-45.
For so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic , Evanjelicka literatura, p. 91.
Hurban , pp . 6-9 (o ri gin al pagina tion of article); Minarik , pp. 267-69; a nd Literarna ruk ovl', pp . 90-92.
Fo r so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a literatura , pp . 12 1-22 .
T he works th at I have listed in numbers 2 , 3, 5, probably l , a nd perh aps 4 we re
published a nd/or co mposed durin g Horcicka's period of exi le.
Th e New Ca th olic En cyclopedia ( 1967), sub verbo '' H ortulu s animae.''
Diciionnaire de Spiriru alite ( l 969), sub verbo " Hortus , Hortu lus/J a rdin spiritu el,"
especiall y columns 777 -783. (In column 779, it is noted that th e J esuit Peter Cani siu s
publi shed in 1563 in Dillin ge n H orru/us animae. Der See/en C arten .)
Herbert Thursto n , " The Print ing Press in th e Service of th e C hurch : I , The Original
Garden of th e Soul, " Am erica n Ecclesias rical R eview, 26 (Februa ry, 1902), 170 ,
no tes it was prin ted in 1569 in N urembe rg a nd a co py is at th e Bodl eia n Libra ry,
Oxford whi ch co ncludes wit h a n histori cal account of Luth er's p rotes t aga in st in d ul ge nces. In hi s Ca th olic Encyclopedia ( 19 10) a rticl e on '' H o nul us an ima e, ''
T hurston notes th at thi s 1569 Luthera n re nditi on " perh a ps co r respond s bes t to the
oth er fa mou s Cath ol ic prayer book the' Pa rad isus Anim ae. ' " In his A m erican Ee-
�72
SLOVAKIA
clesiastical Review art icle cited above, Thurston is discussing primaril y a German
version entitled Der Selen Wurt zgart (first published in 1483), found in th e British
Mu seum (p. 170 in article). He th en m enti ons in a footnote of thi s a rticl e that a
Nuremberg edition of th e same year as th e German H orculu s he is di scussing is entitl ed Hortulus Animae, th e dude Selen wurt-ga rden gen ant , printed by F . P ypus.
Finall y, on pages 174- 75 of this same art icle, Thurston qu otes th e translated introduction of his German Hortulus under di scussion:
Hereafter follows a right pleasant and useful matter; and it is called the
H erb-garden of th e Soul; since ju st as the body of man derives manifold
pleasant savours from clove , gilliflowers, rosemary and other herbs, in like
mann er th e soul receives man y d ifferent en tertainments, both pleasant and
ghostly , from the goodly teachin g and examples whi ch are gathered together
in thi s book.
This present book is divided into four pa rt s. Each part is translated
into German and derived from the writings of honou red teache rs and
histories worth y of credit.
19
30
31
31
This introduction th en shows clearly the utilita ri an characte r of the H orculus.
L exikon fur Th eologie und Kirch e ( 1960), sub verbo " H ortulus animae. " On George
Rh aw ( 1488-1 548), responsible for this 1547 (composed) work, see: The Encyclopedia
of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Rh a u , George." In this encyclo ped ia,
in the articl e " D evo tion al Litera ture, " it is noted that Rhaw 's ve rsion of th e H orculu s dates from 1548, a nd that an offshoot of Rhaw 's version was Nicol aus Cramer's
Wurtzgaerclein d er Seelen of 15 73 . In my research in several librar ies at universities
and theological centers, I have found only one book on Lutheran devotion al literature:
P aul Althaus , Forschungen z ur Evangelischen Gebetsliteracur, 1927 ed ., rpt.
(Hildesheim: Georg Olm s V erl agsbuchhandlung, 1966). This book , howeve r, has
no comm entary abo ut th e Lutheran ve rsion of the H ortulu s; it does spea k of th e
Ca tholi c Hortuli . I have found no references anywhere else to a Lutheran H orculus
or to a book entitled D er Lustgart en der Seelen , the titl ed noted by Thurston.
In Evanjelicka literatura, page 111 , Durovic notes that the Lutheran clergyman Daniel
Pribi s added a section entitled R osarium an imae (Rose-garden of the Soul) to hi s
1634 editi on (cf. Prehl'ad , p. 34) of the 16 12 Slovak rendition of Luther's catech ism.
It mi ght be noted here th at Luther "was ... eage r to replace the ordinary Catholic
prayer books, above all th e com mon popular forms of H orculu s animae ('The Soul 's
Garden') , and thu s his [Luther' s] B etbu chlein (' Prayer Bookl et') of 1522 appea red.":
Th e Encyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo "Devotional Literature.''
In Dictionnaire de Spiricualite, column 783, it is observed th at a J esui t, Andrej Zachon
(d. 1700), wrote and had published in Olomouc in 1669 a H ortulu s spiritualis vernantiae seu libellus precum floriferarium (Littl e Spiritual Ga rd en of Springtime or
The Little Book of Flowerbearin g Entrea ti es).
I am usi ng a mi crofilm of Horcicka 's H ortulu s made from a copy of this book fou nd
in the Lycealn a kni zn ica in Bratislava with no signa ture number. Rizn er, V, 77 and
Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p . 12 1 noted two ex ta nt co pies of the H orculu s one in the Kni znica Tranovskeho a nd another in th e Hun garian National Museum.
�SLOVAKIA
ll
"
"
"
"
"
73
It would seem likely that th e copy in the Kniznica Tranovskeho is now the copy in
the Lycealna knizni ca. Howeve r, as will be evident from my commentary , the copy
studi ed by me has more introductory, unnumbered pages than Rizner indicates 28 instead ofRizner' s 16. In his book , TanovskehoPam eti/Pamati, pp . LXIV-LXV
(64-65)/5 7) tablic notes virtuall y all of these ex tra La tin pages, although he is silent
ab t the sixteen , basically Slovak (unnumbered) pages tha t preced e these Latin ones
in the introductory portion of the H ortulus. Tablic (Pame1i/Pama.1i, pp . LXIX-LXX
(69- 70)/6 1) notes th a t there are illu strations and verses in each of th e twelve divisions of the mai n body ; this format is th en similar to that of emblematic poetry which
has a co upl et-ve rse, a n illu stration , a nd then some furth er verses/commentary: John
L. Lievsay, '' Emblem , ' ' Th e Prin ceton En cyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics , enlarged editi on , Alex Premin ge r et al. , ed. (Prince ton: Prince ton University Press, 1974) .
Thi s feature - th e illustration - is not found in the H ortulus version studi ed b y
me. In hi s D oplnky, p . 25 1, Misianik a nd in Pameti/Pam ati , p. LXX (70)/61, Tablic
not e th a t H orcicka trans lated his Slovak Hortulu s into German, and this Germa n
ve rsion was published in 1680 in Lesno/Leszno. Finally , m y memory of the actual
book wou ld be th at when closed , it would measure so mething like an inch b y three
inches, ap tl y a "little" garde n.
T a blic (Pameti/ Pam ati , p . LXIV (6 4)/57) notes the book is dedi cated to a ce rtain
" Jil'fmu R advan skemu , dedicnemu pan u V R advani, V Skubfne, Malachove,
slov utn eho ispanstvf aneb vidieku zvolenskeho pl'ednfmu assessorovi ajeho man zelce
V. u . pa nfJ ohann e Ka tal'in e, rozene M ari a.save z M a rku sovic (G eo rge R adv ansky,
heredita ry lord of R ad van, Skubin a, M alachov, the p ro min ent assesso r of the wellkn own count y of Zvolen a nd environs and to his wife , th e great?, noble? , lad y Joanna Cath erine, n ee M ariasova from M a rku sovce . '' ) Thi dedi cation va ri es from th a t
in th e ve rsion of th e H ortulus studi ed by me. In the dedi cation to his N eoforum latinos/avon icum , H orcicka na mes a ce rtain J a n R adva nsky of R advai\ , heir to Skubyn
and M alachau/ M a lachov, perha ps son of Jil'f/Juraj menti oned by T ablic: Edition
of J. V . Novak an d V . Flajshan s in P rague, 1908, p . 3. On this same page , H orcicka menti ons a ce rt ain H orwath -Sta nsithioru m in Spfs. This H orwath-S tansithiorum (ge niti ve plural) is rend ered H orwa th-Stancicovce (nominative plural) by Jan
Tibensky, Chvaly a obrany sloven skeh o naroda (Brati slava: Slovenske vyd ava tel'stvo
krasnej li tera tury, 1965), p . 48 .
For some comm ent a ry on Petr Sextiu s, see : Durovic, E vanjelicka lii eratura, pp .
I I 9- 120. H e is m enti oned by Lomba rdini in hi s commentary on Milichov insky, #56
in " Slove nsky Plutarc h ," Slo ven ske pohl'ad y, 7, No . 6 (1887), 135.
On Miloc hovinsky, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura, pp . 62 , 177-78 , and Lombard ini, p. 135.
On J an Sextius, see: Durovic, Eva njelick a lit eratura , p. 62, a nd Lomb a rdini again .
On J a n Buriu s, see: Durovic, Evangelick a lii eracura, pp . 8 1-82, 145 . H orcicka call s
Buriu s a G erman, th ough Du rov ic specul a tes that he m ay have bee n Slovak; he was
born in Lip tov. Al so, on page 84 of hi s cited work , Durovic notes th at J an Sex ti us
and J a n Burius wro te a hi story of a ce rt a in Juraj La ni in 1676.
I have fo und no reference fo r thi s person . Th e phrase " Pas. in Elecc. Dresda.
Va /Jens Hung. " ca n possibly be rendered " ~ in th e Electo rat e of Dresde n
�74
SLOVAKIA
Wall achian of Hun gary . "
Such an address of auth or to book was done nearl y a ce ntury later ( 1758) by Hu golin
G avlovic as he concluded the introductory portion of his Sk ala Krest'ansk a (A C hristian
School): signature MJ 33 1, Litera rn y a rchiv M ati ce sloven skej in Mart in , p . 16 with
title- page as page one . Interestingly, T ablic does n ot m enti on H orcicka's address
to the book in hi s, T a blic's, d escrip tion of the int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus.
40
In composin g hi s later devoti onal wo rk , Perlicka ditek B ozich (The Little Pearl of
G od 's Ch ild ren) , publi shed in 1685, H orcicka purposely structured it accordin g to
the fi ve d ivisions of Luther 's catechi sm : D u rovic, Evanjelick a literatura, pp . 12 1-22.
41
It is interestin g th at in 1685 , H o rcicka published in Levoca K om en sky's/Comenius'
Orbis pictu s sen sualium , on e of th e o utstandin g books of th e seventee nth century
where th e se nses a re u sed th e bette r to in culca te certa in knowled ge a m o ng children
and/or adults: Min arik, p . 270 ; E rce, p . 160; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, sub verbo
" Sinapius- H orci c_ka, D a ni el. " R ecall also th at accord in g to T a blic, Pam eti/Pam ati ,
pp . LXIX-LXX (69- 70)/6 1, th ere we re illustrati o ns wit h Latin or Slovak verse
m o ttoes.
" Bibli svata podle p uvodniho vydani Kra/ick eh o z let 1579-93 (Kutn a H o ra : Ceska
biblicka p race , 1942), and B ibli svata p odle posledn ih o vydani Kralick eh o z roku
1613 (P raha: n .p., 1945).
" C ita ti ons b y H orcicka from the Song of So ngs are: I . Song 4 : 12; 2. So ng 4: 13 (but
also v. 14); 3. So ng 4: 15; 4. So n g 2 :13- 14 ; 5. So ng 1:5 -6; 6. Song 4: 16; 7. So ng
7: 8-9 (bu t actu all y vv. 7-8 in eit her vers ion of the Kralice Bible con sulted); 8. Song
7: 11 (bu t also v. 12) ; 9. Son g 2 : 11- 12 (bu t actu all y citati on sta rts in the midd le of
verse 10 and includes also a pa rt of ve rse l 3); 10. So ng I : 13; 11 . So ng 2 :2; and I 2.
Son g 2: 1.
44
Song of Songs, M a rv in Pope, in tro. and com. , Ancho r Bi ble Series (Ga rd en City ,
New York: Dou bleday and Company , 1977) , especiall y pp. 114-129. Also see : Diction naire de Spiritualite , colum n s 769-76. On page 126 of hi s com mentary, Pope
notes that Lut her rej ected th e allegori cal interpretat ion of th e Song - na m ely, the
allegorical fan cies of the Fathers as well as the literal erotic se nse. R at her , Luther
believed that "the Bride of the Song is the ha ppy and peaceful state under Solomon's
ru le and that th e Song is a h ymn in which Solomon thanks God for the d ivine gift
of obedience.'' Concerning thi s, see also: Luther, ''Lectures on th e Song of Solomon ,''
J an Siggins, tr ., Luther's Works, 15 (St. Louis: Concord ia Publishin g, 1972), 191-95.
I assume that H orcicka would have been aware of Luther' s views, but thi s in no
way limits his int erpretati ve use of this Biblica l book. At present, it can not be said
whether an y o th er Luth era n view of the So ng of So ngs such as that by Johann es
Coccae us Uohann K och, 1603-69), Pope, pp . 128-29, was known b y Horcicka.
" Bes ides hi s cita ti ons from th e Song of Songs at the beginning of each "walk, " H orcicka refers to verses from this book some thi rtee n tim es, only once repeating a verse
from th ose introdu cin g " Walk IX."
46
On numbered page I 98 of th e H ortulus , Horcicka not es a Czec h ve rsion of the Bible
published in 163 I in Wittenberg.
47
H ortulus, numbered page 103; Pope , Song of Songs , p. 123.
39
�SLOVAKIA
75
" In T h e Encyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " D evo tional
Literature," it is no ted th a t ii K empis ' Imitation of Christ was popula r devotional
read in g in Luthera n la nd s.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church . ( 1965), sub verbo " G erh a rd , Johann ."
I have, howeve r , fo und no reference fo r presuma bl y this Ge rha rd 's Postill(ae) cited
by H orcicka.
'° Th e Encyclopedia of th e Luthera n Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Dilherr , J ohann
Michael," but no reference to his Feld-, Welt- etc. work . In two editions of an anthology of old Slova k literature, Misianik notes th a t th e Feld- work by this Dilherr was
published in ure m be rg in 1648 a nd 165 1: An tol6gia starsej slovensej literatury
( Brati slava: Yydavatel'stvo Slove nskej a kademie vied , 1964), p . 6 18, a nd 1981 editi on , p . 583. Misia nik gives the title as Feld- W elt - G artenbetrachtung.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965) , sub verbo" Huelsemann , Johann ."
" H orcicka a lso refers to th e Centuries of M agd eburg on numbered page 176.
" T ablic, Pam eti/Pam ati , pp . LXVI -LXIX (66-69)/5 7-61 , qu otes in Czechi zed form
two of th e verse units on numbered pages 122-23 a nd 402-03. The proper rendition
of these ve rses can be found in th e two Misianik a nthologies, pp . 395 -96 and 399/
373-74 respectively. Misia nik also cites two further ve rse units: H ortulus, numbered
pages 82-83 and 370-75/ M isia ni k, pp. 395, 397 -399 and 370- 73 respec ti vely for th e
two Misianik editi ons. Fina ll y, th ese fo ur ve rse units can also be fo und inJa miluji,
nesmim providaci: antol6gia zo slovenskej barokovej poezie (Bratislava: Tatran , 1977),
pp. 93-99. In a ll , th ere a re fo urtee n ve rse units. T ablic qu otes two a nd gives page
numbers for eleve n oth ers; he missed the page numbers fo r one verse unit according
to th e ve rsion of th e H ortulu s studi ed by me. The fo urtee n ve rse units a re as follows
- numbered pages th en the number of verses in th e unit-: I. 14/6 2 . 82 -83/ 12;
3. 87-88/2 4; 4. 100/4 La tin a nd 4 Slovak; 5. 114-15/ 11; 6 . 122-23/36 ; 7. 186/8; 8.
191/4 La tin and 4 Slovak, a nd aga in 4 La tin and 4 Slovak; 9. 245/6; 10 . 33 7-38/8;
11. 340-43/76; 12. 365-66/ 12, not mention ed by T ablic; 13. 370-75/ 60; and 14.
402 -03/ 18.
,. The orth ograp hy used a t th a t time shows g instead of j (though g was also used for
g), ss for s, w for v, the grave accen t fo r ad verbial endin gs, a nd (som etim es) a dot
fo r a long mark ove r y.
" Hu rba n , p . 6 (o riginal pagin ati on of the articl e) .
" O n unn um bered page 15 , th at is, in th e int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus, Horc icka spea ks to the " Dea r R ead e r " in " Slowen sk em gazyku (Slovak
language/to ngue), " as well as uses the adj ectival fo rms " Slowen sk ych " a nd " Slowenske " fo r "Slova k." In C h valy a obran y sloven sk eh o n arod a, pp . 48- 51, J a n Tibensky notes H orcicka's Slovak consciousness and quotes from th e introducti on to the
latte r 's Neoforum latin o-slavon icum as evide nce of it .
Prese n ted in Pa nel 99 , " Devo ti onal Literature in Seventeenth Ce ntury Slova ki a," a t
the AAASS conve ntion in Washin gton , D .C. on 17 O ctober 1982 . Parts were prepared
at the 1982 Summer Slavic Semin a r at the Unive rsity of Illinois in C ha mpa ign-Urbana .
�
SLOVAKIA
61
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka's
Hortulus Animae Piae
G erald J . Sabo
In Slovak areas during the seventeenth ce ntury , n ation ali st ic turmoil and religious strife were prominent features of life a nd society. Ethnic
consciousness and religious commitment so pe rvaded political r elations
that they pitted Hungarian s, Germans, and Slovaks against o ne another
in shifting alliances. R eli gion, though, remain ed the " leadin g force"
for virtually the entire ce ntury. 1 Indeed , the writings of thi s period Slovak and L a tin - clearly bear this out. 2 Hymnals, hom il etic writing,
religious disputa tion s, doctrinal a nd d evo tion al lite ra ture, school plays
related to religious formation, as well as accounts of imprisonment and/or
ex ile for religious r eason s occupy a promin ent place among the
Slovak/Latin writin gs of this e ra.
Among the distinctive cultural figures of thi s century is the Lutheran family of Sinapius-Horcicka. 3 The father Mi chal a nd two of his sons ,
Jan a nd D ani el, stand out n ot only for their religiou s zeal but esp ec ially
for their eruditio n and writin gs. 4 Indeed , a numbe r of these writings
have earned them a significant place in Slovak cultural history. The father
Michal (d. 1653) was a pastor in Hricov and Sucany a nd a prominent
church elder in the Tre ncfn ecclesiastical (Lutheran) district. During
his studies at Wittenberg as a young man , he presented two public Latin
di sputatio n s: one on the definition and divisio n of m etaphysics and
another on the intell ect a nd w ill of intelli ge nt be in gs. 5 Mi ch al's commi tmen t to eruditio n must ce r tainly have influ en c~d his so n s J a n a nd
D aniel as evidenced by th e latter's activities and writin gs. Like their
fath er , th e sons devoted the ir scholarl y training to serv in g their fellow
Lutheran s as p astors a nd sc hool offi cials, in exile as well as in Slovak
areas. It is their wr itin gs, however, th at have establi shed th e ir places
in Slovak cultu ral history. Virtually all of J an 's extan t writings are written
in Latin o r German. 6 Among them are: 1. a Latin d evo tional work for
stu dents, H orologium sacrum (Sacred H o urs or C lock),7 where eve ry
hour of the day is directed to religious form ation ; 2. a L a tin play 8 H enoch
(E noch) ; an d Ornithica sacra (Sacred Ornithology) written in German
�62
SLOVAKIA
about birds with religious significance. 9 The writings of D aniel are composed in Latin or a vernacular Slovak 10 that shows the influence of and
commitment to Kralice-Biblical-Czech in his reli giou s training and
liturgical practice.
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka was born around 1640 in Sucany. 11 H e
was rector of the Lutheran school in J elsava from 1663-65, 12 a pastor
in K am enan/ 3 from 1665-67, 14 and from 1667-70 in Liptovska Tepla,
and finally from 1670 in R advan. In September, 1673 , Daniel was among
thirty-two Lutheran pastors summoned to trial befo re the Catholic Archbishop of E sztergom . 1~ After the trial , he went into exile first to Brieg
(today Brzeg) and then in the winter of 16 74 to Breslau (Wroclaw) , and
finally in November, 1677 16 to a certain Bojanowo in P oland , 17 where
he was rector of a school. 18 H orcicka returned from exi le some time in
1683, fir st to his former pastorate in R ad van, then in 1684 to a pastorate and position of school official in L evoca. H e remained in Levoca
un ti! his death in 1688.
Some eighteen works 19 are attributed to D aniel Sinapius-Horcicka.
Am ong the writings prominent in Slovak cultural history are : 1. H orcicka' s 1684 enlarged edition of the Lutheran hymnal Cithara sanctorum
(Zither of the Saints), also known as Tran osciu s after its compiler Ju raj
Tranovsky;2° 2. the 1682 wedding verse-composition in Latin, Coelum
Bojan ovien se (Bojanowo H eaven);2 1 3. Neoforum latino-slavonicum
(New L atin-Slavonic Forum) , a 1678 coll ection of popular/folk sayings
in L atin and Slovak;2 2 4. Perlicka ditek Bozich (The Little Pearl of God's
Children), a 1685 devotional work segm ented on the basis of the fi ve
divisions in Luther's catechi sm; 23 and 5. H ortulu s animae piae (The
Little Garden of the Piou s Soul), a 1676 devotional work and the subject of this article. 24
The L atin title of H orc icka 's 1676 work - H ortulu s animae piae
is intri guing. H ortulu s (Hortus) animae is the title for a
type of[Latin and/or German] devotional book of praye rs intended for the [Catholic] laity , that was widespread in Germany in the early sixteenth century .... The H ortuli .. . were
similar in general content and arrangement to many of the
L atin H orae or book of hours, or to the English primers , from
which they developed; howeve r , they were more popular in
character. The H ortuli contain ed the Little Office of Our
L ad y, extracts from the Gospel accounts of the passion, the
�SLOVAKIA
63
Penitential Psalms, and the Litany of the Saints , with a large
selection of supplementary d evotional matter. This material
of private prayer had the tendency to increase size and in extravagan ce. For example, promises of spurious indulgences
and complete forgiveness of sins became attached to man y
prayers . . . The Council of Trent legislated against the accretions , the false promises of indulgences, and the incorrect versions of the Little Office of Our Lady. A bull of Pius V (March
11, 1571) demanded rigorous censorship of all editions. 25
The article on " Hortus/ Hortulus " in Dictionnaire de Spiritualite traces
the extensive number of devotional works associated with this title and
type of writing. 26 The phrase " Hortulus animae" is derived not from
the aesthetic but from the utilitarian aspects of a garden as is evident
from three Latin distichs that usually prefixed many such writings. The
first two lines are as follows:
Ortulus exiguus varias ut saepe salubres Herbas producit, quas
medicina probat. (A small garden often produces a variety
of salutary herbs of which medicine knows the value.) 21
In his articles on the Hortulus animae , Herbert Thurston notes that
in 1569, a certain Lu the ran adaptation was published and called Der
Lustgarten der Seelen (The Pleasure Garden of the Soul). 28 F. Wulf,
though , notes that a Georg Rhaw (Rhau) produced a Lutheran version
in 154 7, in Wittenberg; it was published in 1559 and was composed on
the basis of printed Hortuli forbidden by the Spanish lnquisition . 29
Among the d evotional literature written by Slovak Lutherans , the title
for Horcicka 's composition - Hortulus animae piae - is unique. Nor
is the title Der Lustgarten der Seelen or some Slovak rendition to be
found among Slovak Lutheran writings_ Jo Thus , it remains an open question why Horcicka cho se a title more closely associated with Catholic
devotional writing rather than one from his own Lutheran tradition. JI
The introdu ctory portion of Horcicka ' s HortulusJ 2 has several divisions. On the title page, the full title reads: Hortulu s Animae Piae,
Zahradka Dussicky pobozne, Wkterez se clowek Krestiansky Suzitkem
prochazeti muze (The Little Garden of the Pi ou s Soul in Which a Christian Person Can Walk w ith Usefulness/ Profit). After the title page com es
that with Horcicka 's dedication of the book to "P . Markowy Hor vv
(w) ath-Stansith of Gradetz/Hradec? in the Stolica (Cou nty) of Spis and
�64
SLOVAKIA
to hi s w ife Zoffy, n ee M a riasse/M a ri asove? from Markussowic/Markusovce,'' whom H o rcicka calls Km otrum (God pare nt s) a nd
Dobrodin cu m (Be n efactors) . 33 In the fourt ee n pages that follow, H orcicka es ta blishes in Slovak th e basis or rationale for writing his Hortulus. H e d raws on Scriptu re as well as classical literature for refe ren ce
material. Two further p ages ( 15 and 16 in sequ e nce as these p ages a re
unnumbered) are devoted to the " Laskawemu Ctenari (Dear R eader). "
After these sixteen pages of basically Slovak prose, in the version studied
by m e there foll ow twelve pages in L a tin with dist inct parts. On p age
seventeen (in sequ en ce), H orcicka's brothe r J a n comm ents on the Hortulu s. Then, a close friend , P etr Sext ius, 34 addresses Daniel himself as
the form e r speaks on the H ortulus (pages 17-20). J a n Milochovinsky, 35
elder in the Zilina ecclesiastical district , h as a on e- page, addressed comm ent for D a ni el (page 21 ) . In the course of his comme n ts on the H ortulus, J a n Sextius, 36 called an "amico pectore ( close fri end)" by D a niel ,
addresses the '' P a nn onian offspring' ' and en courages them to show
gratitude to God an d the author of the Hortulu s (pages 22-23). In hi s
nearly three- page co mmentary , Jan Buriu s 37 draws on a number of
sources, theological a nd classical litera ry (pages 23-25). On pages 26
and 2 7 of this introdu ctory portion, Horcicka addresses a certain M a tthias Albrecht whom he d esignates as ''Pas. in Elect. Dresda ... Vallens
Hung. " 38 Fin all y, o n the final page of the int roducto ry portion (28),
the author of the H ortulu s addresses the b ook itself: 39 "A uthor ad
Libellum (Author to th e Little Book .)" At the bottom of this page, a
plaited wreath illu stration encompasses the following: '' D omini Sum us,
Dum Spiro Spero, D ominus Providebit (W e Are the Lord's, While I
Breathe, I Hope, The Lord Will Provide .)" With this succinct statem ent of purpose a nd ou tl ook , Horcicka concludes the in trod u ctory portion of his H ortulu s .
The m ain portion of the H ortulus consists of four hundred and eight
numbered pages virtually all in Slovak with some L atin wri ting and even
a few Greek words . (The Lat in and Greek are also transla ted into H orcicka 's vernacul ar Slovak.) H orcicka divid es the paginated portion into
twelve uneven sections. The division into twelve may have symbolic value
- twelve apostl es/twelve tri bes of Israel. 40 Each of these twelve sect ions
is called a " Prochadzka (Walk )."
Each ''Proch adzka '' begins in the same way . After the Roman
num eral indi cati ng the proper " Walk " are found the words: "wniZ
�SLOVAKIA
65
premyssluge pobozna dusse (in which the pious soul reflects)." In each
of the twelve ''walks ,'' the pious soul reflects on a different object: 1.
the garden in general; 2. the tree of this garden; 3. the well of this garden ;
4 . the dove in this garden; 5. the mirror hangin g in this garden; 6. the
winds that blow through this garden; 7. the palm (tree); 8. the vine
stock/ root; 9 . the fig (tree); 10. myrrh; 11. the rose; and 12 . the lily.
In his comments on these twelve objects for reflection, Horcicka engages
the senses of the reader. 41 Words that help conjure up "sense pictures"
of the objects for reflection enable the reader the better to assimilate the
theological truth presented in association with the objects . Indeed, in
the presentation order of his objects , H orcicka gradually refines the focus
of his reader from a garden in general to a small object like a flower.
After the object for a specific "walk " is named , Horcicka cites a
relevant passage from the Biblical book Song of Songs (also known as
th e Canticle of Canticles or Song of Solomon). In a comparison of H orcicka ' s citat ions from the Song of Songs with two editions of the Kralice
Bible (1579-93 and 161 3), 41 it is clear that Horcicka adapts the verses
somewhat, probably for the sake of better creating his verbal sense-picture of the object for reflection. 4 3 For "Walk X ," Horcicka' s verse quotation from the Song of So ngs is virtually an exact quotation of this verse
according to the 161 3 edition of the Kralice Bible. For " Walk II ," however, Horcicka' s citation see ms to be drawn from the 1579-93 editio n
of the Kralice Bible . At present, though, there is no way of de termining
whe ther Horci cka u sed these versions of the Bible, a nd , if so , which of
th e two , or som e othe r version. Horcicka ' s choi ce of th e Song of Songs
as the Biblical basis for the Hortulus seems natural , perhaps even predictabl e from the tradi tion of C hristian writings about thi s Biblical book.
F rom a s earl y as 200 AD , Christia n writers have commented on a nd
inte rpreted the Song of Songs, usually allegorically , even eroti cally. 44
Horcicka probably wa nted a Biblical work that is co n cern ed not only
wi th a garden , but contain s the various objects for refl ection tha t he cites.
Onl y th e Son g of Son gs co uld give him such varie ty .
In the co mm e nta ry th a t foll ows the verse(s) from the Son g of So ngs
in each " walk ," H o rcicka dra ws on a va ri ety of so urces fo r m a te rial s
to suppo rt hi s co mm ent s. As is to be ex pec ted , Script u re is a n a bundant so urce of ma teri al. R efe rence to ve rses from books of the O ld a nd
New T es ta m e nt can be fo und in eve ry " walk " in la r ge num be rs. 4 5 I ndeed , in " W alk V ," H orcicka gives som e two hun d red and twenty-six
�66
SLOVAKIA
distinct references from the Bible as authoritative corroboration for whatever interpretation and religious/moral instruction he has written.
Curiously, he cites verses from Sirach (some fifteen instances), from
Wisdom (some four instances) , and once each from the first and second
Book of Maccabees . None of these Old Testament books were considered
canonical enough for inclusion in any edition of the Kralice Bible or
probably any non-Catholic version through Horcicka's time. They are
found in Catholic versions of the Bible since well before Horcicka's time. 46
Horcicka refers to prominent Christian writers from early Christian times into his own era. References to various works by Augustine ,
to the writings of Luther, Gregory Nazianzus, Chrysostom, Tertullian ,
Origen, Ambrose, and to the history of Eusebius of Caesarea are noted
and footnoted, at times with even the folio/page numbers. References
to the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux, especially with regard to the
Song of Songs, are probably no surprise; Bernard wrote eighty-six sermons on the Song of Songs alone. Indeed, Horci cka notes sermon 61
where Bernard says that the Song's love pair are the Word of God and
a Soul. 47 Curiously, Horcicka notes two references from Cornelius a
Lapide, a Jesuit (d . 1637), a prolific Biblical exegete and interpreter.
Interestingly, Horcicka also has a single reference to a 1622 Czech translation of the Bible and to a Prague printing of Th e Imitation of Christ
by Thomas a Kempis (p. 171 ) . 48
In the Hortulus, there are a number of works noted and footnoted
that were probably well-known in Horcicka's time. (At the present time,
copies of some of these books are con sidered rare in many US libraries.)
Among these writings are: 1. Schola pietatis by Johann G erhard
(1582-1637), a Lutheran theologian; 49 2. Analecta sacra by J ohann
Heinrich Ursin (1608-67); 3. Arboretum biblicum, also by Ursin; and
4. "Hortus aromaticus," which is part 3 of U rsin 's Continuatio historiae
plantarum biblicae. I have found references for two authors whose names
resemble those footnoted by Horcicka but nothing about the works cited
as theirs. According to Horcicka, a certain Johann Michal Dilherr (a
poet and Lutheran theologian, 1604-69) wrote Welt, Feld, and
Gartenbetrachtung, 50 and a certain Johann Hu elsemann (Lutheran
theologian, 1602-61) is believed to have written Pentagonium
christian um. 51 With other books noted and footnoted by Horcicka , I
have been unable to find any reference for them or their authors. Among
these are: 1. Nicol(s) Roper's Helleuchtend Spiegel der Liebe ; 2. Mich(al)
�SLOVAKIA
67
Ba um a nn 's L exicon Allegorico Evangelicum; 3. Laur( entius)
Halvard(i/ us) ' s Speculum amoris; and 4 . Hist(oria) Boh(emica) by a
certain Dubrav( ius) . 51 In the Hortulus, there is also a good number of
books footnot ed only a few times or less .
The classical authors cited b y Horcicka are well-known figures from
Greek a nd Latin literature. From the Greeks, Herodotus, Homer,
X enophon , a nd Strabo, eve n Ari stotle provide supportive material for
Horcicka. Of the Latin writers , there are Cicero, Horace, Pliny, Plutarch,
Tacitus, Suetonius, and even the outstanding classical specialist, the Dutchman Joest Qustus) Lipsius (1547-1606) . Horcicka's use of these authors
in a d evotional wo rk is not unusual for his time; classical literature continued to provide exempla tive material for writers in Slovak areas through
the eighteenth century .
At the conclusion of each ''walk ,'' Horcicka places Slovak ' ' Modlitby (Prayers)." U sually there are three distinct prayers, except for " Walks
VII a nd XII ," with only two . These prayers are mostly in prose, though
some are in verse, i.e . distichs combined in paired or enclosing rhymes. 53
The various verse compositions in the Hortulus range from six to seventysix verses . Three of the shortest follow , with a literal tra nslation . To
my knowledge they h ave not elsewhere b een reprinted . 54
Ach prigd Pane gezissi
prigd zen ichu neykrazssi
Nawsstew wernu iwu du ssi
at ljby twug hlas slissi
A wmile Zahradce swe
Bud' odpocinuti twe (p. 14)
Com e oh Lord J esus
come most handsome bridegroom
Visit the tru e i va of the soul
May it hear your kind voice
And in your dear Garden
Be your rest
2
KR ys te deg nam wwjre stalost
odegmi ss kodn u wrtkawost
Bychom cyle wi ry dossli
Zsmni casne do Nebe ssli
Na to rjka m Amen/ Amen/
Spas nas Gezu Kryste Amen. (p. 245)
C hri st give us steadfastness in fa ith
take away harmful fickleness
That the goals of faith be attained
Went in time from death to H eaven
To this I say Amen/ Amen/
Save us J esus C hrist Am en .
3
Pos pess o ma dusse ho/sweho
Kwytanj ze nicha ct neho
Kteryz na dum tweho srdce
Ruku mi los ti swe tlu ce
Otewri swe brany gemu
Pekne promluw/ a rcy kn emu
Prigd mi ly mug/ fada m tebe
Nechcy ziti gs uc bez tebe. (p. 337)
H as ten o my sou l him/ of your
Flowerin g the honorable bridegroom
Who upon the house of your heart
With th e hand of his love knocks
Open your gates to him
Nicely speak/ a nd say to hi m :
Come my dear/ I beg you
I do not wish to live being without you .
�68
SLOVAKIA
Whil e the literary value of the verse compositi ons in the H ortulus is
limited , in the narrow sense, they can be considered examples of early
Slovak ve rse writing .
Each of the prayers at the end of the "walks" - verse or prose
- is designated for som e definite purpose ; for instan ce: " For the dear
presence of God; " "For the proper purity of heart , for sincerity, and
piety;" "For the recognition of people's woes and God ' s good acts;"
" For patience in crises and firmn ess in faith ;" and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful ," the last praye r and part of the Hortulus . According to Hurban, the H ortulu s had appended to it " M ensje
jeho basne (his/ Horcicka's/sm aller verses). " 55 Whether Hurban might
be referring to some of the verse compositions in the H ortulus or to some
other ve rses not part of the H ortulus in itself is not clear . In the version
of the Hortulus studied b y m e, the last two prayers (pages 404-408) are
'' For the forgiveness of forgetfulness which we allow while receiving God 's
gifts, " and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful. " For
H orcicka, these subjects may have seem ed an apt conclusion fo r his devotion al work . There is no reason to suspect that there was more writing
related to the Hortulu s which for some reason is not in the bound copy
in the Lycealna knizni ca. Indeed , Rizn er notes that the H ortulu s has
four hundred and eight numbered pages, as does Tablic - the number
found in the Lycealna copy of the H ortulus.
As a fi gure in Slovak cultural hi story, D ani el Sinapius-Horcicka
occupies a definite place. In his H ortulus animae piae, as in other
writings , he manifests a Slovak ethnic consciousness that stands out in
the seve nteenth ce ntury. 56 Through hi s religious zeal, erudition , and
talent , he also provides hi s fellow Lutherans wi th devo tion al writin g to
co nsole them in their time of exile and trials . In effect, he has composed
a notewo rthy example of early Slovak writing. Through not strictly
literary, the Slovak prose a nd verse of H orcicka's Hortulus m erit far
more attention and study th an they have rece ived - practicall y speaking, virtu ally none. It is hoped that thi s study is but the bare beginnin g
of research on the H ortulu s and its author, Daniel Sinapiu s-Horcicka .
NOTES
' J a n Du rov ic, Evanjelick a liceracura d o colerancie (Turcia nsky Sviity M a nin : M a ti ca
slove nska, 1940), p . 5 1.
' This is shown by a peru sal of th e following : J a n Durovic, Evangelicka liceracura a nd
�SLOVAKIA
'
'
'
6
1
'
'
'
0
69
also his Prehl'ad literarnych dejin slovenskych eva njelikov (Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas:
Tra noscius, 1948); " Barak ," D ejin y starsej slovenskej /iteratury (Bratislava:
V ydava tel'stvo Slovensk ej akademie vied , 1958), pp . 155 -298; Literarna rukovat',
2nd ed. (Bra tisl ava: Slove nske pedagogicke nak ladatel's tvo , 1981 ) pp. 72-97.
M an y Lutheran famili es adop ted Latin renditions of the family na mes as new surnames. This hyphena ted name is used for Horcicka family members in Slovak litera ry
hi stories and criti cism as well as in th e a rticl es on them in Encyklopedia Slovenska ,
V ( 198 1).
J an the younger , son of J a n th e elder - Daniel's brother - also wrote a number
of works: l'.udovft Rizner, Bibliogra fia pisomnictva slovenskeho , V (Turciansky Svaty
Martin: M a ri ca slova neka, 1933), 80-81. ( H ereafter , Rizn er , volume in Rom a n
numeral , page(s) in Arabic num eral(s) .) Also , J an Misianik, Doplnky k Rizn erovej
bib/iogra fii , 1946 , 2nd revised and enlarged edition (Martin : Matica slovenska, 1971),
pp. 252 -253 . Jan and Dani el' s sister Elena married into prominent Luthera n families
such as La ni a nd Lad ive r - Jan Slavik, D ejin y zvolenskeho evanjelickeh o a. v.
bra1s1va a senioratu (Banska Sti avn ica: NakJad vdovy a syna AugustaJoergesa, 1921 ),
p . 344.
Rizn er, V , 8 1; Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p. 62 , incompl ete Latin titles.
Rizn er , V , 79-80 ; Durovic, Evanje/ick a Iiteratura , pp. 142-43 , 348; Alexander Lomba rdini, "J a n Sina pi us (H orcicka), #38, " "Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovensk e pohl'ady,
7, No. 4 ( 1887), 82-83; Misia nik , D oplnky , P . 252.
Durovic , Evanje/icka literatura, p. 69
Durovic, Prehl'ad , p . 40 , a nd Evanjelicka literatura , pp . 9 1-92 has " play, " but Erce
(pseudonym of Celes tin R advany i) , Slovenska krv (Bratislava : Vydavatel'stvo lexikalneho di ela " Slovenska krv, " 1942), p. 160 calls it a " praye r book for intellect uals."
J an di ed in ex ile in H alle on August 4, 1682: Rizn er , V , 79 ; Bohuslav Tablic, Pameti
cesk o-slovenskych basnifuv an eb versovcuv , origin all y published in 1800' s,
Bi og raphi ca-Pra mene, zv. 1 (M a rtin : M a rica slovenska , 1972) , p . LXV (65) , and
in Pam ati cesko-slovenskych basnikov alebo versovcov, Rudo Brtai\, tr. (Bratislava :
T at ran , 1974), p. 57; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, V (1981) , sub verbo " SinapiusH orcicka, J a n , st. "
The ve rn acula r Slovak used by Daniel is called " Slovakized Czech " by Jozef Minarik
in Li1erarna rukova t', p. 72 , in both editions. Discussion a bout this la ngu age a nd
its prope r desc ripti ve na me co ntinu es. Fo r instance , l',ubomfr Durovic writes that
" throu gh th e increased use of Czech with local Slovak features in th e administration
of W es t Slova k town s (Bratislava , Trnava, Trencfn , Zilina , etc .), a kind of regional
administra tive koin e spo nt a neously developed in th e sixtee nth and seve ntee nth centuri es .. called ' cultural Wes tern Slova k' (kulturna zapadoslovencina)," in "Slovak,"
�70
SLOVAKIA
The Slavic Literary Languages: Formation and Development , Alexande r Schenker
a nd Edward Stankiewicz, eds. (New H ave n : Yale Concilium on International and
Area Studies, 1980), p . 2 12. Durovic' s a nalysis shows features of this koine th at a re
fou nd in H orcicka's H ortulu s , though how co nsisten tl y a nd exte nsively this is so is
a m a tt er fo r further study by histo ri cal lin gu ists. Durovic continu es:
Another language integrati on a rea in the seventeenth ce ntury was Central
Slovakia [the area of H orcicka's pastoral act ivity), where the Central Slovak
dialects became a basis for a new regional koine. The use of this "cultural
Central Slovak " is a ttested in city administrat ion , pri vate correspondence,
occasional poetry, and in some religious, non-liturgical fun ctions. This koine
was in m an y respec ts ve ry similar to the spoken literary Slovak of today.
(p. 2 12)
"
,i
"
"
"
The related but distinctive process of Slovak ethni c consciousness fo r the period
1620- 1750 must also have been play ing a role in the process of lin guistic development and systematization . After extensive documentary resea rch and study , Josef
M acu rek co nte nds that it was during thi s peri od that "the political and geographical
border , M oravian-Sl ovak .. . , becam e an ethn ographic boundary ," in " Ceske ze me
a Slovensko ( 1620-1750),'' Spisy university j. E . Purkyne v Brne: Filosoficka fakult a,
147 ( 1969), pp . 78-79 ; see also pp. 69-75 with related footnotes and appended
documents on pp . 83-3 I 3. On the basis of his study, M acurek shows that in this
border area , the co nsciousness of Slovaks and M oravians (Czechs) as di stin ct ethnic
groups was es peciall y developed , Thus, H orcicka says he is writing in "slowenskem
gazyku " (Cf note 56 below). For more on this point see also my article on Hu golfn
G avlovic in this issue of Slovakia , note 3.
1 have used the foll owing for the biogra ph y of Daniel Sina piu s- H orcicka: Bohu slav
Tablic, Pameti/ Pam aci , pp . LXI-LXXI (6 1-71)/55-62; Durovic, Evanjelicka
lit eratura, pp. 120-121, note 75 ; Lombard ini , " Daniel Sinapius ( H o rci cka ), #37 ,"
in " Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovenske pohl'ady , 7, No . 4 (1887), 80-82 ; Erce, p . 160 ;
J ozef Minarik , D ejin y starsej slovensk ej literatury, pp. 266-70 ; J ozef Hurba n ,
"Slovensko a jeho zivot litera rni ," Slovenskje pohladi na vedi, umenja a literaturu,
Djel I , Svazok 2 ( 1847), rpt. (Bratislava : Slovenske vydavatel'stvo krasnej literatury ,
1957), 6-9 (ori ginal pagination); En cyklop edia Slovenska, V ( 198 1), sub verbo
"Sinapius- H orcicka, D aniel"; and Misian ik , Doplnky , pp . 25 1-252. The date of
H o rcicka 's birth is given by Durovic as circa 1630 and th at of his death as 1706 b y
Durovic, Erce, and Lomba rdini , an d yet Minarik and En cyklopedia Slovenska give
l 640 a nd 1688 respec tively. I have accepted th e latter as evidence of more rece nt
scholarship on Sinapius-Horcicka .
These d ates a re in En cyklopedia Slovenska ( 198 1), sub verbo "Sin apius-Horcicka,
D a ni el. ''
Lomba rdini names K ameiian y by its Hun garia n appe llat ion (cf. Vlastivedny slovnik obci na Sloven sku ( 19 77) , sub verbo " K ameiiany. " )
Dates for years in K ameiiany and Liptovska T epla in Encyklopedia S/ovenska ( 198 1),
sub verbo "Sinapiu s- H o rcicka, Da niel"; T ablic, Pam eti/ Pam aci , P. LXII (62)/55.
Slav ik , Dejiny, p. 85 notes 33 pastors , but Jan Kvacala, D ejiny reformacie na Sloven -
�SLOVAKIA
"
17
"
19
'°
"
"
"
"
"
16
"
71
sku (Liptovsky Sviity Mikulas : Tranoscius , 1935), p . 235 writes 32 Lutheran pastors
and 1 Reformed pastor.
Tablic, Pameti/Pamiiti, P. LXII (62)/55.
Those authors who have written about Horcicka give variation s on the name of this
Polish town. Tablic (Pameti, PP. LXII-LXIII) has Bojanow(o) , Erce, Bojanov(o)
near Lesno/ Leszno , and Tablic (Pama.ti , pp . 55-56), Nov(y/e) Bojanow(-/o), and
Encyklopedia Slo venska, Nov(y/e) Boja nov (-/o) . On pp . 266-67, Minarik speaks
of a Nov(y/e) Bojanow(o) nea r Lesno/ Leszno . From my own resea rch, I have decided on presentday Bojanowo , southeast of Leszno. The Slownik nazv geograficznych po/ski zachodnej i polnocnej, Stanislaw Rospond, ed . (Warszawa and Wroclaw :
Polskie towarzystwo geografi czne, 195 1), p . 17 sub verbo " Bojanow" desc ribes a
village near R aciborz. H oweve r , two further reference works make me choose Boj anowo near Leszno . They are: Slownik geograficzny kr6lestwa polskiego , Filip
Sulimi ersky and Wl adyslaw Walewsky, ed . (Warszawa: Druk " Wieku ," 1880), pp.
292-294 , sub verbo " Bojanowo" ; and Wielka encyklopedia powszechna (1963), sub
verbo " Bojanowo." These two works mention that in this town's hi story there was/is
a significa nt evangeli cal/protestant background and that here th ere was a protestant
gymna zwm .
Hurba n , p . 6 (original pagination of article); Lomba rdini , p . 80 ; T ablic,
Pameti/ Pamiiti , p. LXII (62)/55 ; Minarik, p . 266: Encyklopedia Slovenska, sub verbo
" Sinap ius-H orcicka , Daniel. " Rudo Brtan in " Daniel Sinapius , '' Slovensky literarny
album (Bratislava: Obzor, 1968) , p . 44 notes that Sinapius-Horcicka stayed on th e
estate of th e Lords Leszczynski ( 1677-83) as rector of th e Latin school in ov(y/e)
Bojanow(-/o).
Rizn er , V, 77-79 , li sts twelve : Lombardini li sts fourt een ; Misianik , Doplnky , pp .
25 1-5 2 , add s six more; Misia ni k has two works listed by Lombardini but not by
Rizn er. They all sha re eleve n in common.
For so me co mm enta r y, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura , pp. 143-45.
For so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic , Evanjelicka literatura, p. 91.
Hurban , pp . 6-9 (o ri gin al pagina tion of article); Minarik , pp. 267-69; a nd Literarna ruk ovl', pp . 90-92.
Fo r so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a literatura , pp . 12 1-22 .
T he works th at I have listed in numbers 2 , 3, 5, probably l , a nd perh aps 4 we re
published a nd/or co mposed durin g Horcicka's period of exi le.
Th e New Ca th olic En cyclopedia ( 1967), sub verbo '' H ortulu s animae.''
Diciionnaire de Spiriru alite ( l 969), sub verbo " Hortus , Hortu lus/J a rdin spiritu el,"
especiall y columns 777 -783. (In column 779, it is noted that th e J esuit Peter Cani siu s
publi shed in 1563 in Dillin ge n H orru/us animae. Der See/en C arten .)
Herbert Thursto n , " The Print ing Press in th e Service of th e C hurch : I , The Original
Garden of th e Soul, " Am erica n Ecclesias rical R eview, 26 (Februa ry, 1902), 170 ,
no tes it was prin ted in 1569 in N urembe rg a nd a co py is at th e Bodl eia n Libra ry,
Oxford whi ch co ncludes wit h a n histori cal account of Luth er's p rotes t aga in st in d ul ge nces. In hi s Ca th olic Encyclopedia ( 19 10) a rticl e on '' H o nul us an ima e, ''
T hurston notes th at thi s 1569 Luthera n re nditi on " perh a ps co r respond s bes t to the
oth er fa mou s Cath ol ic prayer book the' Pa rad isus Anim ae. ' " In his A m erican Ee-
�72
SLOVAKIA
clesiastical Review art icle cited above, Thurston is discussing primaril y a German
version entitled Der Selen Wurt zgart (first published in 1483), found in th e British
Mu seum (p. 170 in article). He th en m enti ons in a footnote of thi s a rticl e that a
Nuremberg edition of th e same year as th e German H orculu s he is di scussing is entitl ed Hortulus Animae, th e dude Selen wurt-ga rden gen ant , printed by F . P ypus.
Finall y, on pages 174- 75 of this same art icle, Thurston qu otes th e translated introduction of his German Hortulus under di scussion:
Hereafter follows a right pleasant and useful matter; and it is called the
H erb-garden of th e Soul; since ju st as the body of man derives manifold
pleasant savours from clove , gilliflowers, rosemary and other herbs, in like
mann er th e soul receives man y d ifferent en tertainments, both pleasant and
ghostly , from the goodly teachin g and examples whi ch are gathered together
in thi s book.
This present book is divided into four pa rt s. Each part is translated
into German and derived from the writings of honou red teache rs and
histories worth y of credit.
19
30
31
31
This introduction th en shows clearly the utilita ri an characte r of the H orculus.
L exikon fur Th eologie und Kirch e ( 1960), sub verbo " H ortulus animae. " On George
Rh aw ( 1488-1 548), responsible for this 1547 (composed) work, see: The Encyclopedia
of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Rh a u , George." In this encyclo ped ia,
in the articl e " D evo tion al Litera ture, " it is noted that Rhaw 's ve rsion of th e H orculu s dates from 1548, a nd that an offshoot of Rhaw 's version was Nicol aus Cramer's
Wurtzgaerclein d er Seelen of 15 73 . In my research in several librar ies at universities
and theological centers, I have found only one book on Lutheran devotion al literature:
P aul Althaus , Forschungen z ur Evangelischen Gebetsliteracur, 1927 ed ., rpt.
(Hildesheim: Georg Olm s V erl agsbuchhandlung, 1966). This book , howeve r, has
no comm entary abo ut th e Lutheran ve rsion of the H ortulu s; it does spea k of th e
Ca tholi c Hortuli . I have found no references anywhere else to a Lutheran H orculus
or to a book entitled D er Lustgart en der Seelen , the titl ed noted by Thurston.
In Evanjelicka literatura, page 111 , Durovic notes that the Lutheran clergyman Daniel
Pribi s added a section entitled R osarium an imae (Rose-garden of the Soul) to hi s
1634 editi on (cf. Prehl'ad , p. 34) of the 16 12 Slovak rendition of Luther's catech ism.
It mi ght be noted here th at Luther "was ... eage r to replace the ordinary Catholic
prayer books, above all th e com mon popular forms of H orculu s animae ('The Soul 's
Garden') , and thu s his [Luther' s] B etbu chlein (' Prayer Bookl et') of 1522 appea red.":
Th e Encyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo "Devotional Literature.''
In Dictionnaire de Spiricualite, column 783, it is observed th at a J esui t, Andrej Zachon
(d. 1700), wrote and had published in Olomouc in 1669 a H ortulu s spiritualis vernantiae seu libellus precum floriferarium (Littl e Spiritual Ga rd en of Springtime or
The Little Book of Flowerbearin g Entrea ti es).
I am usi ng a mi crofilm of Horcicka 's H ortulu s made from a copy of this book fou nd
in the Lycealn a kni zn ica in Bratislava with no signa ture number. Rizn er, V, 77 and
Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p . 12 1 noted two ex ta nt co pies of the H orculu s one in the Kni znica Tranovskeho a nd another in th e Hun garian National Museum.
�SLOVAKIA
ll
"
"
"
"
"
73
It would seem likely that th e copy in the Kniznica Tranovskeho is now the copy in
the Lycealna knizni ca. Howeve r, as will be evident from my commentary , the copy
studi ed by me has more introductory, unnumbered pages than Rizner indicates 28 instead ofRizner' s 16. In his book , TanovskehoPam eti/Pamati, pp . LXIV-LXV
(64-65)/5 7) tablic notes virtuall y all of these ex tra La tin pages, although he is silent
ab t the sixteen , basically Slovak (unnumbered) pages tha t preced e these Latin ones
in the introductory portion of the H ortulus. Tablic (Pame1i/Pama.1i, pp . LXIX-LXX
(69- 70)/6 1) notes th a t there are illu strations and verses in each of th e twelve divisions of the mai n body ; this format is th en similar to that of emblematic poetry which
has a co upl et-ve rse, a n illu stration , a nd then some furth er verses/commentary: John
L. Lievsay, '' Emblem , ' ' Th e Prin ceton En cyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics , enlarged editi on , Alex Premin ge r et al. , ed. (Prince ton: Prince ton University Press, 1974) .
Thi s feature - th e illustration - is not found in the H ortulus version studi ed b y
me. In hi s D oplnky, p . 25 1, Misianik a nd in Pameti/Pam ati , p. LXX (70)/61, Tablic
not e th a t H orcicka trans lated his Slovak Hortulu s into German, and this Germa n
ve rsion was published in 1680 in Lesno/Leszno. Finally , m y memory of the actual
book wou ld be th at when closed , it would measure so mething like an inch b y three
inches, ap tl y a "little" garde n.
T a blic (Pameti/ Pam ati , p . LXIV (6 4)/57) notes the book is dedi cated to a ce rtain
" Jil'fmu R advan skemu , dedicnemu pan u V R advani, V Skubfne, Malachove,
slov utn eho ispanstvf aneb vidieku zvolenskeho pl'ednfmu assessorovi ajeho man zelce
V. u . pa nfJ ohann e Ka tal'in e, rozene M ari a.save z M a rku sovic (G eo rge R adv ansky,
heredita ry lord of R ad van, Skubin a, M alachov, the p ro min ent assesso r of the wellkn own count y of Zvolen a nd environs and to his wife , th e great?, noble? , lad y Joanna Cath erine, n ee M ariasova from M a rku sovce . '' ) Thi dedi cation va ri es from th a t
in th e ve rsion of th e H ortulus studi ed by me. In the dedi cation to his N eoforum latinos/avon icum , H orcicka na mes a ce rtain J a n R adva nsky of R advai\ , heir to Skubyn
and M alachau/ M a lachov, perha ps son of Jil'f/Juraj menti oned by T ablic: Edition
of J. V . Novak an d V . Flajshan s in P rague, 1908, p . 3. On this same page , H orcicka menti ons a ce rt ain H orwath -Sta nsithioru m in Spfs. This H orwath-S tansithiorum (ge niti ve plural) is rend ered H orwa th-Stancicovce (nominative plural) by Jan
Tibensky, Chvaly a obrany sloven skeh o naroda (Brati slava: Slovenske vyd ava tel'stvo
krasnej li tera tury, 1965), p . 48 .
For some comm ent a ry on Petr Sextiu s, see : Durovic, E vanjelicka lii eratura, pp .
I I 9- 120. H e is m enti oned by Lomba rdini in hi s commentary on Milichov insky, #56
in " Slove nsky Plutarc h ," Slo ven ske pohl'ad y, 7, No . 6 (1887), 135.
On Miloc hovinsky, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura, pp . 62 , 177-78 , and Lombard ini, p. 135.
On J an Sextius, see: Durovic, Eva njelick a lit eratura , p. 62, a nd Lomb a rdini again .
On J a n Buriu s, see: Durovic, Evangelick a lii eracura, pp . 8 1-82, 145 . H orcicka call s
Buriu s a G erman, th ough Du rov ic specul a tes that he m ay have bee n Slovak; he was
born in Lip tov. Al so, on page 84 of hi s cited work , Durovic notes th at J an Sex ti us
and J a n Burius wro te a hi story of a ce rt a in Juraj La ni in 1676.
I have fo und no reference fo r thi s person . Th e phrase " Pas. in Elecc. Dresda.
Va /Jens Hung. " ca n possibly be rendered " ~ in th e Electo rat e of Dresde n
�74
SLOVAKIA
Wall achian of Hun gary . "
Such an address of auth or to book was done nearl y a ce ntury later ( 1758) by Hu golin
G avlovic as he concluded the introductory portion of his Sk ala Krest'ansk a (A C hristian
School): signature MJ 33 1, Litera rn y a rchiv M ati ce sloven skej in Mart in , p . 16 with
title- page as page one . Interestingly, T ablic does n ot m enti on H orcicka's address
to the book in hi s, T a blic's, d escrip tion of the int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus.
40
In composin g hi s later devoti onal wo rk , Perlicka ditek B ozich (The Little Pearl of
G od 's Ch ild ren) , publi shed in 1685, H orcicka purposely structured it accordin g to
the fi ve d ivisions of Luther 's catechi sm : D u rovic, Evanjelick a literatura, pp . 12 1-22.
41
It is interestin g th at in 1685 , H o rcicka published in Levoca K om en sky's/Comenius'
Orbis pictu s sen sualium , on e of th e o utstandin g books of th e seventee nth century
where th e se nses a re u sed th e bette r to in culca te certa in knowled ge a m o ng children
and/or adults: Min arik, p . 270 ; E rce, p . 160; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, sub verbo
" Sinapius- H orci c_ka, D a ni el. " R ecall also th at accord in g to T a blic, Pam eti/Pam ati ,
pp . LXIX-LXX (69- 70)/6 1, th ere we re illustrati o ns wit h Latin or Slovak verse
m o ttoes.
" Bibli svata podle p uvodniho vydani Kra/ick eh o z let 1579-93 (Kutn a H o ra : Ceska
biblicka p race , 1942), and B ibli svata p odle posledn ih o vydani Kralick eh o z roku
1613 (P raha: n .p., 1945).
" C ita ti ons b y H orcicka from the Song of So ngs are: I . Song 4 : 12; 2. So ng 4: 13 (but
also v. 14); 3. So ng 4: 15; 4. So n g 2 :13- 14 ; 5. So ng 1:5 -6; 6. Song 4: 16; 7. So ng
7: 8-9 (bu t actu all y vv. 7-8 in eit her vers ion of the Kralice Bible con sulted); 8. Song
7: 11 (bu t also v. 12) ; 9. Son g 2 : 11- 12 (bu t actu all y citati on sta rts in the midd le of
verse 10 and includes also a pa rt of ve rse l 3); 10. So ng I : 13; 11 . So ng 2 :2; and I 2.
Son g 2: 1.
44
Song of Songs, M a rv in Pope, in tro. and com. , Ancho r Bi ble Series (Ga rd en City ,
New York: Dou bleday and Company , 1977) , especiall y pp. 114-129. Also see : Diction naire de Spiritualite , colum n s 769-76. On page 126 of hi s com mentary, Pope
notes that Lut her rej ected th e allegori cal interpretat ion of th e Song - na m ely, the
allegorical fan cies of the Fathers as well as the literal erotic se nse. R at her , Luther
believed that "the Bride of the Song is the ha ppy and peaceful state under Solomon's
ru le and that th e Song is a h ymn in which Solomon thanks God for the d ivine gift
of obedience.'' Concerning thi s, see also: Luther, ''Lectures on th e Song of Solomon ,''
J an Siggins, tr ., Luther's Works, 15 (St. Louis: Concord ia Publishin g, 1972), 191-95.
I assume that H orcicka would have been aware of Luther' s views, but thi s in no
way limits his int erpretati ve use of this Biblica l book. At present, it can not be said
whether an y o th er Luth era n view of the So ng of So ngs such as that by Johann es
Coccae us Uohann K och, 1603-69), Pope, pp . 128-29, was known b y Horcicka.
" Bes ides hi s cita ti ons from th e Song of Songs at the beginning of each "walk, " H orcicka refers to verses from this book some thi rtee n tim es, only once repeating a verse
from th ose introdu cin g " Walk IX."
46
On numbered page I 98 of th e H ortulus , Horcicka not es a Czec h ve rsion of the Bible
published in 163 I in Wittenberg.
47
H ortulus, numbered page 103; Pope , Song of Songs , p. 123.
39
�SLOVAKIA
75
" In T h e Encyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " D evo tional
Literature," it is no ted th a t ii K empis ' Imitation of Christ was popula r devotional
read in g in Luthera n la nd s.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church . ( 1965), sub verbo " G erh a rd , Johann ."
I have, howeve r , fo und no reference fo r presuma bl y this Ge rha rd 's Postill(ae) cited
by H orcicka.
'° Th e Encyclopedia of th e Luthera n Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Dilherr , J ohann
Michael," but no reference to his Feld-, Welt- etc. work . In two editions of an anthology of old Slova k literature, Misianik notes th a t th e Feld- work by this Dilherr was
published in ure m be rg in 1648 a nd 165 1: An tol6gia starsej slovensej literatury
( Brati slava: Yydavatel'stvo Slove nskej a kademie vied , 1964), p . 6 18, a nd 1981 editi on , p . 583. Misia nik gives the title as Feld- W elt - G artenbetrachtung.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965) , sub verbo" Huelsemann , Johann ."
" H orcicka a lso refers to th e Centuries of M agd eburg on numbered page 176.
" T ablic, Pam eti/Pam ati , pp . LXVI -LXIX (66-69)/5 7-61 , qu otes in Czechi zed form
two of th e verse units on numbered pages 122-23 a nd 402-03. The proper rendition
of these ve rses can be found in th e two Misianik a nthologies, pp . 395 -96 and 399/
373-74 respectively. Misia nik also cites two further ve rse units: H ortulus, numbered
pages 82-83 and 370-75/ M isia ni k, pp. 395, 397 -399 and 370- 73 respec ti vely for th e
two Misianik editi ons. Fina ll y, th ese fo ur ve rse units can also be fo und inJa miluji,
nesmim providaci: antol6gia zo slovenskej barokovej poezie (Bratislava: Tatran , 1977),
pp. 93-99. In a ll , th ere a re fo urtee n ve rse units. T ablic qu otes two a nd gives page
numbers for eleve n oth ers; he missed the page numbers fo r one verse unit according
to th e ve rsion of th e H ortulu s studi ed by me. The fo urtee n ve rse units a re as follows
- numbered pages th en the number of verses in th e unit-: I. 14/6 2 . 82 -83/ 12;
3. 87-88/2 4; 4. 100/4 La tin a nd 4 Slovak; 5. 114-15/ 11; 6 . 122-23/36 ; 7. 186/8; 8.
191/4 La tin and 4 Slovak, a nd aga in 4 La tin and 4 Slovak; 9. 245/6; 10 . 33 7-38/8;
11. 340-43/76; 12. 365-66/ 12, not mention ed by T ablic; 13. 370-75/ 60; and 14.
402 -03/ 18.
,. The orth ograp hy used a t th a t time shows g instead of j (though g was also used for
g), ss for s, w for v, the grave accen t fo r ad verbial endin gs, a nd (som etim es) a dot
fo r a long mark ove r y.
" Hu rba n , p . 6 (o riginal pagin ati on of the articl e) .
" O n unn um bered page 15 , th at is, in th e int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus, Horc icka spea ks to the " Dea r R ead e r " in " Slowen sk em gazyku (Slovak
language/to ngue), " as well as uses the adj ectival fo rms " Slowen sk ych " a nd " Slowenske " fo r "Slova k." In C h valy a obran y sloven sk eh o n arod a, pp . 48- 51, J a n Tibensky notes H orcicka's Slovak consciousness and quotes from th e introducti on to the
latte r 's Neoforum latin o-slavon icum as evide nce of it .
Prese n ted in Pa nel 99 , " Devo ti onal Literature in Seventeenth Ce ntury Slova ki a," a t
the AAASS conve ntion in Washin gton , D .C. on 17 O ctober 1982 . Parts were prepared
at the 1982 Summer Slavic Semin a r at the Unive rsity of Illinois in C ha mpa ign-Urbana .
�
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
1982-83, Vol. 30
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 30 (No. 55-56), 1982-83.
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
1982-83
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
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka's
Hortulus Animae Piae
G erald J . Sabo
In Slovak areas during the seventeenth ce ntury , n ation ali st ic turmoil and religious strife were prominent features of life a nd society. Ethnic
consciousness and religious commitment so pe rvaded political r elations
that they pitted Hungarian s, Germans, and Slovaks against o ne another
in shifting alliances. R eli gion, though, remain ed the " leadin g force"
for virtually the entire ce ntury. 1 Indeed , the writings of thi s period Slovak and L a tin - clearly bear this out. 2 Hymnals, hom il etic writing,
religious disputa tion s, doctrinal a nd d evo tion al lite ra ture, school plays
related to religious formation, as well as accounts of imprisonment and/or
ex ile for religious r eason s occupy a promin ent place among the
Slovak/Latin writin gs of this e ra.
Among the distinctive cultural figures of thi s century is the Lutheran family of Sinapius-Horcicka. 3 The father Mi chal a nd two of his sons ,
Jan a nd D ani el, stand out n ot only for their religiou s zeal but esp ec ially
for their eruditio n and writin gs. 4 Indeed , a numbe r of these writings
have earned them a significant place in Slovak cultural history. The father
Michal (d. 1653) was a pastor in Hricov and Sucany a nd a prominent
church elder in the Tre ncfn ecclesiastical (Lutheran) district. During
his studies at Wittenberg as a young man , he presented two public Latin
di sputatio n s: one on the definition and divisio n of m etaphysics and
another on the intell ect a nd w ill of intelli ge nt be in gs. 5 Mi ch al's commi tmen t to eruditio n must ce r tainly have influ en c~d his so n s J a n a nd
D aniel as evidenced by th e latter's activities and writin gs. Like their
fath er , th e sons devoted the ir scholarl y training to serv in g their fellow
Lutheran s as p astors a nd sc hool offi cials, in exile as well as in Slovak
areas. It is their wr itin gs, however, th at have establi shed th e ir places
in Slovak cultu ral history. Virtually all of J an 's extan t writings are written
in Latin o r German. 6 Among them are: 1. a Latin d evo tional work for
stu dents, H orologium sacrum (Sacred H o urs or C lock),7 where eve ry
hour of the day is directed to religious form ation ; 2. a L a tin play 8 H enoch
(E noch) ; an d Ornithica sacra (Sacred Ornithology) written in German
62
SLOVAKIA
about birds with religious significance. 9 The writings of D aniel are composed in Latin or a vernacular Slovak 10 that shows the influence of and
commitment to Kralice-Biblical-Czech in his reli giou s training and
liturgical practice.
Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka was born around 1640 in Sucany. 11 H e
was rector of the Lutheran school in J elsava from 1663-65, 12 a pastor
in K am enan/ 3 from 1665-67, 14 and from 1667-70 in Liptovska Tepla,
and finally from 1670 in R advan. In September, 1673 , Daniel was among
thirty-two Lutheran pastors summoned to trial befo re the Catholic Archbishop of E sztergom . 1~ After the trial , he went into exile first to Brieg
(today Brzeg) and then in the winter of 16 74 to Breslau (Wroclaw) , and
finally in November, 1677 16 to a certain Bojanowo in P oland , 17 where
he was rector of a school. 18 H orcicka returned from exi le some time in
1683, fir st to his former pastorate in R ad van, then in 1684 to a pastorate and position of school official in L evoca. H e remained in Levoca
un ti! his death in 1688.
Some eighteen works 19 are attributed to D aniel Sinapius-Horcicka.
Am ong the writings prominent in Slovak cultural history are : 1. H orcicka' s 1684 enlarged edition of the Lutheran hymnal Cithara sanctorum
(Zither of the Saints), also known as Tran osciu s after its compiler Ju raj
Tranovsky;2° 2. the 1682 wedding verse-composition in Latin, Coelum
Bojan ovien se (Bojanowo H eaven);2 1 3. Neoforum latino-slavonicum
(New L atin-Slavonic Forum) , a 1678 coll ection of popular/folk sayings
in L atin and Slovak;2 2 4. Perlicka ditek Bozich (The Little Pearl of God's
Children), a 1685 devotional work segm ented on the basis of the fi ve
divisions in Luther's catechi sm; 23 and 5. H ortulu s animae piae (The
Little Garden of the Piou s Soul), a 1676 devotional work and the subject of this article. 24
The L atin title of H orc icka 's 1676 work - H ortulu s animae piae
is intri guing. H ortulu s (Hortus) animae is the title for a
type of[Latin and/or German] devotional book of praye rs intended for the [Catholic] laity , that was widespread in Germany in the early sixteenth century .... The H ortuli .. . were
similar in general content and arrangement to many of the
L atin H orae or book of hours, or to the English primers , from
which they developed; howeve r , they were more popular in
character. The H ortuli contain ed the Little Office of Our
L ad y, extracts from the Gospel accounts of the passion, the
SLOVAKIA
63
Penitential Psalms, and the Litany of the Saints , with a large
selection of supplementary d evotional matter. This material
of private prayer had the tendency to increase size and in extravagan ce. For example, promises of spurious indulgences
and complete forgiveness of sins became attached to man y
prayers . . . The Council of Trent legislated against the accretions , the false promises of indulgences, and the incorrect versions of the Little Office of Our Lady. A bull of Pius V (March
11, 1571) demanded rigorous censorship of all editions. 25
The article on " Hortus/ Hortulus " in Dictionnaire de Spiritualite traces
the extensive number of devotional works associated with this title and
type of writing. 26 The phrase " Hortulus animae" is derived not from
the aesthetic but from the utilitarian aspects of a garden as is evident
from three Latin distichs that usually prefixed many such writings. The
first two lines are as follows:
Ortulus exiguus varias ut saepe salubres Herbas producit, quas
medicina probat. (A small garden often produces a variety
of salutary herbs of which medicine knows the value.) 21
In his articles on the Hortulus animae , Herbert Thurston notes that
in 1569, a certain Lu the ran adaptation was published and called Der
Lustgarten der Seelen (The Pleasure Garden of the Soul). 28 F. Wulf,
though , notes that a Georg Rhaw (Rhau) produced a Lutheran version
in 154 7, in Wittenberg; it was published in 1559 and was composed on
the basis of printed Hortuli forbidden by the Spanish lnquisition . 29
Among the d evotional literature written by Slovak Lutherans , the title
for Horcicka 's composition - Hortulus animae piae - is unique. Nor
is the title Der Lustgarten der Seelen or some Slovak rendition to be
found among Slovak Lutheran writings_ Jo Thus , it remains an open question why Horcicka cho se a title more closely associated with Catholic
devotional writing rather than one from his own Lutheran tradition. JI
The introdu ctory portion of Horcicka ' s HortulusJ 2 has several divisions. On the title page, the full title reads: Hortulu s Animae Piae,
Zahradka Dussicky pobozne, Wkterez se clowek Krestiansky Suzitkem
prochazeti muze (The Little Garden of the Pi ou s Soul in Which a Christian Person Can Walk w ith Usefulness/ Profit). After the title page com es
that with Horcicka 's dedication of the book to "P . Markowy Hor vv
(w) ath-Stansith of Gradetz/Hradec? in the Stolica (Cou nty) of Spis and
64
SLOVAKIA
to hi s w ife Zoffy, n ee M a riasse/M a ri asove? from Markussowic/Markusovce,'' whom H o rcicka calls Km otrum (God pare nt s) a nd
Dobrodin cu m (Be n efactors) . 33 In the fourt ee n pages that follow, H orcicka es ta blishes in Slovak th e basis or rationale for writing his Hortulus. H e d raws on Scriptu re as well as classical literature for refe ren ce
material. Two further p ages ( 15 and 16 in sequ e nce as these p ages a re
unnumbered) are devoted to the " Laskawemu Ctenari (Dear R eader). "
After these sixteen pages of basically Slovak prose, in the version studied
by m e there foll ow twelve pages in L a tin with dist inct parts. On p age
seventeen (in sequ en ce), H orcicka's brothe r J a n comm ents on the Hortulu s. Then, a close friend , P etr Sext ius, 34 addresses Daniel himself as
the form e r speaks on the H ortulus (pages 17-20). J a n Milochovinsky, 35
elder in the Zilina ecclesiastical district , h as a on e- page, addressed comm ent for D a ni el (page 21 ) . In the course of his comme n ts on the H ortulus, J a n Sextius, 36 called an "amico pectore ( close fri end)" by D a niel ,
addresses the '' P a nn onian offspring' ' and en courages them to show
gratitude to God an d the author of the Hortulu s (pages 22-23). In hi s
nearly three- page co mmentary , Jan Buriu s 37 draws on a number of
sources, theological a nd classical litera ry (pages 23-25). On pages 26
and 2 7 of this introdu ctory portion, Horcicka addresses a certain M a tthias Albrecht whom he d esignates as ''Pas. in Elect. Dresda ... Vallens
Hung. " 38 Fin all y, o n the final page of the int roducto ry portion (28),
the author of the H ortulu s addresses the b ook itself: 39 "A uthor ad
Libellum (Author to th e Little Book .)" At the bottom of this page, a
plaited wreath illu stration encompasses the following: '' D omini Sum us,
Dum Spiro Spero, D ominus Providebit (W e Are the Lord's, While I
Breathe, I Hope, The Lord Will Provide .)" With this succinct statem ent of purpose a nd ou tl ook , Horcicka concludes the in trod u ctory portion of his H ortulu s .
The m ain portion of the H ortulus consists of four hundred and eight
numbered pages virtually all in Slovak with some L atin wri ting and even
a few Greek words . (The Lat in and Greek are also transla ted into H orcicka 's vernacul ar Slovak.) H orcicka divid es the paginated portion into
twelve uneven sections. The division into twelve may have symbolic value
- twelve apostl es/twelve tri bes of Israel. 40 Each of these twelve sect ions
is called a " Prochadzka (Walk )."
Each ''Proch adzka '' begins in the same way . After the Roman
num eral indi cati ng the proper " Walk " are found the words: "wniZ
SLOVAKIA
65
premyssluge pobozna dusse (in which the pious soul reflects)." In each
of the twelve ''walks ,'' the pious soul reflects on a different object: 1.
the garden in general; 2. the tree of this garden; 3. the well of this garden ;
4 . the dove in this garden; 5. the mirror hangin g in this garden; 6. the
winds that blow through this garden; 7. the palm (tree); 8. the vine
stock/ root; 9 . the fig (tree); 10. myrrh; 11. the rose; and 12 . the lily.
In his comments on these twelve objects for reflection, Horcicka engages
the senses of the reader. 41 Words that help conjure up "sense pictures"
of the objects for reflection enable the reader the better to assimilate the
theological truth presented in association with the objects . Indeed, in
the presentation order of his objects , H orcicka gradually refines the focus
of his reader from a garden in general to a small object like a flower.
After the object for a specific "walk " is named , Horcicka cites a
relevant passage from the Biblical book Song of Songs (also known as
th e Canticle of Canticles or Song of Solomon). In a comparison of H orcicka ' s citat ions from the Song of Songs with two editions of the Kralice
Bible (1579-93 and 161 3), 41 it is clear that Horcicka adapts the verses
somewhat, probably for the sake of better creating his verbal sense-picture of the object for reflection. 4 3 For "Walk X ," Horcicka' s verse quotation from the Song of So ngs is virtually an exact quotation of this verse
according to the 161 3 edition of the Kralice Bible. For " Walk II ," however, Horcicka' s citation see ms to be drawn from the 1579-93 editio n
of the Kralice Bible . At present, though, there is no way of de termining
whe ther Horci cka u sed these versions of the Bible, a nd , if so , which of
th e two , or som e othe r version. Horcicka ' s choi ce of th e Song of Songs
as the Biblical basis for the Hortulus seems natural , perhaps even predictabl e from the tradi tion of C hristian writings about thi s Biblical book.
F rom a s earl y as 200 AD , Christia n writers have commented on a nd
inte rpreted the Song of Songs, usually allegorically , even eroti cally. 44
Horcicka probably wa nted a Biblical work that is co n cern ed not only
wi th a garden , but contain s the various objects for refl ection tha t he cites.
Onl y th e Son g of Son gs co uld give him such varie ty .
In the co mm e nta ry th a t foll ows the verse(s) from the Son g of So ngs
in each " walk ," H o rcicka dra ws on a va ri ety of so urces fo r m a te rial s
to suppo rt hi s co mm ent s. As is to be ex pec ted , Script u re is a n a bundant so urce of ma teri al. R efe rence to ve rses from books of the O ld a nd
New T es ta m e nt can be fo und in eve ry " walk " in la r ge num be rs. 4 5 I ndeed , in " W alk V ," H orcicka gives som e two hun d red and twenty-six
66
SLOVAKIA
distinct references from the Bible as authoritative corroboration for whatever interpretation and religious/moral instruction he has written.
Curiously, he cites verses from Sirach (some fifteen instances), from
Wisdom (some four instances) , and once each from the first and second
Book of Maccabees . None of these Old Testament books were considered
canonical enough for inclusion in any edition of the Kralice Bible or
probably any non-Catholic version through Horcicka's time. They are
found in Catholic versions of the Bible since well before Horcicka's time. 46
Horcicka refers to prominent Christian writers from early Christian times into his own era. References to various works by Augustine ,
to the writings of Luther, Gregory Nazianzus, Chrysostom, Tertullian ,
Origen, Ambrose, and to the history of Eusebius of Caesarea are noted
and footnoted, at times with even the folio/page numbers. References
to the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux, especially with regard to the
Song of Songs, are probably no surprise; Bernard wrote eighty-six sermons on the Song of Songs alone. Indeed, Horci cka notes sermon 61
where Bernard says that the Song's love pair are the Word of God and
a Soul. 47 Curiously, Horcicka notes two references from Cornelius a
Lapide, a Jesuit (d . 1637), a prolific Biblical exegete and interpreter.
Interestingly, Horcicka also has a single reference to a 1622 Czech translation of the Bible and to a Prague printing of Th e Imitation of Christ
by Thomas a Kempis (p. 171 ) . 48
In the Hortulus, there are a number of works noted and footnoted
that were probably well-known in Horcicka's time. (At the present time,
copies of some of these books are con sidered rare in many US libraries.)
Among these writings are: 1. Schola pietatis by Johann G erhard
(1582-1637), a Lutheran theologian; 49 2. Analecta sacra by J ohann
Heinrich Ursin (1608-67); 3. Arboretum biblicum, also by Ursin; and
4. "Hortus aromaticus," which is part 3 of U rsin 's Continuatio historiae
plantarum biblicae. I have found references for two authors whose names
resemble those footnoted by Horcicka but nothing about the works cited
as theirs. According to Horcicka, a certain Johann Michal Dilherr (a
poet and Lutheran theologian, 1604-69) wrote Welt, Feld, and
Gartenbetrachtung, 50 and a certain Johann Hu elsemann (Lutheran
theologian, 1602-61) is believed to have written Pentagonium
christian um. 51 With other books noted and footnoted by Horcicka , I
have been unable to find any reference for them or their authors. Among
these are: 1. Nicol(s) Roper's Helleuchtend Spiegel der Liebe ; 2. Mich(al)
SLOVAKIA
67
Ba um a nn 's L exicon Allegorico Evangelicum; 3. Laur( entius)
Halvard(i/ us) ' s Speculum amoris; and 4 . Hist(oria) Boh(emica) by a
certain Dubrav( ius) . 51 In the Hortulus, there is also a good number of
books footnot ed only a few times or less .
The classical authors cited b y Horcicka are well-known figures from
Greek a nd Latin literature. From the Greeks, Herodotus, Homer,
X enophon , a nd Strabo, eve n Ari stotle provide supportive material for
Horcicka. Of the Latin writers , there are Cicero, Horace, Pliny, Plutarch,
Tacitus, Suetonius, and even the outstanding classical specialist, the Dutchman Joest Qustus) Lipsius (1547-1606) . Horcicka's use of these authors
in a d evotional wo rk is not unusual for his time; classical literature continued to provide exempla tive material for writers in Slovak areas through
the eighteenth century .
At the conclusion of each ''walk ,'' Horcicka places Slovak ' ' Modlitby (Prayers)." U sually there are three distinct prayers, except for " Walks
VII a nd XII ," with only two . These prayers are mostly in prose, though
some are in verse, i.e . distichs combined in paired or enclosing rhymes. 53
The various verse compositions in the Hortulus range from six to seventysix verses . Three of the shortest follow , with a literal tra nslation . To
my knowledge they h ave not elsewhere b een reprinted . 54
Ach prigd Pane gezissi
prigd zen ichu neykrazssi
Nawsstew wernu iwu du ssi
at ljby twug hlas slissi
A wmile Zahradce swe
Bud' odpocinuti twe (p. 14)
Com e oh Lord J esus
come most handsome bridegroom
Visit the tru e i va of the soul
May it hear your kind voice
And in your dear Garden
Be your rest
2
KR ys te deg nam wwjre stalost
odegmi ss kodn u wrtkawost
Bychom cyle wi ry dossli
Zsmni casne do Nebe ssli
Na to rjka m Amen/ Amen/
Spas nas Gezu Kryste Amen. (p. 245)
C hri st give us steadfastness in fa ith
take away harmful fickleness
That the goals of faith be attained
Went in time from death to H eaven
To this I say Amen/ Amen/
Save us J esus C hrist Am en .
3
Pos pess o ma dusse ho/sweho
Kwytanj ze nicha ct neho
Kteryz na dum tweho srdce
Ruku mi los ti swe tlu ce
Otewri swe brany gemu
Pekne promluw/ a rcy kn emu
Prigd mi ly mug/ fada m tebe
Nechcy ziti gs uc bez tebe. (p. 337)
H as ten o my sou l him/ of your
Flowerin g the honorable bridegroom
Who upon the house of your heart
With th e hand of his love knocks
Open your gates to him
Nicely speak/ a nd say to hi m :
Come my dear/ I beg you
I do not wish to live being without you .
68
SLOVAKIA
Whil e the literary value of the verse compositi ons in the H ortulus is
limited , in the narrow sense, they can be considered examples of early
Slovak ve rse writing .
Each of the prayers at the end of the "walks" - verse or prose
- is designated for som e definite purpose ; for instan ce: " For the dear
presence of God; " "For the proper purity of heart , for sincerity, and
piety;" "For the recognition of people's woes and God ' s good acts;"
" For patience in crises and firmn ess in faith ;" and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful ," the last praye r and part of the Hortulus . According to Hurban, the H ortulu s had appended to it " M ensje
jeho basne (his/ Horcicka's/sm aller verses). " 55 Whether Hurban might
be referring to some of the verse compositions in the H ortulus or to some
other ve rses not part of the H ortulus in itself is not clear . In the version
of the Hortulus studied b y m e, the last two prayers (pages 404-408) are
'' For the forgiveness of forgetfulness which we allow while receiving God 's
gifts, " and "For the good realization of a life short and woeful. " For
H orcicka, these subjects may have seem ed an apt conclusion fo r his devotion al work . There is no reason to suspect that there was more writing
related to the Hortulu s which for some reason is not in the bound copy
in the Lycealna knizni ca. Indeed , Rizn er notes that the H ortulu s has
four hundred and eight numbered pages, as does Tablic - the number
found in the Lycealna copy of the H ortulus.
As a fi gure in Slovak cultural hi story, D ani el Sinapius-Horcicka
occupies a definite place. In his H ortulus animae piae, as in other
writings , he manifests a Slovak ethnic consciousness that stands out in
the seve nteenth ce ntury. 56 Through hi s religious zeal, erudition , and
talent , he also provides hi s fellow Lutherans wi th devo tion al writin g to
co nsole them in their time of exile and trials . In effect, he has composed
a notewo rthy example of early Slovak writing. Through not strictly
literary, the Slovak prose a nd verse of H orcicka's Hortulus m erit far
more attention and study th an they have rece ived - practicall y speaking, virtu ally none. It is hoped that thi s study is but the bare beginnin g
of research on the H ortulu s and its author, Daniel Sinapiu s-Horcicka .
NOTES
' J a n Du rov ic, Evanjelick a liceracura d o colerancie (Turcia nsky Sviity M a nin : M a ti ca
slove nska, 1940), p . 5 1.
' This is shown by a peru sal of th e following : J a n Durovic, Evangelicka liceracura a nd
SLOVAKIA
'
'
'
6
1
'
'
'
0
69
also his Prehl'ad literarnych dejin slovenskych eva njelikov (Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas:
Tra noscius, 1948); " Barak ," D ejin y starsej slovenskej /iteratury (Bratislava:
V ydava tel'stvo Slovensk ej akademie vied , 1958), pp . 155 -298; Literarna rukovat',
2nd ed. (Bra tisl ava: Slove nske pedagogicke nak ladatel's tvo , 1981 ) pp. 72-97.
M an y Lutheran famili es adop ted Latin renditions of the family na mes as new surnames. This hyphena ted name is used for Horcicka family members in Slovak litera ry
hi stories and criti cism as well as in th e a rticl es on them in Encyklopedia Slovenska ,
V ( 198 1).
J an the younger , son of J a n th e elder - Daniel's brother - also wrote a number
of works: l'.udovft Rizner, Bibliogra fia pisomnictva slovenskeho , V (Turciansky Svaty
Martin: M a ri ca slova neka, 1933), 80-81. ( H ereafter , Rizn er , volume in Rom a n
numeral , page(s) in Arabic num eral(s) .) Also , J an Misianik, Doplnky k Rizn erovej
bib/iogra fii , 1946 , 2nd revised and enlarged edition (Martin : Matica slovenska, 1971),
pp. 252 -253 . Jan and Dani el' s sister Elena married into prominent Luthera n families
such as La ni a nd Lad ive r - Jan Slavik, D ejin y zvolenskeho evanjelickeh o a. v.
bra1s1va a senioratu (Banska Sti avn ica: NakJad vdovy a syna AugustaJoergesa, 1921 ),
p . 344.
Rizn er, V , 8 1; Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p. 62 , incompl ete Latin titles.
Rizn er , V , 79-80 ; Durovic, Evanje/ick a Iiteratura , pp. 142-43 , 348; Alexander Lomba rdini, "J a n Sina pi us (H orcicka), #38, " "Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovensk e pohl'ady,
7, No. 4 ( 1887), 82-83; Misia nik , D oplnky , P . 252.
Durovic , Evanje/icka literatura, p. 69
Durovic, Prehl'ad , p . 40 , a nd Evanjelicka literatura , pp . 9 1-92 has " play, " but Erce
(pseudonym of Celes tin R advany i) , Slovenska krv (Bratislava : Vydavatel'stvo lexikalneho di ela " Slovenska krv, " 1942), p. 160 calls it a " praye r book for intellect uals."
J an di ed in ex ile in H alle on August 4, 1682: Rizn er , V , 79 ; Bohuslav Tablic, Pameti
cesk o-slovenskych basnifuv an eb versovcuv , origin all y published in 1800' s,
Bi og raphi ca-Pra mene, zv. 1 (M a rtin : M a rica slovenska , 1972) , p . LXV (65) , and
in Pam ati cesko-slovenskych basnikov alebo versovcov, Rudo Brtai\, tr. (Bratislava :
T at ran , 1974), p. 57; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, V (1981) , sub verbo " SinapiusH orcicka, J a n , st. "
The ve rn acula r Slovak used by Daniel is called " Slovakized Czech " by Jozef Minarik
in Li1erarna rukova t', p. 72 , in both editions. Discussion a bout this la ngu age a nd
its prope r desc ripti ve na me co ntinu es. Fo r instance , l',ubomfr Durovic writes that
" throu gh th e increased use of Czech with local Slovak features in th e administration
of W es t Slova k town s (Bratislava , Trnava, Trencfn , Zilina , etc .), a kind of regional
administra tive koin e spo nt a neously developed in th e sixtee nth and seve ntee nth centuri es .. called ' cultural Wes tern Slova k' (kulturna zapadoslovencina)," in "Slovak,"
70
SLOVAKIA
The Slavic Literary Languages: Formation and Development , Alexande r Schenker
a nd Edward Stankiewicz, eds. (New H ave n : Yale Concilium on International and
Area Studies, 1980), p . 2 12. Durovic' s a nalysis shows features of this koine th at a re
fou nd in H orcicka's H ortulu s , though how co nsisten tl y a nd exte nsively this is so is
a m a tt er fo r further study by histo ri cal lin gu ists. Durovic continu es:
Another language integrati on a rea in the seventeenth ce ntury was Central
Slovakia [the area of H orcicka's pastoral act ivity), where the Central Slovak
dialects became a basis for a new regional koine. The use of this "cultural
Central Slovak " is a ttested in city administrat ion , pri vate correspondence,
occasional poetry, and in some religious, non-liturgical fun ctions. This koine
was in m an y respec ts ve ry similar to the spoken literary Slovak of today.
(p. 2 12)
"
,i
"
"
"
The related but distinctive process of Slovak ethni c consciousness fo r the period
1620- 1750 must also have been play ing a role in the process of lin guistic development and systematization . After extensive documentary resea rch and study , Josef
M acu rek co nte nds that it was during thi s peri od that "the political and geographical
border , M oravian-Sl ovak .. . , becam e an ethn ographic boundary ," in " Ceske ze me
a Slovensko ( 1620-1750),'' Spisy university j. E . Purkyne v Brne: Filosoficka fakult a,
147 ( 1969), pp . 78-79 ; see also pp. 69-75 with related footnotes and appended
documents on pp . 83-3 I 3. On the basis of his study, M acurek shows that in this
border area , the co nsciousness of Slovaks and M oravians (Czechs) as di stin ct ethnic
groups was es peciall y developed , Thus, H orcicka says he is writing in "slowenskem
gazyku " (Cf note 56 below). For more on this point see also my article on Hu golfn
G avlovic in this issue of Slovakia , note 3.
1 have used the foll owing for the biogra ph y of Daniel Sina piu s- H orcicka: Bohu slav
Tablic, Pameti/ Pam aci , pp . LXI-LXXI (6 1-71)/55-62; Durovic, Evanjelicka
lit eratura, pp. 120-121, note 75 ; Lombard ini , " Daniel Sinapius ( H o rci cka ), #37 ,"
in " Slovensky Plutarch ," Slovenske pohl'ady , 7, No . 4 (1887), 80-82 ; Erce, p . 160 ;
J ozef Minarik , D ejin y starsej slovensk ej literatury, pp. 266-70 ; J ozef Hurba n ,
"Slovensko a jeho zivot litera rni ," Slovenskje pohladi na vedi, umenja a literaturu,
Djel I , Svazok 2 ( 1847), rpt. (Bratislava : Slovenske vydavatel'stvo krasnej literatury ,
1957), 6-9 (ori ginal pagination); En cyklop edia Slovenska, V ( 198 1), sub verbo
"Sinapius- H orcicka, D aniel"; and Misian ik , Doplnky , pp . 25 1-252. The date of
H o rcicka 's birth is given by Durovic as circa 1630 and th at of his death as 1706 b y
Durovic, Erce, and Lomba rdini , an d yet Minarik and En cyklopedia Slovenska give
l 640 a nd 1688 respec tively. I have accepted th e latter as evidence of more rece nt
scholarship on Sinapius-Horcicka .
These d ates a re in En cyklopedia Slovenska ( 198 1), sub verbo "Sin apius-Horcicka,
D a ni el. ''
Lomba rdini names K ameiian y by its Hun garia n appe llat ion (cf. Vlastivedny slovnik obci na Sloven sku ( 19 77) , sub verbo " K ameiiany. " )
Dates for years in K ameiiany and Liptovska T epla in Encyklopedia S/ovenska ( 198 1),
sub verbo "Sinapiu s- H o rcicka, Da niel"; T ablic, Pam eti/ Pam aci , P. LXII (62)/55.
Slav ik , Dejiny, p. 85 notes 33 pastors , but Jan Kvacala, D ejiny reformacie na Sloven -
SLOVAKIA
"
17
"
19
'°
"
"
"
"
"
16
"
71
sku (Liptovsky Sviity Mikulas : Tranoscius , 1935), p . 235 writes 32 Lutheran pastors
and 1 Reformed pastor.
Tablic, Pameti/Pamiiti, P. LXII (62)/55.
Those authors who have written about Horcicka give variation s on the name of this
Polish town. Tablic (Pameti, PP. LXII-LXIII) has Bojanow(o) , Erce, Bojanov(o)
near Lesno/ Leszno , and Tablic (Pama.ti , pp . 55-56), Nov(y/e) Bojanow(-/o), and
Encyklopedia Slo venska, Nov(y/e) Boja nov (-/o) . On pp . 266-67, Minarik speaks
of a Nov(y/e) Bojanow(o) nea r Lesno/ Leszno . From my own resea rch, I have decided on presentday Bojanowo , southeast of Leszno. The Slownik nazv geograficznych po/ski zachodnej i polnocnej, Stanislaw Rospond, ed . (Warszawa and Wroclaw :
Polskie towarzystwo geografi czne, 195 1), p . 17 sub verbo " Bojanow" desc ribes a
village near R aciborz. H oweve r , two further reference works make me choose Boj anowo near Leszno . They are: Slownik geograficzny kr6lestwa polskiego , Filip
Sulimi ersky and Wl adyslaw Walewsky, ed . (Warszawa: Druk " Wieku ," 1880), pp.
292-294 , sub verbo " Bojanowo" ; and Wielka encyklopedia powszechna (1963), sub
verbo " Bojanowo." These two works mention that in this town's hi story there was/is
a significa nt evangeli cal/protestant background and that here th ere was a protestant
gymna zwm .
Hurba n , p . 6 (original pagination of article); Lomba rdini , p . 80 ; T ablic,
Pameti/ Pamiiti , p. LXII (62)/55 ; Minarik, p . 266: Encyklopedia Slovenska, sub verbo
" Sinap ius-H orcicka , Daniel. " Rudo Brtan in " Daniel Sinapius , '' Slovensky literarny
album (Bratislava: Obzor, 1968) , p . 44 notes that Sinapius-Horcicka stayed on th e
estate of th e Lords Leszczynski ( 1677-83) as rector of th e Latin school in ov(y/e)
Bojanow(-/o).
Rizn er , V, 77-79 , li sts twelve : Lombardini li sts fourt een ; Misianik , Doplnky , pp .
25 1-5 2 , add s six more; Misia ni k has two works listed by Lombardini but not by
Rizn er. They all sha re eleve n in common.
For so me co mm enta r y, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura , pp. 143-45.
For so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic , Evanjelicka literatura, p. 91.
Hurban , pp . 6-9 (o ri gin al pagina tion of article); Minarik , pp. 267-69; a nd Literarna ruk ovl', pp . 90-92.
Fo r so me co mm enta ry, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a literatura , pp . 12 1-22 .
T he works th at I have listed in numbers 2 , 3, 5, probably l , a nd perh aps 4 we re
published a nd/or co mposed durin g Horcicka's period of exi le.
Th e New Ca th olic En cyclopedia ( 1967), sub verbo '' H ortulu s animae.''
Diciionnaire de Spiriru alite ( l 969), sub verbo " Hortus , Hortu lus/J a rdin spiritu el,"
especiall y columns 777 -783. (In column 779, it is noted that th e J esuit Peter Cani siu s
publi shed in 1563 in Dillin ge n H orru/us animae. Der See/en C arten .)
Herbert Thursto n , " The Print ing Press in th e Service of th e C hurch : I , The Original
Garden of th e Soul, " Am erica n Ecclesias rical R eview, 26 (Februa ry, 1902), 170 ,
no tes it was prin ted in 1569 in N urembe rg a nd a co py is at th e Bodl eia n Libra ry,
Oxford whi ch co ncludes wit h a n histori cal account of Luth er's p rotes t aga in st in d ul ge nces. In hi s Ca th olic Encyclopedia ( 19 10) a rticl e on '' H o nul us an ima e, ''
T hurston notes th at thi s 1569 Luthera n re nditi on " perh a ps co r respond s bes t to the
oth er fa mou s Cath ol ic prayer book the' Pa rad isus Anim ae. ' " In his A m erican Ee-
72
SLOVAKIA
clesiastical Review art icle cited above, Thurston is discussing primaril y a German
version entitled Der Selen Wurt zgart (first published in 1483), found in th e British
Mu seum (p. 170 in article). He th en m enti ons in a footnote of thi s a rticl e that a
Nuremberg edition of th e same year as th e German H orculu s he is di scussing is entitl ed Hortulus Animae, th e dude Selen wurt-ga rden gen ant , printed by F . P ypus.
Finall y, on pages 174- 75 of this same art icle, Thurston qu otes th e translated introduction of his German Hortulus under di scussion:
Hereafter follows a right pleasant and useful matter; and it is called the
H erb-garden of th e Soul; since ju st as the body of man derives manifold
pleasant savours from clove , gilliflowers, rosemary and other herbs, in like
mann er th e soul receives man y d ifferent en tertainments, both pleasant and
ghostly , from the goodly teachin g and examples whi ch are gathered together
in thi s book.
This present book is divided into four pa rt s. Each part is translated
into German and derived from the writings of honou red teache rs and
histories worth y of credit.
19
30
31
31
This introduction th en shows clearly the utilita ri an characte r of the H orculus.
L exikon fur Th eologie und Kirch e ( 1960), sub verbo " H ortulus animae. " On George
Rh aw ( 1488-1 548), responsible for this 1547 (composed) work, see: The Encyclopedia
of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Rh a u , George." In this encyclo ped ia,
in the articl e " D evo tion al Litera ture, " it is noted that Rhaw 's ve rsion of th e H orculu s dates from 1548, a nd that an offshoot of Rhaw 's version was Nicol aus Cramer's
Wurtzgaerclein d er Seelen of 15 73 . In my research in several librar ies at universities
and theological centers, I have found only one book on Lutheran devotion al literature:
P aul Althaus , Forschungen z ur Evangelischen Gebetsliteracur, 1927 ed ., rpt.
(Hildesheim: Georg Olm s V erl agsbuchhandlung, 1966). This book , howeve r, has
no comm entary abo ut th e Lutheran ve rsion of the H ortulu s; it does spea k of th e
Ca tholi c Hortuli . I have found no references anywhere else to a Lutheran H orculus
or to a book entitled D er Lustgart en der Seelen , the titl ed noted by Thurston.
In Evanjelicka literatura, page 111 , Durovic notes that the Lutheran clergyman Daniel
Pribi s added a section entitled R osarium an imae (Rose-garden of the Soul) to hi s
1634 editi on (cf. Prehl'ad , p. 34) of the 16 12 Slovak rendition of Luther's catech ism.
It mi ght be noted here th at Luther "was ... eage r to replace the ordinary Catholic
prayer books, above all th e com mon popular forms of H orculu s animae ('The Soul 's
Garden') , and thu s his [Luther' s] B etbu chlein (' Prayer Bookl et') of 1522 appea red.":
Th e Encyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965), sub verbo "Devotional Literature.''
In Dictionnaire de Spiricualite, column 783, it is observed th at a J esui t, Andrej Zachon
(d. 1700), wrote and had published in Olomouc in 1669 a H ortulu s spiritualis vernantiae seu libellus precum floriferarium (Littl e Spiritual Ga rd en of Springtime or
The Little Book of Flowerbearin g Entrea ti es).
I am usi ng a mi crofilm of Horcicka 's H ortulu s made from a copy of this book fou nd
in the Lycealn a kni zn ica in Bratislava with no signa ture number. Rizn er, V, 77 and
Durovic, Evanjelicka lit eratura, p . 12 1 noted two ex ta nt co pies of the H orculu s one in the Kni znica Tranovskeho a nd another in th e Hun garian National Museum.
SLOVAKIA
ll
"
"
"
"
"
73
It would seem likely that th e copy in the Kniznica Tranovskeho is now the copy in
the Lycealna knizni ca. Howeve r, as will be evident from my commentary , the copy
studi ed by me has more introductory, unnumbered pages than Rizner indicates 28 instead ofRizner' s 16. In his book , TanovskehoPam eti/Pamati, pp . LXIV-LXV
(64-65)/5 7) tablic notes virtuall y all of these ex tra La tin pages, although he is silent
ab t the sixteen , basically Slovak (unnumbered) pages tha t preced e these Latin ones
in the introductory portion of the H ortulus. Tablic (Pame1i/Pama.1i, pp . LXIX-LXX
(69- 70)/6 1) notes th a t there are illu strations and verses in each of th e twelve divisions of the mai n body ; this format is th en similar to that of emblematic poetry which
has a co upl et-ve rse, a n illu stration , a nd then some furth er verses/commentary: John
L. Lievsay, '' Emblem , ' ' Th e Prin ceton En cyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics , enlarged editi on , Alex Premin ge r et al. , ed. (Prince ton: Prince ton University Press, 1974) .
Thi s feature - th e illustration - is not found in the H ortulus version studi ed b y
me. In hi s D oplnky, p . 25 1, Misianik a nd in Pameti/Pam ati , p. LXX (70)/61, Tablic
not e th a t H orcicka trans lated his Slovak Hortulu s into German, and this Germa n
ve rsion was published in 1680 in Lesno/Leszno. Finally , m y memory of the actual
book wou ld be th at when closed , it would measure so mething like an inch b y three
inches, ap tl y a "little" garde n.
T a blic (Pameti/ Pam ati , p . LXIV (6 4)/57) notes the book is dedi cated to a ce rtain
" Jil'fmu R advan skemu , dedicnemu pan u V R advani, V Skubfne, Malachove,
slov utn eho ispanstvf aneb vidieku zvolenskeho pl'ednfmu assessorovi ajeho man zelce
V. u . pa nfJ ohann e Ka tal'in e, rozene M ari a.save z M a rku sovic (G eo rge R adv ansky,
heredita ry lord of R ad van, Skubin a, M alachov, the p ro min ent assesso r of the wellkn own count y of Zvolen a nd environs and to his wife , th e great?, noble? , lad y Joanna Cath erine, n ee M ariasova from M a rku sovce . '' ) Thi dedi cation va ri es from th a t
in th e ve rsion of th e H ortulus studi ed by me. In the dedi cation to his N eoforum latinos/avon icum , H orcicka na mes a ce rtain J a n R adva nsky of R advai\ , heir to Skubyn
and M alachau/ M a lachov, perha ps son of Jil'f/Juraj menti oned by T ablic: Edition
of J. V . Novak an d V . Flajshan s in P rague, 1908, p . 3. On this same page , H orcicka menti ons a ce rt ain H orwath -Sta nsithioru m in Spfs. This H orwath-S tansithiorum (ge niti ve plural) is rend ered H orwa th-Stancicovce (nominative plural) by Jan
Tibensky, Chvaly a obrany sloven skeh o naroda (Brati slava: Slovenske vyd ava tel'stvo
krasnej li tera tury, 1965), p . 48 .
For some comm ent a ry on Petr Sextiu s, see : Durovic, E vanjelicka lii eratura, pp .
I I 9- 120. H e is m enti oned by Lomba rdini in hi s commentary on Milichov insky, #56
in " Slove nsky Plutarc h ," Slo ven ske pohl'ad y, 7, No . 6 (1887), 135.
On Miloc hovinsky, see: Durovic, Evanjelick a lit eratura, pp . 62 , 177-78 , and Lombard ini, p. 135.
On J an Sextius, see: Durovic, Eva njelick a lit eratura , p. 62, a nd Lomb a rdini again .
On J a n Buriu s, see: Durovic, Evangelick a lii eracura, pp . 8 1-82, 145 . H orcicka call s
Buriu s a G erman, th ough Du rov ic specul a tes that he m ay have bee n Slovak; he was
born in Lip tov. Al so, on page 84 of hi s cited work , Durovic notes th at J an Sex ti us
and J a n Burius wro te a hi story of a ce rt a in Juraj La ni in 1676.
I have fo und no reference fo r thi s person . Th e phrase " Pas. in Elecc. Dresda.
Va /Jens Hung. " ca n possibly be rendered " ~ in th e Electo rat e of Dresde n
74
SLOVAKIA
Wall achian of Hun gary . "
Such an address of auth or to book was done nearl y a ce ntury later ( 1758) by Hu golin
G avlovic as he concluded the introductory portion of his Sk ala Krest'ansk a (A C hristian
School): signature MJ 33 1, Litera rn y a rchiv M ati ce sloven skej in Mart in , p . 16 with
title- page as page one . Interestingly, T ablic does n ot m enti on H orcicka's address
to the book in hi s, T a blic's, d escrip tion of the int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus.
40
In composin g hi s later devoti onal wo rk , Perlicka ditek B ozich (The Little Pearl of
G od 's Ch ild ren) , publi shed in 1685, H orcicka purposely structured it accordin g to
the fi ve d ivisions of Luther 's catechi sm : D u rovic, Evanjelick a literatura, pp . 12 1-22.
41
It is interestin g th at in 1685 , H o rcicka published in Levoca K om en sky's/Comenius'
Orbis pictu s sen sualium , on e of th e o utstandin g books of th e seventee nth century
where th e se nses a re u sed th e bette r to in culca te certa in knowled ge a m o ng children
and/or adults: Min arik, p . 270 ; E rce, p . 160; and En cyklopedia Sloven ska, sub verbo
" Sinapius- H orci c_ka, D a ni el. " R ecall also th at accord in g to T a blic, Pam eti/Pam ati ,
pp . LXIX-LXX (69- 70)/6 1, th ere we re illustrati o ns wit h Latin or Slovak verse
m o ttoes.
" Bibli svata podle p uvodniho vydani Kra/ick eh o z let 1579-93 (Kutn a H o ra : Ceska
biblicka p race , 1942), and B ibli svata p odle posledn ih o vydani Kralick eh o z roku
1613 (P raha: n .p., 1945).
" C ita ti ons b y H orcicka from the Song of So ngs are: I . Song 4 : 12; 2. So ng 4: 13 (but
also v. 14); 3. So ng 4: 15; 4. So n g 2 :13- 14 ; 5. So ng 1:5 -6; 6. Song 4: 16; 7. So ng
7: 8-9 (bu t actu all y vv. 7-8 in eit her vers ion of the Kralice Bible con sulted); 8. Song
7: 11 (bu t also v. 12) ; 9. Son g 2 : 11- 12 (bu t actu all y citati on sta rts in the midd le of
verse 10 and includes also a pa rt of ve rse l 3); 10. So ng I : 13; 11 . So ng 2 :2; and I 2.
Son g 2: 1.
44
Song of Songs, M a rv in Pope, in tro. and com. , Ancho r Bi ble Series (Ga rd en City ,
New York: Dou bleday and Company , 1977) , especiall y pp. 114-129. Also see : Diction naire de Spiritualite , colum n s 769-76. On page 126 of hi s com mentary, Pope
notes that Lut her rej ected th e allegori cal interpretat ion of th e Song - na m ely, the
allegorical fan cies of the Fathers as well as the literal erotic se nse. R at her , Luther
believed that "the Bride of the Song is the ha ppy and peaceful state under Solomon's
ru le and that th e Song is a h ymn in which Solomon thanks God for the d ivine gift
of obedience.'' Concerning thi s, see also: Luther, ''Lectures on th e Song of Solomon ,''
J an Siggins, tr ., Luther's Works, 15 (St. Louis: Concord ia Publishin g, 1972), 191-95.
I assume that H orcicka would have been aware of Luther' s views, but thi s in no
way limits his int erpretati ve use of this Biblica l book. At present, it can not be said
whether an y o th er Luth era n view of the So ng of So ngs such as that by Johann es
Coccae us Uohann K och, 1603-69), Pope, pp . 128-29, was known b y Horcicka.
" Bes ides hi s cita ti ons from th e Song of Songs at the beginning of each "walk, " H orcicka refers to verses from this book some thi rtee n tim es, only once repeating a verse
from th ose introdu cin g " Walk IX."
46
On numbered page I 98 of th e H ortulus , Horcicka not es a Czec h ve rsion of the Bible
published in 163 I in Wittenberg.
47
H ortulus, numbered page 103; Pope , Song of Songs , p. 123.
39
SLOVAKIA
75
" In T h e Encyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church ( 1965), sub verbo " D evo tional
Literature," it is no ted th a t ii K empis ' Imitation of Christ was popula r devotional
read in g in Luthera n la nd s.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Luth eran Church . ( 1965), sub verbo " G erh a rd , Johann ."
I have, howeve r , fo und no reference fo r presuma bl y this Ge rha rd 's Postill(ae) cited
by H orcicka.
'° Th e Encyclopedia of th e Luthera n Church ( 1965), sub verbo " Dilherr , J ohann
Michael," but no reference to his Feld-, Welt- etc. work . In two editions of an anthology of old Slova k literature, Misianik notes th a t th e Feld- work by this Dilherr was
published in ure m be rg in 1648 a nd 165 1: An tol6gia starsej slovensej literatury
( Brati slava: Yydavatel'stvo Slove nskej a kademie vied , 1964), p . 6 18, a nd 1981 editi on , p . 583. Misia nik gives the title as Feld- W elt - G artenbetrachtung.
" Th e En cyclopedia of th e Lutheran Church ( 1965) , sub verbo" Huelsemann , Johann ."
" H orcicka a lso refers to th e Centuries of M agd eburg on numbered page 176.
" T ablic, Pam eti/Pam ati , pp . LXVI -LXIX (66-69)/5 7-61 , qu otes in Czechi zed form
two of th e verse units on numbered pages 122-23 a nd 402-03. The proper rendition
of these ve rses can be found in th e two Misianik a nthologies, pp . 395 -96 and 399/
373-74 respectively. Misia nik also cites two further ve rse units: H ortulus, numbered
pages 82-83 and 370-75/ M isia ni k, pp. 395, 397 -399 and 370- 73 respec ti vely for th e
two Misianik editi ons. Fina ll y, th ese fo ur ve rse units can also be fo und inJa miluji,
nesmim providaci: antol6gia zo slovenskej barokovej poezie (Bratislava: Tatran , 1977),
pp. 93-99. In a ll , th ere a re fo urtee n ve rse units. T ablic qu otes two a nd gives page
numbers for eleve n oth ers; he missed the page numbers fo r one verse unit according
to th e ve rsion of th e H ortulu s studi ed by me. The fo urtee n ve rse units a re as follows
- numbered pages th en the number of verses in th e unit-: I. 14/6 2 . 82 -83/ 12;
3. 87-88/2 4; 4. 100/4 La tin a nd 4 Slovak; 5. 114-15/ 11; 6 . 122-23/36 ; 7. 186/8; 8.
191/4 La tin and 4 Slovak, a nd aga in 4 La tin and 4 Slovak; 9. 245/6; 10 . 33 7-38/8;
11. 340-43/76; 12. 365-66/ 12, not mention ed by T ablic; 13. 370-75/ 60; and 14.
402 -03/ 18.
,. The orth ograp hy used a t th a t time shows g instead of j (though g was also used for
g), ss for s, w for v, the grave accen t fo r ad verbial endin gs, a nd (som etim es) a dot
fo r a long mark ove r y.
" Hu rba n , p . 6 (o riginal pagin ati on of the articl e) .
" O n unn um bered page 15 , th at is, in th e int rodu cto ry portion of the H ortulus, Horc icka spea ks to the " Dea r R ead e r " in " Slowen sk em gazyku (Slovak
language/to ngue), " as well as uses the adj ectival fo rms " Slowen sk ych " a nd " Slowenske " fo r "Slova k." In C h valy a obran y sloven sk eh o n arod a, pp . 48- 51, J a n Tibensky notes H orcicka's Slovak consciousness and quotes from th e introducti on to the
latte r 's Neoforum latin o-slavon icum as evide nce of it .
Prese n ted in Pa nel 99 , " Devo ti onal Literature in Seventeenth Ce ntury Slova ki a," a t
the AAASS conve ntion in Washin gton , D .C. on 17 O ctober 1982 . Parts were prepared
at the 1982 Summer Slavic Semin a r at the Unive rsity of Illinois in C ha mpa ign-Urbana .
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
Daniel Sinapius-Horčička's Hortulus Animae Piae
Description
An account of the resource
Gerald J. Sabo
Slovakia, Vol. 30 (No. 55-56), 1982-83
pp. 61-75
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Sabo, Gerald J., 1945–2020
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1982-83
LCNAF+dates
-
https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/82efa56c7bee59fa9fb4ec1ba55521d4.pdf
0007048043183d6c353791f1a5db6802
PDF Text
Text
36
SLOVAKIA
Dark Hours of the Church
in Slovakia
After the shock of the Russian invasion of CzechoSlovakia on August 21, 1968, the first task of Moscow and
its collaborators in that country was to "normalize" the
situation. The term "normalization" in communist jargon
meant the abrogation of all civil liberties gained during
the Dubcek regime and the imposition of rigid control on
public and private life of all citizens.
After Alexander Dubcek fell in disgrace of Moscow,
Gustav Eusak, his former right hand, used all available
methods to get to the top of the Communist Party of
Czecho-Slovakia and to stay there with the blessing of
Moscow. He did not hesitate to renege on all the principles
of Dubcek's "Communism with human face". Under the
supervision of Moscow's emissaries it did not take long
before the country returned to the brutal Stalinist era of
Antonin Novotny.
The so-called "normalization" applies to all sections of
life in Czecho-Slovakia, including religious life. Since 1969
the atheistic propaganda is steadily increasing in printed
publications and in broadcasting. The teachers are pressed
to spread anti-religious indoctrination on all levels of
education, in all subject-matters taught in schools. It is
permissible for the priests to teach religion in school
buildings after the regular curriculum in grade schoolsone hour weekly for lower grades and one hour bi-weekly
for upper grades. But it can be done only with a written
petition of both parents who must come personally to the
principal of the school. In such an interview, the principal,
as a rule, tries to influence even to intimidate the parents.
Children who have attended religious classes are not admitted to higher education and their parents are branded
as unreliable to the Communist regime. Public servants
are dissuaded from attending Masses and receiving the
sacraments.
�SLOVAKIA
37
Freedom of press, so much enjoyed during the short
period of Dubcek regime, was again suppressed. The only
Slovak Catholic weekly newspaper, Katolicke noviny ( Catholic News) is under strict Communist control. The editor of
this newspaper since September 1973 is Rev. Francis Marko.
The newspaper prints only selected religious news, and the
readers of the paper are fed with Communist Party line
editorials and articles. The same applies to the monthly
priestly magazine Duchovny pastier (Spiritual Shepherd)
under the editorship of Rev. Michal Krovina, and to the
almanac Putnik svatovojtessky (Pilgrim of St. Vojtech),
published annually. All these publications appear under the
sponsorship of the Society of St. Vojtech.
The Society of St. Vojtech played a unique role in the
history of Slovak Catholics and of the Slovak nation. It
was founded in 1870 by Rev. Andrew Radlinsky in the time
of great magyarization of the Slovak nation. By its large
membership and publications this Society kept alive the
faith in the souls of Slovak people and the hope for better
future . From 1918 till 1945 it made a great progress in its
scope and activity. The Society of St. Vojtech became the
heart of the Slovak Catholic culture. The Communists after
the take-over in 1948 put the Society under their control.
They took away its printery and book bindery, discarded
its membership and completely changed its structure and
mission. Besides the three above mentioned regular publications they permitted to publish under the name of the
Society of St. Vojtech some prayer and liturgical books and
parish administration forms. The main purpose of the
"nationalized" Society of St. Vojtech became the selling
of liturgical and devotional objects and the distribution of
Mass wine to all the parishes of Slovakia.
Since 1948 the new Society of St. Vojtech was managed
by an Executive Committee, headed by Rev. Alexander
Horak, a well known pro-Communist priest. With the
arrival of Dubcek thaw, this Executive Committee was
replaced by two representatives from each diocese of
Slovakia. Msgr. John Postenyi, administrative manager of
the Society for several decades, was elected president of the
Society of St. Vojtech. Under Postenyi's leadership the
Society, during the short period of more favorable condi-
�38
SLOVAKIA
tions, published a series of much needed liturgical books
and the whole new Slovak translation of the Bible. Msgr.
Postenyi also began preparations for the 100th anniversary
of the foundation of the Society to be held in 1970. But,
meanwhile, the situation worsened again. Msgr. Postenyi
was replaced by Rev. Alexander Horak as the president of
the Society, and the principal centenary celebrations on
September 24, 1970 were held in the pro-government spirit
under the supervision of Communist big wheels.
During the years 1968-1969, the new spirit came also
to the Catholic seminary in Bratislava. So many candidates
for the priesthood enrolled to the seminary that there was
a serious talk about asking permission for opening another
one in eastern Slovakia. The barriers in accepting seminarians were broken and in 1968-1969 more than a hundred
candidates were accepted into the seminary. But here too
the "normalization" took place. In later years many of
these candidates for the priesthood were dismissed. And
those who were ordained in 1973 and 1974, were sent to
military service. The "numerus clausus" and strict selection
of candidates were reinforced. Sixty newly ordained priests
in one year seemed much too many for the communist
supervisors of religious life. On the other hand, several
priests who showed extraordinary zeal in performing their
ministry, were deprived of state permission to perform
parish work and were sent to non-priestly employment or
were forced to retire. Some were sentenced to imprisonment
on various pretexts.
How could the religious situation worsen so rapidly
after all the signs of hope in 1968?
During the years 1950-1968 the Catholic Church in
Czecho-Slovakia was kept in firm grips by the Communist
government with the help of priests-collaborators organized
in the "Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". Priests of
this organization closely cooperated with the Communist
Agencies for Ecclesiastical Affairs and practically dominated
the institutional Church in Czecho-Slovakia. Only priests
active in this association had some measure of security and
possibility of being promoted to higher positions in Church
hierarchy, and thus getting higher state salaries. In the
�SLOVAKIA
39
early sixties "The Peace Movement" h~d ample following
among the priests, thougb. not all of them were collaborat~g
with Communist governm~nt in equal degree.
On March 21, 1968, in the general of anti-Stalinjst mood
in all spheres of life, the pro-Communist "Peace MPVlement
of the Catholic Clergy" was forced to disband. The :vriests
loyal to the Church and unburdened by tJ'}e past organiied
themselves in a new association called "The Task for the
Council Renewal". They began the difficult work of correcting the evils of the precedent ·era, trymg to get rid of
the strict control of thi Church by Communist agenctes
and to purge the Church -administration from, t~ most
compromised collaborators 'Yith the former regime. The
most meritorious fruit of these efforts were the re,tqration
of the Greek Catholic Diocese of Prespv, Slovakia, which
has been forcibly made Orthodpx in April 1950. Whe~ in
1968 two collaborating vicars capitulars, namely Rev. John
Dechet and Rev. Andrew Scheffer died, two $Olid priests
were appointed by Slovak bishop 4mbrose Lazik, namely
Rev. Joseph Ligos to take place of Scheffer as administrator
of Spis Diocese and Rev. Francis Haspra as acuninistrator
of Banska Bystrica Diocese. T~re were hope(ul signs of
restoration of some monasteries and convents ~uppressed
in 1950, as well as of establishing more normal COild,itions
for religious life in general. But the Russian invasion of
August 1968 shattered all premature hopes.
New enslavement of the Church was the order of the
day of the new post-Dubcek regime. Since Septeµib13r 1969,
the government was set up to restore the status quo before
1968 in the Church-State relations. For this goal an organization of collaborating priest.5, similar to the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Cler~" was a~solutely
necessary. It was pretty difficult to re-organize iji~ discredited priestly pro-Communist orga~ati9n of "Peace
Movements". Finally, on August 31, 1971, the society was
resurrected under the n&me of "The Fede~tion of the
Catholic Clergy - Pacem ·in Terris".
The same;old collaborators from the ranks of th~ clergy
worked on the reyival of the ill-famed priestly "Peace
Movement" and are now leading it, namely, Rev. Nicholas
Visnovsky, Rev. Stephen Onderko, Rev. Alexan~er Horak
�40
SLOVAKIA
et al. They openly claim the continuity with the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". The new organization has the same structure, the same goals and means
as the previous one. In close collaboration with State and
Provincial agencies for the ecclesiastical affairs the members of this organization gradually took over the Society
of St. Vojtech, the residual Catholic press, Catholic Charity,
diocesan chanceries, the Cyrilo-Methodian Theological Faculty in Bratislava and whatever Catholic institutions still
exist. They pretend to be spokesmen for the Catholic
Church in Czecho-Slovakia. After long discussions between
the representative of the Holy See (Agostino Casaroli) and
the Czecho-Slovak government four new bishops were
appointed, three for Slovakia, and one for Moravia in March
1973. The leaders of the "Pacem in Terris" claim that they
took part in these negotiations and that the new bishops
were members of the "Peace Movement of the Catholic
Clergy" and two of them are active members of the "Pacem
in Terris". They also claim that all newly appointed canons
are active members of the new "Federation of the Catholic
Clergy"; that members of this organization have preference
in getting free board and room in spas and recreation
centers reserved for priest.*
It is quite shameful that the same discredited priests,
who were swept away by the dawn of freedom during the
Dubcek era, did not hesitate to get involved in collaborating
with the atheistic Communism for the second time. If
Catholic priests stood unified and not let their ranks infiltrate by collaborators, the Communist aims for enslaving
the Church again would have been much more difficult.
New set of priests, not burdened with the stained past,
probably would have withstood the Communist pressure
and preserved at least some measure of independence which
the Church gained during the Dubcek era.
Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M.
*)
Duchovni pastyr, 1974, pp. 30-32; Duchovny pastier, 1974, pp. 145-146.
�
36
SLOVAKIA
Dark Hours of the Church
in Slovakia
After the shock of the Russian invasion of CzechoSlovakia on August 21, 1968, the first task of Moscow and
its collaborators in that country was to "normalize" the
situation. The term "normalization" in communist jargon
meant the abrogation of all civil liberties gained during
the Dubcek regime and the imposition of rigid control on
public and private life of all citizens.
After Alexander Dubcek fell in disgrace of Moscow,
Gustav Eusak, his former right hand, used all available
methods to get to the top of the Communist Party of
Czecho-Slovakia and to stay there with the blessing of
Moscow. He did not hesitate to renege on all the principles
of Dubcek's "Communism with human face". Under the
supervision of Moscow's emissaries it did not take long
before the country returned to the brutal Stalinist era of
Antonin Novotny.
The so-called "normalization" applies to all sections of
life in Czecho-Slovakia, including religious life. Since 1969
the atheistic propaganda is steadily increasing in printed
publications and in broadcasting. The teachers are pressed
to spread anti-religious indoctrination on all levels of
education, in all subject-matters taught in schools. It is
permissible for the priests to teach religion in school
buildings after the regular curriculum in grade schoolsone hour weekly for lower grades and one hour bi-weekly
for upper grades. But it can be done only with a written
petition of both parents who must come personally to the
principal of the school. In such an interview, the principal,
as a rule, tries to influence even to intimidate the parents.
Children who have attended religious classes are not admitted to higher education and their parents are branded
as unreliable to the Communist regime. Public servants
are dissuaded from attending Masses and receiving the
sacraments.
�SLOVAKIA
37
Freedom of press, so much enjoyed during the short
period of Dubcek regime, was again suppressed. The only
Slovak Catholic weekly newspaper, Katolicke noviny ( Catholic News) is under strict Communist control. The editor of
this newspaper since September 1973 is Rev. Francis Marko.
The newspaper prints only selected religious news, and the
readers of the paper are fed with Communist Party line
editorials and articles. The same applies to the monthly
priestly magazine Duchovny pastier (Spiritual Shepherd)
under the editorship of Rev. Michal Krovina, and to the
almanac Putnik svatovojtessky (Pilgrim of St. Vojtech),
published annually. All these publications appear under the
sponsorship of the Society of St. Vojtech.
The Society of St. Vojtech played a unique role in the
history of Slovak Catholics and of the Slovak nation. It
was founded in 1870 by Rev. Andrew Radlinsky in the time
of great magyarization of the Slovak nation. By its large
membership and publications this Society kept alive the
faith in the souls of Slovak people and the hope for better
future . From 1918 till 1945 it made a great progress in its
scope and activity. The Society of St. Vojtech became the
heart of the Slovak Catholic culture. The Communists after
the take-over in 1948 put the Society under their control.
They took away its printery and book bindery, discarded
its membership and completely changed its structure and
mission. Besides the three above mentioned regular publications they permitted to publish under the name of the
Society of St. Vojtech some prayer and liturgical books and
parish administration forms. The main purpose of the
"nationalized" Society of St. Vojtech became the selling
of liturgical and devotional objects and the distribution of
Mass wine to all the parishes of Slovakia.
Since 1948 the new Society of St. Vojtech was managed
by an Executive Committee, headed by Rev. Alexander
Horak, a well known pro-Communist priest. With the
arrival of Dubcek thaw, this Executive Committee was
replaced by two representatives from each diocese of
Slovakia. Msgr. John Postenyi, administrative manager of
the Society for several decades, was elected president of the
Society of St. Vojtech. Under Postenyi's leadership the
Society, during the short period of more favorable condi-
�38
SLOVAKIA
tions, published a series of much needed liturgical books
and the whole new Slovak translation of the Bible. Msgr.
Postenyi also began preparations for the 100th anniversary
of the foundation of the Society to be held in 1970. But,
meanwhile, the situation worsened again. Msgr. Postenyi
was replaced by Rev. Alexander Horak as the president of
the Society, and the principal centenary celebrations on
September 24, 1970 were held in the pro-government spirit
under the supervision of Communist big wheels.
During the years 1968-1969, the new spirit came also
to the Catholic seminary in Bratislava. So many candidates
for the priesthood enrolled to the seminary that there was
a serious talk about asking permission for opening another
one in eastern Slovakia. The barriers in accepting seminarians were broken and in 1968-1969 more than a hundred
candidates were accepted into the seminary. But here too
the "normalization" took place. In later years many of
these candidates for the priesthood were dismissed. And
those who were ordained in 1973 and 1974, were sent to
military service. The "numerus clausus" and strict selection
of candidates were reinforced. Sixty newly ordained priests
in one year seemed much too many for the communist
supervisors of religious life. On the other hand, several
priests who showed extraordinary zeal in performing their
ministry, were deprived of state permission to perform
parish work and were sent to non-priestly employment or
were forced to retire. Some were sentenced to imprisonment
on various pretexts.
How could the religious situation worsen so rapidly
after all the signs of hope in 1968?
During the years 1950-1968 the Catholic Church in
Czecho-Slovakia was kept in firm grips by the Communist
government with the help of priests-collaborators organized
in the "Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". Priests of
this organization closely cooperated with the Communist
Agencies for Ecclesiastical Affairs and practically dominated
the institutional Church in Czecho-Slovakia. Only priests
active in this association had some measure of security and
possibility of being promoted to higher positions in Church
hierarchy, and thus getting higher state salaries. In the
�SLOVAKIA
39
early sixties "The Peace Movement" h~d ample following
among the priests, thougb. not all of them were collaborat~g
with Communist governm~nt in equal degree.
On March 21, 1968, in the general of anti-Stalinjst mood
in all spheres of life, the pro-Communist "Peace MPVlement
of the Catholic Clergy" was forced to disband. The :vriests
loyal to the Church and unburdened by tJ'}e past organiied
themselves in a new association called "The Task for the
Council Renewal". They began the difficult work of correcting the evils of the precedent ·era, trymg to get rid of
the strict control of thi Church by Communist agenctes
and to purge the Church -administration from, t~ most
compromised collaborators 'Yith the former regime. The
most meritorious fruit of these efforts were the re,tqration
of the Greek Catholic Diocese of Prespv, Slovakia, which
has been forcibly made Orthodpx in April 1950. Whe~ in
1968 two collaborating vicars capitulars, namely Rev. John
Dechet and Rev. Andrew Scheffer died, two $Olid priests
were appointed by Slovak bishop 4mbrose Lazik, namely
Rev. Joseph Ligos to take place of Scheffer as administrator
of Spis Diocese and Rev. Francis Haspra as acuninistrator
of Banska Bystrica Diocese. T~re were hope(ul signs of
restoration of some monasteries and convents ~uppressed
in 1950, as well as of establishing more normal COild,itions
for religious life in general. But the Russian invasion of
August 1968 shattered all premature hopes.
New enslavement of the Church was the order of the
day of the new post-Dubcek regime. Since Septeµib13r 1969,
the government was set up to restore the status quo before
1968 in the Church-State relations. For this goal an organization of collaborating priest.5, similar to the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Cler~" was a~solutely
necessary. It was pretty difficult to re-organize iji~ discredited priestly pro-Communist orga~ati9n of "Peace
Movements". Finally, on August 31, 1971, the society was
resurrected under the n&me of "The Fede~tion of the
Catholic Clergy - Pacem ·in Terris".
The same;old collaborators from the ranks of th~ clergy
worked on the reyival of the ill-famed priestly "Peace
Movement" and are now leading it, namely, Rev. Nicholas
Visnovsky, Rev. Stephen Onderko, Rev. Alexan~er Horak
�40
SLOVAKIA
et al. They openly claim the continuity with the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". The new organization has the same structure, the same goals and means
as the previous one. In close collaboration with State and
Provincial agencies for the ecclesiastical affairs the members of this organization gradually took over the Society
of St. Vojtech, the residual Catholic press, Catholic Charity,
diocesan chanceries, the Cyrilo-Methodian Theological Faculty in Bratislava and whatever Catholic institutions still
exist. They pretend to be spokesmen for the Catholic
Church in Czecho-Slovakia. After long discussions between
the representative of the Holy See (Agostino Casaroli) and
the Czecho-Slovak government four new bishops were
appointed, three for Slovakia, and one for Moravia in March
1973. The leaders of the "Pacem in Terris" claim that they
took part in these negotiations and that the new bishops
were members of the "Peace Movement of the Catholic
Clergy" and two of them are active members of the "Pacem
in Terris". They also claim that all newly appointed canons
are active members of the new "Federation of the Catholic
Clergy"; that members of this organization have preference
in getting free board and room in spas and recreation
centers reserved for priest.*
It is quite shameful that the same discredited priests,
who were swept away by the dawn of freedom during the
Dubcek era, did not hesitate to get involved in collaborating
with the atheistic Communism for the second time. If
Catholic priests stood unified and not let their ranks infiltrate by collaborators, the Communist aims for enslaving
the Church again would have been much more difficult.
New set of priests, not burdened with the stained past,
probably would have withstood the Communist pressure
and preserved at least some measure of independence which
the Church gained during the Dubcek era.
Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M.
*)
Duchovni pastyr, 1974, pp. 30-32; Duchovny pastier, 1974, pp. 145-146.
�
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
1975, Vol. 25
Description
An account of the resource
Vol. 25 (No. 48), 1975.
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
1975
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
Dark Hours of the Church
in Slovakia
After the shock of the Russian invasion of CzechoSlovakia on August 21, 1968, the first task of Moscow and
its collaborators in that country was to "normalize" the
situation. The term "normalization" in communist jargon
meant the abrogation of all civil liberties gained during
the Dubcek regime and the imposition of rigid control on
public and private life of all citizens.
After Alexander Dubcek fell in disgrace of Moscow,
Gustav Eusak, his former right hand, used all available
methods to get to the top of the Communist Party of
Czecho-Slovakia and to stay there with the blessing of
Moscow. He did not hesitate to renege on all the principles
of Dubcek's "Communism with human face". Under the
supervision of Moscow's emissaries it did not take long
before the country returned to the brutal Stalinist era of
Antonin Novotny.
The so-called "normalization" applies to all sections of
life in Czecho-Slovakia, including religious life. Since 1969
the atheistic propaganda is steadily increasing in printed
publications and in broadcasting. The teachers are pressed
to spread anti-religious indoctrination on all levels of
education, in all subject-matters taught in schools. It is
permissible for the priests to teach religion in school
buildings after the regular curriculum in grade schoolsone hour weekly for lower grades and one hour bi-weekly
for upper grades. But it can be done only with a written
petition of both parents who must come personally to the
principal of the school. In such an interview, the principal,
as a rule, tries to influence even to intimidate the parents.
Children who have attended religious classes are not admitted to higher education and their parents are branded
as unreliable to the Communist regime. Public servants
are dissuaded from attending Masses and receiving the
sacraments.
SLOVAKIA
37
Freedom of press, so much enjoyed during the short
period of Dubcek regime, was again suppressed. The only
Slovak Catholic weekly newspaper, Katolicke noviny ( Catholic News) is under strict Communist control. The editor of
this newspaper since September 1973 is Rev. Francis Marko.
The newspaper prints only selected religious news, and the
readers of the paper are fed with Communist Party line
editorials and articles. The same applies to the monthly
priestly magazine Duchovny pastier (Spiritual Shepherd)
under the editorship of Rev. Michal Krovina, and to the
almanac Putnik svatovojtessky (Pilgrim of St. Vojtech),
published annually. All these publications appear under the
sponsorship of the Society of St. Vojtech.
The Society of St. Vojtech played a unique role in the
history of Slovak Catholics and of the Slovak nation. It
was founded in 1870 by Rev. Andrew Radlinsky in the time
of great magyarization of the Slovak nation. By its large
membership and publications this Society kept alive the
faith in the souls of Slovak people and the hope for better
future . From 1918 till 1945 it made a great progress in its
scope and activity. The Society of St. Vojtech became the
heart of the Slovak Catholic culture. The Communists after
the take-over in 1948 put the Society under their control.
They took away its printery and book bindery, discarded
its membership and completely changed its structure and
mission. Besides the three above mentioned regular publications they permitted to publish under the name of the
Society of St. Vojtech some prayer and liturgical books and
parish administration forms. The main purpose of the
"nationalized" Society of St. Vojtech became the selling
of liturgical and devotional objects and the distribution of
Mass wine to all the parishes of Slovakia.
Since 1948 the new Society of St. Vojtech was managed
by an Executive Committee, headed by Rev. Alexander
Horak, a well known pro-Communist priest. With the
arrival of Dubcek thaw, this Executive Committee was
replaced by two representatives from each diocese of
Slovakia. Msgr. John Postenyi, administrative manager of
the Society for several decades, was elected president of the
Society of St. Vojtech. Under Postenyi's leadership the
Society, during the short period of more favorable condi-
38
SLOVAKIA
tions, published a series of much needed liturgical books
and the whole new Slovak translation of the Bible. Msgr.
Postenyi also began preparations for the 100th anniversary
of the foundation of the Society to be held in 1970. But,
meanwhile, the situation worsened again. Msgr. Postenyi
was replaced by Rev. Alexander Horak as the president of
the Society, and the principal centenary celebrations on
September 24, 1970 were held in the pro-government spirit
under the supervision of Communist big wheels.
During the years 1968-1969, the new spirit came also
to the Catholic seminary in Bratislava. So many candidates
for the priesthood enrolled to the seminary that there was
a serious talk about asking permission for opening another
one in eastern Slovakia. The barriers in accepting seminarians were broken and in 1968-1969 more than a hundred
candidates were accepted into the seminary. But here too
the "normalization" took place. In later years many of
these candidates for the priesthood were dismissed. And
those who were ordained in 1973 and 1974, were sent to
military service. The "numerus clausus" and strict selection
of candidates were reinforced. Sixty newly ordained priests
in one year seemed much too many for the communist
supervisors of religious life. On the other hand, several
priests who showed extraordinary zeal in performing their
ministry, were deprived of state permission to perform
parish work and were sent to non-priestly employment or
were forced to retire. Some were sentenced to imprisonment
on various pretexts.
How could the religious situation worsen so rapidly
after all the signs of hope in 1968?
During the years 1950-1968 the Catholic Church in
Czecho-Slovakia was kept in firm grips by the Communist
government with the help of priests-collaborators organized
in the "Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". Priests of
this organization closely cooperated with the Communist
Agencies for Ecclesiastical Affairs and practically dominated
the institutional Church in Czecho-Slovakia. Only priests
active in this association had some measure of security and
possibility of being promoted to higher positions in Church
hierarchy, and thus getting higher state salaries. In the
SLOVAKIA
39
early sixties "The Peace Movement" h~d ample following
among the priests, thougb. not all of them were collaborat~g
with Communist governm~nt in equal degree.
On March 21, 1968, in the general of anti-Stalinjst mood
in all spheres of life, the pro-Communist "Peace MPVlement
of the Catholic Clergy" was forced to disband. The :vriests
loyal to the Church and unburdened by tJ'}e past organiied
themselves in a new association called "The Task for the
Council Renewal". They began the difficult work of correcting the evils of the precedent ·era, trymg to get rid of
the strict control of thi Church by Communist agenctes
and to purge the Church -administration from, t~ most
compromised collaborators 'Yith the former regime. The
most meritorious fruit of these efforts were the re,tqration
of the Greek Catholic Diocese of Prespv, Slovakia, which
has been forcibly made Orthodpx in April 1950. Whe~ in
1968 two collaborating vicars capitulars, namely Rev. John
Dechet and Rev. Andrew Scheffer died, two $Olid priests
were appointed by Slovak bishop 4mbrose Lazik, namely
Rev. Joseph Ligos to take place of Scheffer as administrator
of Spis Diocese and Rev. Francis Haspra as acuninistrator
of Banska Bystrica Diocese. T~re were hope(ul signs of
restoration of some monasteries and convents ~uppressed
in 1950, as well as of establishing more normal COild,itions
for religious life in general. But the Russian invasion of
August 1968 shattered all premature hopes.
New enslavement of the Church was the order of the
day of the new post-Dubcek regime. Since Septeµib13r 1969,
the government was set up to restore the status quo before
1968 in the Church-State relations. For this goal an organization of collaborating priest.5, similar to the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Cler~" was a~solutely
necessary. It was pretty difficult to re-organize iji~ discredited priestly pro-Communist orga~ati9n of "Peace
Movements". Finally, on August 31, 1971, the society was
resurrected under the n&me of "The Fede~tion of the
Catholic Clergy - Pacem ·in Terris".
The same;old collaborators from the ranks of th~ clergy
worked on the reyival of the ill-famed priestly "Peace
Movement" and are now leading it, namely, Rev. Nicholas
Visnovsky, Rev. Stephen Onderko, Rev. Alexan~er Horak
40
SLOVAKIA
et al. They openly claim the continuity with the defunct
"Peace Movement of the Catholic Clergy". The new organization has the same structure, the same goals and means
as the previous one. In close collaboration with State and
Provincial agencies for the ecclesiastical affairs the members of this organization gradually took over the Society
of St. Vojtech, the residual Catholic press, Catholic Charity,
diocesan chanceries, the Cyrilo-Methodian Theological Faculty in Bratislava and whatever Catholic institutions still
exist. They pretend to be spokesmen for the Catholic
Church in Czecho-Slovakia. After long discussions between
the representative of the Holy See (Agostino Casaroli) and
the Czecho-Slovak government four new bishops were
appointed, three for Slovakia, and one for Moravia in March
1973. The leaders of the "Pacem in Terris" claim that they
took part in these negotiations and that the new bishops
were members of the "Peace Movement of the Catholic
Clergy" and two of them are active members of the "Pacem
in Terris". They also claim that all newly appointed canons
are active members of the new "Federation of the Catholic
Clergy"; that members of this organization have preference
in getting free board and room in spas and recreation
centers reserved for priest.*
It is quite shameful that the same discredited priests,
who were swept away by the dawn of freedom during the
Dubcek era, did not hesitate to get involved in collaborating
with the atheistic Communism for the second time. If
Catholic priests stood unified and not let their ranks infiltrate by collaborators, the Communist aims for enslaving
the Church again would have been much more difficult.
New set of priests, not burdened with the stained past,
probably would have withstood the Communist pressure
and preserved at least some measure of independence which
the Church gained during the Dubcek era.
Theodoric J. Zubek, O.F.M.
*)
Duchovni pastyr, 1974, pp. 30-32; Duchovny pastier, 1974, pp. 145-146.
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
Dark Hours of the Church in Slovakia
Description
An account of the resource
Theodoric J. Zúbek, O.F.M.
Slovakia, Vol. 25 (No. 48), 1975
pp. 36-40
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Zúbek, Teodorik J., 1914-1988
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1975
SNK