This past week was a good time for me, I was able to meet my lawyer and develop a strategy for a long stay. Jan wants nothing less than a passport for me… dual citizenship. Also, I had a fun night at Jazztikot with Stephko, Sylvia, and Bobos (bo-bohsh). Also, a few good visits to the Slovak National Gallery (SNG). We had elections for president on Saturday… makes sense right? At this point in my life, and in this place, I have become truly apolitical. But it is interesting to see the “morally-just” right vs. the “corrupt-woke” left still alive even here. While the “more to the right” Robert Fico is Prime Minister, and now the Slovaks have to elect a president. It will come down to the two candidates elected last weekend; a “west-leaning” candidate, and a candidate that is sometimes not clear on his platform. The elections in the US, are a hot topic here, and I have a difficult time convincing the people that I talk to, that (in my opinion) they are two of the worst candidates to have to choose from. Here in east central Europe, the idea of an autocrat (like Trump or Putin) still carries some appeal. I can’t wrap my head around it; another reason why I am apolitical… I don’t want to think about it anymore. I’d rather study the past, it is much more interesting, and less of the “same old – same old” of the present.

   In the past three posts, we have looked at Slovakia’s art. We started with its visual art from the Middle Ages, and followed along until the Neo-Classical/Romantic. The intervening two portions were focused on the written form in literature, poetry, and drama. This is my last popst in this series, and I want to end with visual art from the mid-19th century to the 1880’s/90’s. After the turn of the 20th century, the art in Slovakia bursts into the scene of the “modern era”, and they are no longer behind the western waves of creativity… instead right along the top of the crest. We will look at it when we near WWI.

   I want to mention again the portrait of Empress Maria Theresa, by Franz Anton Palko (1755-1756). I pointed out in Part I that Palko was a “Baroque” painter, when in fact further research and discussion with an art historian revealed that Palko was part of the “Old Masters” of Austrian art. The “Old Masters” title refers to mostly painters, and is not specific about their style or the movement to which they belong. Generally speaking, this to a wide range of the greatest figures in western art… da Vinci, Caravaggio, Rembrandt, and Durer… to name a few. My best description of Palko’s painting in that post was okayed by an art historian I met at the SNG> It’s nice to know that the art aesthetics courses I had at Columbia College 40 years ago have stuck with me.

   I have to include this again because it is so lovely, and the first that draws my eye when I walk into the gallery. Absolutely one of my favorite paintings in the SNG. While he was born in southwestern Poland, Palko did spend some time in Slovakia.

For all of the works that you will see going forward, more “modern”, if you will… there was still Sacred Art being done. But overall, there is much more portraiture that takes place, eventually going from the sittings of the aristocracy, to the “everyday people” in the middle portion of the 19th century. Representative of this style is Johann Rombauer, an “ethnic-German” born in Levoca – wholly “Slovak” in my book. His story is fascinating, if you just Wiki him, his travels alone make for good reading.

   This is Rombauer’s Salvador Mundi from early in the 19th century.

   From Mundi, you see the growth of Rombauer’s work in 1810 or so to his portrait of noblewoman Thereza Mattyasovszka in 1836. Gone is any hint of the secular, and he paints her in repose, with depth, light and dark, as well as the deeper colors of the flowers in the vase. The fine detail of her dress is also very clear.

   As I pointed out earlier, there is a movement afoot during this time to show the struggles of the commoners, heroic depictions, and themes more emblematic of the early Realist period.

   In this period of our interest – 1820’s to 1890’s, we begin to see a change in the way Slovaks are shown. Peter Michal Bohun has a vast catalog of work than spans everything from single-subject portraiture to settings of villagers, farm workers, and families throughout the Slovakia of his time… 1822-1897. Personally I love Bohun’s work for its richness of life, and strength of form and color. Add to that, the fact that he came from my Grandmother’s region near Dolny Kubin makes him all the more dear to me. I think it also important to acknowledge the fact that Bohun was another founding member of Matica Slovenska, and fervent about Stur and the Slovak revival. I will include one more before we move on.

   With Bohun, and so many other Slovak artists, we cross over from Romantic to Realist period. The rejection of “the individual in the majesty of the natural world”, a romanticizing of the living in the outdoors, and “sky and landscape” first – then everything after. We will see our people, places, and things as they were; an emphasis on nationalism, and the hardships and struggles of people at work… bringing empathy and recognition to their station in life.

   We will pass over many of our best; Jozef Czanczik (Czauczik/Czaucsig) is another favorite of mine, and along with Johann Rombauer, and is considered a leader in Slovak art of the 19th century, and wholly Slovak. He was born in Levoca, studied – it is said- in Vienna, and returned to Levoca to spend the rest of his life their. Another exploration, even if just a look in Wiki, Czanczik was an incredibly talented painter who not only did portraiture, but also (like many) he created frescoes in a few of the churches in Spis (Speesh).

   As we see with both Marko and Benicky (ben-itz-key), the “Realist” effect is beginning to take hold. Marko is Hungarian, and Benicky is Slovak, I believe – both bios are difficult to come by. Marko goes on to paint grand landscapes. This is the art of the middle periods, and typifies what was being lived, experienced and seen by the Slovaks of the day. Artists such as Jozef Bozetech Klemens are beginning to segue from portraiture to landscapes. Klemens was born in Slovakia and did the now-famous painting of Ludovit Stur (you saw it in Part III), and he did work as a geologist, as well as a photographer.

   In a span of roughly 15 years, we can see Klemens develop as an artist. Zofia Brezovicka is a wonderful painting and its glowing shape-filled aura asks me to look into it… as well does his Mountain waterfall. But we continue to move forward in the growth and development of our art and artists. While there are still portraits being painted, there is a strong accent by many to show the struggle of those not well-off enough to pay to have their pictures painted. Heading into the back half (and bringing this all together) of our 19th century, we have two of the great artists of the age in Eduard Majsch (my-sh) and Ladislav Mednyansky, or Mednansky (med-nee-yahnskee). Although neither were entirely Slovak, they were born here and created some of our best late 19th century art.

   Eduard Majsch (1852-1919) renders many of the styles of the mid-to-late 19th century. He seems to mirror the work of the Dutch “Old Masters” in “Serenade” with its light and dark themes, In “Blind Joe”, Majsch gives a sanpshot of everyday life, and the run-up to his earnest semi-impressionistic work of Bratislava and the Danube in winter. Impressionism was sweeping western Europe at the time, as it begun on 10/15 earlier in Paris. Majsch is a little lighter on detail than say “Blind Joe”, but remains outdoor to give this wide open look at his city with Bratislava Castle silhouetted against the winter sky. I see more in his paintings everytime I go to the SNG. He is considered a “Hungarian” painter, even though his father, Sebastian was an “Austrian painter of Slovak descent”. Nonetheless, Eduard’s paintings captured the feel of the life in Slovakia during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Ladislav Mednaynsky (1852-1919), was a giant in Slovak art. Both he and  Majsch were actually born in the territory of Slovakia, but were considered “Hungarian’ despite there origin of birth… Mednaynsky in Beckov (Western Slovakia) and Majsch (Bratislava). It’s a funny thing, that the Hungarian/Magyars were so nationalist in this sense. Add to this that Magyarization was in full swing with Kossuth’s fervent appeal to have the language and culture in the whole of the Kingdom attain a number one status… Hungarian/Magyar first. I’m not sure if either artist at this time was “political”, but they put their work to canvas and gave us art on a par with anything else at the time. They are not alone, there are many, many that we could look at; I chose them because they appeal to me the most. Also, Martin Benka (1888-1971) bears mention here, as he is looked up on as the root of the “Modernist” movement in Slovakia. Benka is entirely Slovak and dedicated himself to recording rural life, the simple live of those in the countryside living in the natural world. When you stand in front of his work, you can almost get the sense of him creating this work spontaneously, and without any contrivance. I will include one of Benka’s works at our close.

   For my eye, Mednaynsky seems to embody the early-Modern painter. He was taught early on in watercolor at 12/14 years old and then earned his education in Munich and Paris. He had a studio in Montmatre at the beginning of the Bell Epoque in Paris. He was influenced by the Barbizon School (outdoor moods/landscape), and of course Impressionism. In the SNG, in front of Mednaynsky, time passes slowly as my eye (and mind) wander across his rich paintings of our past.

We will end here with an early painting by Martin Benka. I know there are so many more to mention, but time does not allow for an extensive trip through the astounding treasure of written, visual, and dramatic art that has been created under the thumb of the Hungarians… but art always survives. Hippocrates said it best: “ars longa, vita brevis”… art lasts, but life is short > and I paraphrase. Telling our story through art is absolutely important. Slovakia may have had setbacks during the nearly 1,000 years of Hungarian/Magyar rule, but its spirit endured, and that spirit is apparent in the art it created. I sincerely hope that I shed a little more light on the richness and fullness of a people, culture, or nation that didn’t exist in the minds of many Hungarians… leaders and citizens.

   We will return to the History Corner, and our regular posts on what exactly happened from the post-Ausgleich (Compromise of 1867) period to our run-up to WWI, where I will end the posts on SLovak history, and begin anew with all that I am learning about single events from Medieval to pre-WWI Slovakia.

   I thank all of you who have been following me, or just dropped in, and I appreciate your indulgence as I may have run a bit long on this post. Until we meet again… please take care of yourselves, and take care of each other.

.

    There can be no doubt that Bernolak’s work was a great step forward for the Slovaks. In the larger picture, it was actually a stepping-stone to another place in time, and an advancement for the language. Please indulge me as I attempt to orient you in the surrounding scene. I realize that we have been over this ground in prior posts, but for the sake of your memory, and for the sake of our subject – literature – I will draw a picture in a paragraph.

    Here we are at the turn of the 19th century, and art begins to take a life unto itself, even moreso for the Slovaks. The Enlightenment ideals, along with the Reformation a couple centuries earlier, brings about a headier mix of styles and content. From the end of the 18th to the mid-19th century, the changes are exponential. Behind us lies two massive revolutions (France and United States), and in this time the Industrial Revolution has begun (c. 1760); just these events on their own are enough to exert change. Also, Napoleon has begun to upset everything on the continent… power, trade, social class standing, and the burgeoning middle class. Art is no longer associated with the affluent or powerful church/royalty/noble circles. The rapid growth of urbanization, capital-driven labor economy, and communication leads to access for the “common people” in the post-Napoleonic early 19th century. For artists, this is a period when they can create as they please; meaning they are no longer at the beck and call of a wealthy-quasi-aristocrat to paint/write/sculpt on command… they are the sole agents of their expression. The artist as a singular creator is still a few decades away, but in a sense, art is liberated from the church, and upper classes. We have seen some of the  Slovak writers ask their brethren to become aware of who they are as a people, in a sense promoting a sense of patriotism, or nationality. This may have been inferred in the past, but in the coming years, as we will see, many writers will hitch their ideas to vehicles of furthering their national cause… some with the cause of all the Slavs (Pan-Slavism).

From Holly and Fandly, we will turn to the “nation-builders”: Safarik, Kollar, Stur, and both Chalupka brothers, Jan and Samo. As we know Fandly passes in 1811, and his work for the “Slovak Learned Brotherhood” lives on as a legacy; this is not to say that Holly wasn’t expired too – he lives until 1849 and sees the fruits of his earlier labors come to bear. The strength in Slovak literature comes with the pitch toward Romanticism and away from Neo-Classical. This particular age will also witness linguists, philologists, writers, painters, and historians take on Pan Slavism as a guiding principle.

   I think it is important to start with Pavel Jozef Safarik (sha-far-ick). Born in 1761 to a Protestant preacher, he was well traveled and well studied; Safarik is considered by many to be the first “Slavist” to study as a scientist. A “Slavist” is someone who specializes in the study of Slavic languages, culture, history, literature, and culture. After Safarik, this becomes a Social Science, Social Studies subject, or just a part of Humanities (Humanistic Studies). Safarik was a voracious reader, and learned Latin, German, Magyar, and of course Slovak. Latin was the language of science and the learned. At a lyceum, he met students from Poland, Serbia, and the Ukraine. This is in 1810-1814, and for two years he studied in Germany (Univ. of Jena). While in the lyceum he wrote a volume of poetry entitled “The Muse of Tatras”. Yet in Germany a few years later he would turn from poetry to scientist, and here at Jena he would become friends with one of the seminal Slovak writers Jan Chalupka; another friend introduced Safarik to Goethe. Alas, Safarik would travel back to Slovakia, out of money, and landed a job as a tutor in Bratislava. It was here that he met Jan Kollar. In 1819, Safarik left his homeland for good, and traveled to Novi Sad (in modern Serbia), where he would teach until 1833. Safarik was active in the ill-fated Prague Slavic Congress of 1848, he was persecuted by the Austrians, and died in Prague in 1861. He was given a full pension by Franz Jozef just before he died, as Safarik was curator/custodian of the university library in Prague. Safarik was, and this should be known,  a Protestant who believed that Slovakia’s future should be linked to the Czechs. Later leaders of the Slovaks, especially Stur, doesn’t hold this same feeling. Safarik’s legacy is vast, timeless, and far-reaching. His work runs from the poetry of Neo-Classical, to Romantic prose, and then to the focus on the plight of all Slavs in Realism.

   I want to devote a few words to the Chalupka brothers. Jan and Samo Chalupka stand out for me because they used their pens to draw the Slovaks (young and old) to action. Jan is one of the last (aside from Jozef Bajza) of the giants of Slovak literature to be born in the 18th century. Known mainly as a dramatist, and this is quite telling of what is taking place in this period (1820’s/1830’s), as Chalupka wrote many theatrical satires of patriotism (criticizing the lack of it), the narrow options available to everyday Slovaks, Magyarization, and conservatism. After 1848, Chalupka wrote exclusively in Slovak, he also translated his earlier work (Czech and Hungarian), and I don’t know of anything more evident of the turning of the tide in the “Upper Kingdom”. His work also bears the hallmarks of the subtle change from Romanticism to Realism.

   Samo Chalupka, younger brother to Jan, shared a Protestant background with his brother, but was a poet instead of a dramatist. Samo was a bit more active in the political circles than Jan. He was co-creator of the “Memorandum of the Slovak Nation”, a co-founder of Matica Slovenska, and like his brother wrote mostly in the Central Slovak dialect. He espoused the ideals of the Slovaks as a legitimate nation. Samo exhibited the same tendencies in his writing as Jan, and perhaps because of his political activism, he moved from Romantic to Realism. I think some twenty years younger, Samo also was on the forefront of the going trends of the literary art of the day.

   As with Safarik, I want to devote some time to L’udovit Stur (sh-tur). We have many writers and artists that capture the sense of being and future for the Slovaks, but Stur might be THE man for change in the “Upper Kingdom”. Stur was a revolutionary in more ways than one. Stur’s father was a school teacher, and from early on and he learned Latin at 12/14 years old. As a young student, history, German, Greek, and Hungarian followed as subjects to master. From the age of 14 until he was 21, Stur studied here in Bratislava, at a Lutheran lyceum (college prep), and here he joins a Czech-Slovak Society, and becomes interested in all Slavs nations.

   To label Stur a revolutionary may be correct, but I believe he was more a visionary. Born into an Evangelical Lutheran family in 1815, Stur was a great admirer of Jan Kollar, and Pavel Safarik, who preceded him in the cause of the Slovaks. With his membership in the Czech-Slovak Society, he became fervent in his study of all Slav cultures; here in lyceum he begins to pen his writings (poems) in 1831, and encourages Jozef M. Hurban to get involved in the Slovak National movement. Keep in mind that he is only 16 years old at this time… in my mind he’s a phenom.  Hurban, for his part, goes on to be one of the co-founders of the Slovak National Council, Matica Slovenska, and is deeply involved in the Slovak National Awakening. Time limits highlighting Hurban, as it does so many of the other participants in this historical point of our history… he is worth a look – even if you just Wiki him.

   Stur is a “giant” in my mind, because he took a firm “no” from the Czechs to create a unified Czech-Slovak language, and decided at a meeting at Devin Castle no-less, to create a standard Slovak language, along with his friends in the movement. This was due to the Czech used by Protestants in Slovakia not being understood by ordinary Slovaks. Stur’s story after this moment in time, bears some investigation by my readers. Although Stur is not alone in this, he is the driver of the national cause of the Slovaks, the awakening, and further work on behalf of fighting the increasing Magyarization at the time. Again, it is imperative that we remember the processes of transformation underway in continental Europe at this time. There is a change from the state/manor society to civil society; traditional ways of life are becoming “modernized”, and nations are forming. In the big scheme of things, Stur was the right man, at the right time for the Slovaks. For my readers in the U.S., Stur was a sort of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson – only more literate and more educated.

   Stur, along with Hurban and Hodza, formed the Sloval National Council in 1848, and declared it to be the single voice for the Slovaks refusing the Hungarian will. It was also at this time that Stur, was negotiating with Vienna on the “Demands of the Slovak Nation”. Alas, all of the change that Stur and his compatriots worked for was washed away in the revolutions/uprisings in the Austrian-Hungaro lands. Stur’s writing was prolific, history, philosophy, poetry, and much more. His work was peppered with an instructional on Slovak language, songs about the past legends, and before his death in 1856 he published a poetry collection. It should be pointed out that even though he founded the Slovak language, Stur was a Russophile. He proposed that Russian should be the language of all Slavic tribes. This is probably an act of an amatuer historian to mention that Stur was an anti-Semite. It is difficult for me to separate the “change over time” aspect of historical study, but I find this notion regarding Stur very repulsive. I realize that the Jews have been demonized from time immemorial, but I truly believe that order to free the Slovaks, you have to free everyone in the territory. Stur opposed the emancipation of the Jews in general, and stated that the “Jews could not belong to the Slovak Nation”.

Stur, Kollar, Hurban, and so many others, are responsible for a movement that came to a stunning halt with the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 (Auslgeich). Our focus here is the literature of the period, and so running out of time, I want to highlight further the writers that advanced the cause of the Slovaks. Jozef Bajza (1755-1836), Martin Kukucin (1860-1928), Jan Kral (1822-1876), and my very favorite P.O. Hviezdoslav (1849-1921). Hviezdoslav does what Stur did and much more – he used self-coined idioms that were not translatable.

  In sum, Slovak literature, mirrored the ideals of Romanticism in the beginning of the 19th century, and included elements of the Neo-Classical that preceded it. These ideas of art in real life metamorphosed into Realism. This writing (Realism) whether in the form of poetry, drama, or prose, is imbued the struggle of everyday life in the “Upper Kingdom”, the lack of interest from the Magyar elite, and the will of the Slovaks to overcome their position in the denial of their culture. I am haunted by a made by a Hungarian Diet member of the time: “I know of no Slovak Nation”. This is a paraphrase of course, but it sets the tone for the Slovaks to come.

   In our last post, upcoming, I will finish with visual art of this period (1850-1880/90), and that will be it for “Slovakia’s Journey Through Art”. I would like to thank any and all who have stopped by to read this blog, and I ask for forgiveness for making this particular read so lengthy. Our history is long and complicated, and trying to keep some of the topics under 7 minutes is a great challenge. Thank you… again. Until week meet again, please take care of yourselves, and take care of each other.

   So far, this week has been an interesting mix of Winter’s cold drear, and Spring’s bright sun-lit warmth. The rain has been cold, slanted, and a wind-driven mess. I met today with a Judge Advocate that wants to take my case, and he wants nothing less than dual-citizenship for me. With both Grandparents dually born here, this is an asset that the issuing bureau cannot overlook. Added to that is the fact that I am steeped in my “Slovakness”… if you will. Humbly stated, I have many things going for me here, especially this blog, in which I draw the world into Slovakia and shine a light on her. Although it is a far cry from any type of “yearly-limited” visa, it is indisputable and allows for much more freedom than a visa will afford me. I am excited, yet guarded as he says this will take some time to get some documents straightened out. I will do what I have to, as I have no intention of returning to the US, where I would not be happy.  So onward with our blogs, and our intentions.

   This is the 2nd of 4 installments on Slovak art. This is a subject that I am not able to condense into a 5/7 blog. We have done our early visual art, now we will look at the literature in antiquity, and then on to the modern era (3rd blog), and to finish in the 4th post with our visual art up to the turn of the 20th century.

   Slovakia’s earliest writers were the foundation of all that will follow. Jakub Jakobeus (1591-1645), was a learned man, a Protestant preacher that wrote in Latin – the “language of the educated”, and he was born in the modern Czech Republic. After the Battle of Biela Hora (White Mountain/1620), the victorious Habsburgs led by Ferdinand II – a devout Catholic – expelled the Protestants from their realm. This is also one of the first of the many battles in the continuation of The Thirty Years War, a religious conflict that occured from 1618 to 1648, caused an estimated 4.5 to 8.5 million lives, and very clearly shaped the zeitgeist of the era. Fascinating to say the least, and worth every moment to learn about. Nonetheless, Jakobeus fled to Protestant-friendly Saxony, before going to Hungary, and settling in the Presov region to continue preaching, writing, and teaching. His bio gets shady at this time though, it mentions that Jakobeus returned to his “ancestral land of Slovakia”, and since I cannot find anything regarding his background – I will leave it at that. Jakobeus wrote in the post-Renaissance Humanist vein, for the most part. Although some of his writings were secular, the most important were in defense of the Slovaks in Upper Hungary (even though he was under the aegis of a Count from Trencin – Magyar no doubt). The most famous of Jakobeus’ works is “Tears, Sighs, and Pleas of the Slovak Nation” (1642). This work is considered the first recognition of Slovaks and their condition in the “Upper Kingdom” (Upper Hungary).

   The overlap of the Renaissance and Baroque finds us next with Daniel Sinapius-Horcicka (hor-cheech-ka) (1640-1688). While most of his writings are wrought with secular themes, and written in Latin, he wrote in Slovak language idioms (Liturgical Czech), and he dwelt in the provinces of his people like Jakobeus before him. Except that Sinapius-Horcicka is wholly ours; born in Sucany (sue-chohnny), and laid to rest in Levoca (Lev-o-cha) – he is a solid Slovak. Still in the post-Renaissance-Reformation era, and beginning to feel the ideas of the Enlightenment, there is Hugolin Galovic (gav-low-vich). He was born just north of our present border with Poland. Gavlovic was born in 1712, and passed in the Trencin (tren-cheen) region in 1787. He became a Franciscan priest, and a Catholic comes forward to write “didactic poetry” (wisdom and moral poetry); Gavlovic represented the Baroque period. Just a note… the Franciscans (along with the Dominicans) led the Inquistion 4 centuries prior.

   These three, Jakobeus, Sinapius-Horcicka, and Gavlovic, represent for me the epitome of what will follow after Anton Bernolak. They,  along with Pavel Dolezal (doh-le-zhal), emphasized the Slovaks as natural denizens since antiquity, lamented the lack of any sense-of-self (nationalism?), and used the most common basis of the Slovak language in their writings. Dolezal in particular used “Slovakized Czech”. Dolezal was also born in Slovakia, west of Trnava (my Grandfather’s region) in 1700, and passed away in 1778 at the mountain town of Vysna Boca (vish-nah Boca) near Liptovsky Mikulas (mik-u-lahsh). 

   This all brings us to the doorstep of a very important moment in the history of our language, and so our writing/communication, our sense of nationhood, and in the end – our art. Anton Bernolak is credited with the codification of Slovak as a language. He was born in Namestovo (1763-1813), Orava (Arva in Magyar), in my Grandmother’s region, and not far from where my dear cousins live in Usted Nad Priehradou on Orava Reservoir. Bernolak passed away in Nove Zamky in southern Slovakia. Although he was a prolific writer, this singular work by Bernolak leads to a groundswell of change in in the “Upper Kingdom”. Not only does it reflect the changes afoot at this moment in history, but Bernolak’s codification indicates Neoclassical/Romantic ideals. Remember, this is a time of revolution, the visual becomes less ornate – away from Baroque/Rococo; literature bears the weight of this period. The weight of society and man’s struggle, and the duty of society to change and fit or cure man’s strife-ridden situation. In Slovakia, as in much of Europe, there is a reaction to the Enlightenment (idealism, balance, order…), toward emotion, the individual, the visionary/nationalist, and imagination. Bernolak’s efforts also spawned the “Slovak Learned Society”, comprised of mostly Catholic priests, but it established an outlet for the creation (and development) of independent Slovak literature based on the language of those who spoke it – the people. This “society” would include some of the most important leaders of the future, and the greatest of Slovakia’s literary giants. At this point in Slovakia’s history, they will spend time and energy to advance their cause, but also to adopt a style and language that tells the story of their struggle and hopes for the future. There are two writers that merit considerable mention during this time, because they are considered Slovakia’s greatest poets. They are Juraj Fandly and Jan Holly. At this point in their history, they will spend at least the next 30 years to go beyond Bernolaks Slovak, and create a singular language that those in the territory of the “Upper KIngdom” can speak. While it is renowned that the future leaders of  the Slovak National Awakening felt that Bernolak’s Western-Central based Slovak was a step forward, they believed it could be improved.

   Before we look at Fandly and Holly, I want tto make one thing very clear. Any of the forms of Czech that were spoken in Slovakia were the results of many factors. Biblical Czech carried the message of the dual confessions – Catholic and Protestant. After the Reformation, the Hussites brought the Protestant Czech Bible into Slovakia to carry on their  proselytism of the Slovaks.  The Catholic Bible, which dated back to the 14th century, was its counterpart. Yet there is evidence of Slovakisms in the written Czech; the town book of Zilina (zhil-eena) has Slovakisms as early as 1451. When Jakobeus and Sinapius-Horcicka come along, the fact that they were using Slovak, to a degree, is a given. Bernolak’s codification did not happen out of thin air. There was a living, working, and breathing quality to the language of the Slovaks in the “Upper KIngdom”.

   So, let us finish this part of Slovak art with Juraj Fandly, and Jan Holly. Juraj Fandly was born in the Bratislava region in 1750, Fandly would go on to write, as an ordained priest, works that helped his parishioners to raise crops, bee-keep, and so on, but also poetry (the 1st in Bernolak’s Slovak) that spoused patriotism in the young: “Sigh and Lament” and “Friendly Understandings”. Both works exhibit Fandly’s storytelling, while revealing his disappointment with life in Slovakia. Fandly’s writing is considered the work of the Enlightenment, in spite of his being a priest; he worked to achieve some sort of independence for his people, while writing about the mundane, and the aspirations of those who struggled. Jan Holly, on the other hand, elevated Bernolak’s Slovak by writing in iambic verse (sometimes referred to as “Alexandrine Verse”, proving that Slovak was an equal to classical poetry. Holly was born in the Trnava region (1785-1849), studying in various academies in the Slovak territory, and remained so virtually all his life. This Catholic priest wrote most of his poetry while under a large oak tree. Holly’s complicated verses reveal incredible depth and beauty, and his choice of place to create certainly evokes an image of the archetypal poet. Holly was a priest who put everything aside, all material wealth, to serve his God, his flock, and his nation. His influence, and imprint cannot be overstated as he shares the stage with Pavel Jozef Safarik (sheh-far-eek), and stirred a nation to exercise its will. Holly translated Virgil’s Aeneid, wrote stirring poetry with Svatopluk as his topic to remind the Slovaks of their glorious past, and to announce the arrival of the Slovaks as a viable cultural, historic, and artistic force. We will begin our next post by continuing with Holly’s further work, and introduce Safarik… leading on to Stur, Kollar, and many others you may be familiar with from our posts on the Slovak National Awakening.

   Thank you all for joining me on this journey through the history of Slovak art, and in a sense not only my history, but the past that belongs to each and every one of us. I am already beginning to write our next post on Slovak literature, and I hope to post it within the next 4/5 days. Until then, please, take care of yourselves… and take care of each other.

   I am very happy to be here, at this point in my life. I had a good week past. On Tuesday I met with Prof. Homza and we began efforts to move forward on his book. We then had a nice talk about the Slovak/Russian relations prior to WWI; being open, I listened with intent as we walked to Zlaty Jelen for our regular weekly meet-up there. Professor gave a nice talk (in Slovak, of course) on the influence of the Benedictines in Svatopluk’s time. It was easy to follow along in spite of my language gap, as I am a bit familiar with the subject… having learned already from him. On Thursday night I went to Jazztikot to see Sitra Achra with a dynamic young singer – Anna Hortova. As I have said in previous posts, this is one of my very favorite places to see live music here in Bratislava. Peto, the host and owner is a super guy, I am always greeted warmly, and Sitra Achra have become good friends. I will try and highlight them in further posts on Bratislava. Today, Saturday, 24th of February, I am going to the Slovak National Gallery to prepare for my next post. We will take a break from the politics of post- National Awakening, and look at some of the art from the period. Hopefully, I can find something, as painting is somewhat scarce until the Art Nouveau period in Slovakia (late-19th century).

HISTORY CORNER

    I want to begin this post with the Compromise of 1867, also known as “Ausgleich” (German for “compromise”). It came in the aftermath of defeat in Italy, and the drubbing of Austria by Prussia. In a thumbnail; it was a constitutional concession written by Francis Deak, and ratified by the Austrian emperor Franz Josef, giving Hungary its own parliament and constitution. But Franz Josef kept his title as the King of Hungary. This is the now-famous dual monarchy that most in the west are familiar with. The Magyars were allowed to dominate their subjects now, and the Austrians retained the 17/18 of the provinces in the Austrian Empire.

   At the risk of back-tracking too much, I would like to set the background for this most-important period for our dear Slovaks. I have stated in many past posts about the military nature of the Austrians in the middle of the 19th century. After the uprisings/revolutions of 1848/49 in their sphere-of-influence, Austria under Franz Josef has Hungary under martial law (until 1853), is quelling unrest on its borders, and is trying to keep the German Confederation from coming apart at the seams. This confederation was composed of nearly 40 German-speaking nation-states, principalities…duchies,etc. It was founded in the post-Napoleonic Congress of Vienna. We know very well by now that after the Ottomans were beaten by the Habsburgs at the 2nd Battle of Mohacs (1687) , the Hungarians/Magyars came under the rule of the Austrians, with all successive kings being crowned as “Kings of Hungary”; this was an improvement for the Habsurgs – they accumulated more land and power than the result of the first Battle of  Mohacs (1526).

    Jumping forward almost three and a half centuries, with the failure of the Hungarian Revolution of 1848/49, Franz Josef will now apply a completely absolutist rule we have been discussing in our past posts. Austria will now spend the next 20 years or so embroiled in many wars that would not only drain its national funds, but just as importantly lose its status as a great power in European affairs. A short list of Austria’s military ventures: 1) 1st War of Italian Independence & Revolution in the Italian States 1848/victory, 2) 2nd War of Italian Independence/defeat, 3) “Involved” in the intervention with France in Mexico, due to Maximillian I being a Habsburg/defeat & death of Maximillian/1861, 4) The Schleswig Wars (1st 1848-52) 2nd-1864/victory, 5) Austro-Prussian War (with the 3rf Italian War of Independence 1866/defeat… also diplomatic involvement with the Crimean War which damages its status further. Austria gave up its alliance with Russia during the Crimean War and is now isolated diplomatically, while not directly engaged in fighting.

   Austria’s loss to the now-rising Prussia (1866), led by Wilhelm I and Otto von Bismarck, brought a wide-ranging shift in Austria’s power and the erasure of the German Confederation, which it led, and this alone brings about the need for Austria to save face and cede to the Hungarians in the Compromise of 1867. The ruling elite in Vienna since the post-Napoleonic era, believed they were validated or entitled as the sole uniters of the small German political entities, and Prussia had always disagreed with the old-guard Austrians. With both the loss and the “war indemnity” to Prussia, the existential/psychological crisis that Austria faced was nearly too much. This all leads to a soul-crushing result for our Slovaks, as well as all of the nationalities under Magyar rule. I cannot stress this enough… the fate of our Slovaks, no matter how hard they worked, was not and will not be in their own hands until after WWI… well, somewhat in their own hands.

   Since issuing the “Memorandum of the Slovak Nation” in 1861, getting Franz Josef’s approval, and then having it dismissed by Magyar leaders in Budapest, our Slovak leaders were frustrated and disappointed. I must point out that not all of the representatives of the Hungarian Diet were complete nationalistic ass-hats. Many were moderates, and among them Ferenc Deak and Josef Eotvos may have been the “better angels” for the Slovak cause. Eotvos would later (1867) pass a law in the Diet emancipating the Jews in Hungary (imagine that!… emancipating the Jews). In the “Memorandum”, the leading voices of Matica Slovenska captured Stefan Daxner’s ideals and proposed forthwith a basis for a Slovak constitution within the framework of Hungary… again, no revolution, no separation… just recognition and cooperation. Here are some of the basic points: 1) equal rights with the Magyars, 2) individuality by law – a recognition of their nation, 3) a Slovak Academy of Law ( also a chair of Slovanic Studies in Pest), 4) the right to form the “Northern Hungarian Slovak District”, and Slovak as the language of its management, 5) a repeal of any Hungarian law that denied the equality of the nationalities.

   To illustrate how important this moment was, 16 men travled from Martin to Budapest directly to the home of Kalman Tisza (president of the Diet) to submit the “Memorandum”. Tisza did not hand it over to the Diet, instead he gave to a committee under Eotvos. This committee rejected the territorial claims, but took into consideration the individual rights and free association of the nationalities. Deak and Eotvos saw the situation differently; to quote from Kirschbaum – they were “convinced that both justice and expediency called for the enactment of legislation of a nature to the ‘justified demands’ of the nationalities”. The committee’s report was approved by the Diet, but the Diet was abolished soon after, and so was never given a true legislative motion. Incredibly, the “Memorandum” generated by Matica Slovenska would serve as a basis for the Nationalities Law of 1868… and further Magyarization.

   Going to Martin, back into history and the inauguration of Matica Slovenska in 1863, the first benefit to the Slovaks was education. Slovak language use spread like a wildfire, first mostly in Catholic schools, and then in Protestant schools…both primary and secondary. It should be noted that Franz Josef gave monetary support from Vienna to Matica Slovenska. This wholly Slovak institute became the center of the universe for them. Not only was it an incubator for its development as a nation, but most importantly it was a bulwark against Magyarization, and even better yet – Matica Slovenska was an entire cultural center in one place. Despite having more than 1,000 menbers, the Hungarians did not allow it to have branches in Slovakia. For the first time in their history, the Slovaks were united from bottom to top, enthusiastically bound by the hope for some sort of freedom, and possessing an outlet for cultural expression. The overall problem is that the Matica became a target, and was shut down by the Hungarians in early 1875. Adding insult to injury, the property of Matica Slovenska was taken over by the Magyars, justified by Hungarian law that “a Slovak nation did not exist”. Among most of the Magyar/Hungarian old guard, this notion was handed down from generation to generation.

   You must keep in mind that the Compromise of 1867 doomed almost all of the nationalities in the “Hungarian Kingdom”… only Croatia came through “un-Magyarized”. The “Nationalities Law of 1868” were completely outrageous in not only its scope, but also in its depth. I will save this entire section of my research for our post after the next. We will revisit Kalman Tisza, and one of the many ass-hats that vehemently pursued Magyarization – Bela Grunwald. I am risking a too-long post here and so we will end in the late-1870’s. In our next post we will take a short look at the art produced by the Slovaks going into this period in history; we will look back from about the High Middle Ages and come forward to the beginning of Art Nouveau in Slovakia. Also we will have an “Umbrella Moment” that will span 2 decades – 1870’s & 80’s.

UMBRELLA MOMENT

    We begin the 1860’s with the election of Abraham Lincoln to the presidency of the U.S., South Carolina’s seccession, and the beginning of the U.S. Civil War. This auspicious war was one of the first “industrial war” in that it used machine guns and steel/iron warships. Fought from 1861 to 1865, it is one of the bloodiest in the Americas; the Paraguayan War (1864-70) is also cited as one of the worst in South American history with Paraguay losing almost 60% of its population. The Russo-Circassian War … continued from 1763… ends in 1864 with a the Circassian genocide and a diaspora (Circassia is ancient region in the Caucasus on the Black Sea). After 9 years Italy is finally unified in 1870. Canada is created by the British North America Act (1867).  This decade sees some of the most influential works published, among them: Les Miserables/Hugo, War & Peace/Tolstoy, Crime & Punishment/Dostoevsky, Alice in Wonderland/Carroll, Das Kapital/Marx, and both Great Expectations and Our Mutual Friend/Dickens… are published. This also the decade that Impressionism in recognized. The Victorian Era begins and its influence extends over the next 40 years. This only the very few of the notable achievements and events that occurred in the 1860’s.

   I will say goodbye for now. I am grateful to everyone who has taken the time to read my notes from here in Central Europe. Keeping these missives to a 5/7 minute read is a challenge, and I apologize for getting too long in writing. This is a subject very close to my heart, very complicated to discern and make palatable to the unanointed. Until we meet again… please take care of yourselves, and take care of each other.

   

   We’ve had another warmer-than-average week here in Bratislava. The temps have been near 14C/57F, and very easy to get some good walks in. Today, Sunday the 11th of Feb. it is raining and but will hold in the “teens”… around the mid-fifties in fahrenheit. It was a semi-busy week for me. I have submitted my 3rd/4th edition of Prof. Homza’s book to him. There will still be more work to do, of that I’m sure. I have been able to make visits to some of my weekly haunts, and ended the week with a great dinner with some of my favorites. Danko organized it and picked me up to make sure I was able to take the bus through Petrzalka (pet-r-zhelka…sorry -no diacritics on my keyboard). Rancik (Ran-chick) was a great restaurant situated on the edge of Bratislava and near a horse stable… very good food, atmosphere, and nice setting. We had all the notables there; Igor, Boris, Stephan, Danko, and eventually Vincent.

   As always, there is excellent conversation, company, and food/drink. Next Apache has also been one of my favorite places to go – early when it is relatively quiet, and I am able to write. I like to get out and write as I tend to spend enough time alone in my apartment. I love this town! There is a never-ending trail of characters to see and visit with. The music scene is quite active. Friday night past at yet another favorite place, Jazztikot, I was able to see good friends play their fantastic brand of Blues. Bobos (Boboe-sh), Stephan, Ico (short for Igor> ee-cho) and the Maestro are incredible. They play at Next Apache also. The band is known as – Sitra Achra- Kabbalist for “the other side”… and boy do they explore it in their music. It is very refreshing to see this approach. as I am getting better at finding my way around, my life has a tendency to take a different perspective, and I hope it does nothing but continue.

HISTORY CORNER

   Coming into the 1850’s, we now know that the winners of the uprisings of 1848/49 were the Habsburgs. They concentrated power, emancipated the peasantry (serfs), and granted certain rights to the nationalists; these “rights” would be taken away in the future. As we discussed in the last post, the neo-absolutism that Franz Josef acquired was the ruin of the middle and lower nobility, and this frustration with their lot (the nobility) would transferred to our Slovaks. This will continue for another 70 years… from 1848 until the end of WWi; and still the Slovaks will not be able to purely be their own voice for legitimacy as a free nation.

Just a moment to backtrack and set the stage in the aftermath of the uprisings of 1848/49. Alexander Bach is now Franz Josef’s Interior Minister, and the Prime Minister is Felix von Schwarzenberg – until his death in 1852. These three men were determined to institute an Imperial political system in which German was the primary language – at the least in administration, if not in the entire empire. The middle and lower nobility, were virtually all Magyar; combined with the bourgeoisie, comprised of mostly Germans, were one of the staunchest defenders of the status quo. Bach ordered military control of Hungary until 1853, and then generals were replaced with civilians, and what is more – Bach at one time, declared Hungary’s constitution null and void. With von Schwarzenberg’s death, Franz Josef assumed the title of Prime Minister. Talk about consolidating “absolute power”!

   A few more words re: Austria post-1849. I know that I have drilled this point quite a few times, but it is of prime importance to remember. The fate of our Slovaks is attached to both Austria and Hungary; the leadership of the Slovaks are able to do only what they are “allowed” by the Hungarians/Magyars and the Austrian Habsburgs. After the uprisings of 1848/49, the Austrian Empire, under Bach, was on a great wave of economic growth and freedom. It needed this boost in finances as it was in a state of constant war. Austria was part of “The German Confederation”, an alliance of German-speaking nation/states created by the Congress of Vienna in 1815 (post-Napoleon). As such, the empire was entwined in  many alliances that challenged it in the years following the uprisings. This confederation was fragile; it fell apart and re-gained strength many times in its history. It finally ended up on the trash-heap of  the past with a war between its two main powers – Prussia and Austria. With “The Seven Weeks War” in 1866 the political balance in Central Europe was completely altered until WWI. Military issues with Italian states on its border, the 1st Schleiswig War from 1848 to 1851, and other civil and empirical upsets would be a constant strain on Austria’s coffers. Add to this, Vienna’s ruling elite felt that Austria was entitled to keep the German-speaking kingdoms, principalities, duchies, and states- “German”. Armies are expensive entities and in 1866, Prussia put an end to Austria’s “Ultra-Imperial” ambitions. In the end the Hungarians were held in check until the mid-1850’s, and thus the multitude of ethno-linguistic groups under them… including our Slovaks. Let us return to the 1850’s…

   The Slovak leaders made the decision to back the Habsburgs against the Magyars. The leadership would adhere to this policy until the Compromise of 1867… another 17 years. If the imperial circles had been genuine with them, the Slovaks may have garnered a modicum of success against the Magyars. In the end, the Vienna powers-that-be used our Slovaks against the Magyars, or for their own imperial interests, and when the Slovaks no longer served them – the Austrians deserted the Slovaks to their fate with the Magyar/Hungarians. All along, the Slovak leadership knew that to ensure the survival of their nation, there weren’t many options. This option was not without benefits to some; Kollar was given a professorship in Vienna… to best advise the Habsburgs on “the Slovak question”. Vienna also sponsored a Slovak newspaper, published in Czech oddly enough. The Habsburgs also offered both Hurban and Stur positions in goverment. They both declined and were promptly put under surveillance by the police. This did not stop them from the work that was begun in the 1830’s/40’s. The focus of the leadeship was always to convince the Slovak people to realize that they were a legitimate nation. This focus was most often a literary language, and it was ultimately settled when Martin Hattala published “A Concise Slovak Grammar” in 1852. This moment is of prime importance for a couple of reasons. The first is that while the Lutherans were not going to let go of biblical Czech very easily, this book by Hattala would initiate a higher quality literary output that until now had not cemented its place in Slovak literature – it ushered in Slovak Romanticism. Second in importance was the fact that Hattala’s work was signed by six church leaders; three Catholic and three Lutheran – a superb acknowledgement that it was acceptable to both confessional powers in Slovakia.

   !853 sees the return of civilian rule in the Habsburg lands (namely Hungary), and an imperial decree officially ending the serdom that was abolished in 1848. For a time here in the early 1850’s, a policy of “Germanization” gave the Slovaks a break from Magyarization. The Habsburg’s centralization made for difficulty in the school systems though… especially secondary education. As a result, 1857 there were no “purely Slovak schools”, and what is more surprising is the fact that not everyone in Slovakia were Slovaks – nor were these non-Slovaks interested in a Slovak education for their children.

   Let’s not forget that we are still in “Bach’s Austria”. This was a German state in which the language of administration was… German. This included Hungary for all intent and purpose. Only those that spoke German, and went to the German institutes in say Vienna or Prague, were able to get the best positions. At this point, 1852, Stur is beginning to lose hope for the future of his Slovaks. He is under the constant eye of the police, but still writes “Slavdom and the World of the Future”, and it is not published until after his death, in Russia in 1867. In this, among the last of his works, Stur pins his hope on a Russian-led Panslavism and turned away from Slovak nationalism. Of course, Russia claimed to be “The Big Brother of the Slavs”, but rarely extended a hand to those outside of Russia, and acted only in the interests of Russia. As with most of Ludovit Stur’s work, this manifesto on Panslavism would leave a long-lasting influence on the politics of Slovakia’s future, and we will see this motif arise a couple more times as we continue forward into the history of our dear Slovaks. Of course it was all for naught as I just mentioned, Russia had very little interest in fomenting Slavic, or Panslavic concerns until the issue with Serbia prior to WWI.

   In our next post we will begin again in the 1860’s with Matica Slovenska, and a spark for change in a very trying period for our Slovaks. We will also take a short look back at some of the figures that have played import roles, and will act out their part on this great stage. Men like Andrej Radlinsky, Stefan Moyses, Stefan Marko Daxner, and others will be brought to light. We will also have an “Umbrella Moment” to sum up the 1850’s in the rest of the world.

Thanks to all those who have been engaging me in this conversation. I am very grateful. Until we meet again, please, take care of yourselves…and take care of each other.

We have had a very mild winter here in Bratislava… so far. At this writing on 4, February 2024, the temps are 12C/53-54F. It is sunny and breezy. Not what we should expect for winter. I have had a very quiet week since the above photo was taken at Jelen on Tuesday. Stanka is a dear friend, and I look up to her. She is someone I don’t get to see often enough, but I learn from her everytime we meet. My evenings in the old wine cellar are a high point in my week, as I get to see many of my “Slovenska rodina” (Slovak family) – I have been “adopted” by them. I became sick early Wednesday morning and “lost” two days to delerium and fever. I’m happy to report that I am feeling much better as of yesterday. Since my last post I have attended a birthday party at Next Apache, and I’ve also been sequestered in my apartment as well working on Prof. Homza’s e-book. Our early history is endlessly fascinating to me. This only serves to drive my curiosity to delve further into our culture as well.

HISTORY CORNER

In our last post we talked about the aftermath of the uprising of 1848 in the Kingdom of Hungary, and some of the influences that led to that moment in time. We discussed also, two of the “Five C’s” of historical thinking if you will… causality and contingency. My definitions of both can be seen upon a revisit to our last post. All in all they are: 1)Context, 2)Change Over Time,3)Complexity,4)Causality, and 5)Contingency. In the coming posts I will try and define them, and it’s important to keep in mind that there is no order in which to apply them. I will share also an acronym that I learned long ago that always helps me whenever I am looking at a given historical event, culture, or country/empire: P.E.R.S.I.A..

The nationalism that arose in the early 1820/30’s were the fuel for a fire that continued to burn long after 1848. In lieu of “historical rights”, which the Slovaks were unable to have recognized, their claim of “natural rights” were denied or looked over by the Magyars. So what does this mean? “Historical rights” are usually seen as a continuation of a political entity, which in the case of our Slovaks, would have been a formation or possession of a state after say… Great Moravia. Lacking any firm state, the Slovaks would then have to draw on their “natural rights”; those based on the fact that they had occupied their territory for as long as they did – without a “recognized or legitimate” state configuration. Here we are, in 1850, without some form of legal basis for being allowed to have our voices heard…

This is a crucial year for our Slovaks. Going forward, they will face not only a physical/pragmatic challenge, but one of existence… an “existential” struggle to prove in a verifiable context – who they are. We know well enough at this point, they have a common language, and a modicum of cross-confessional unity (agreement between the two major faiths – Catholic and Protestant). Leadership is growing, but still learning along the way. Here is the my conundrum… In more than 800 years of existing with each other, the Magyars and Slovaks had a particular give-and-take relationship. As it stands, in 1850, there is a clear break, and the connection becomes more confrontational and rebellious. It will never again be the same. Slovakia still holds the wealth of the Hungarian kingdom, as it has since 1526 when the Ottomans captured and ruled more than half of Hungary proper. From here on in, the medieval order is about to change. Magyarization is no longer a personal choice; it will be a source of frustration for our Slovaks…almost 70 years long.

I promise that my next post will go beyond this year of 1850, but I want to make it abundantly clear how much our Slovaks are charged with, and how long the road ahead them will be. They will get very little help from the outside, and their existence as a verifiable entity will be stymied at every turn by the Hungarians. In retrospect, the Magyar/Hungarians were able to promote their own nationalism, and as an extension of the knowledge that they were in fact a minority in their own “kingdom”; a further promotion of fear… their fear of autonomy for their subjects was unmatched. Since the “X Law” was decreed by Leopold II, the Magyars began their programs in the interests of a Hungarian state. The Hungarian nobility in Slovakia, the most important class, made themselves inaccessable (and scarce) to the Slovak National Movement. The lesser nobility took their cue from the magnates above them, and used their positions to interfere with and help crush the uprising. Lastly, the mass of the population – the peasants- looked to the Hungarians because they had been imbued with the notion their social/civil rights were granted to them by the Magyars… and not the Slovak revolutionary leaders. This was mostly due to a “patriarchal” relationship that the peasnts had with the nobility and their respect for that authority.

A few things stand directly in the path of the Slovaks. We know that “Magyarization” will become more intense, but the Slovaks have countered it with a developed language, and an as-yet fragile union among the whole of the populace. We know also, that Slovakia is still well behind the industrialization taking place to their west. For the Slovaks, their industrial, political, and cultural spheres are in a fragile and acquisitive phase at this point. Heading into the 1850’s, our Slovaks are challenged by more the aforementioned circumstances: all the while they exist in a state that has no intention of empowering them- much less sharing any power with them. For the part of the Habsburgs, as they may have helped the lower tier of the subjects by emancipating the serfs, and granting some rights… this could be viewed as a smoke-screen to hide their consolidation of power (termed by many as “neo-absolutism”), and in the end to punish Hungary for their rebellion (*auth. ::> I am not comfortable with the term “revolution” here, as it doesn’t fit my template or criteria for the term) Meanwhile, in other regions of the world…

UMBRELLA MOMENT

In 1850, the Potato Famine is ongoing, not only in Ireland, but Newfoundland, Belgium, the Kingdom of Denmark… essentially it struck a geographical area that comprised the northern aspects of Europe. Alongside of it is the cholera pandemic that continued into the early 1860’s. In the U.S., Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “The Scarlet Letter” is published. Los Angeles is incorporated. Great Britain begins to ship convicts to Australia (extraordinary read > “The Fatal Shore”/Robert Hughes). Franz Liszt (a frequent visitor to Bratislava) directs Wagner’s “Lohengrin” in Berlin. Brazil abolishes the slave trade. Thomas Masaryk, the 1st president of Czecho-Slovakia is born. 1850 is also the year that Johnny (“I’m your huckleberry) Ringo is born. The world lost William Wordsworth, Honore de Balzac, and King Louis Phillipe of France – among many other “children of the Enlightenment”.

I want to thank each and every one of you who may be following me, just stopped in, or had this blog pop up in a search. I have several goals for 2024, and one of them is to continue to open the world up to our history, culture, and general zeitgeist. Life here in Central Europe isn’t always perfect…where on this planet would it be? The longer that I am able to stay here in Slovakia, the more that I want the world to know that we are much more than hockey players and KIAs. I have some of the very best people as friends, and although I miss my family and friends in the U.S., I have a good foundation here. Until we meet again, please… take care of yourselves and take care of each other.

Winter has finally come to Bratislava. The temps have swung from the teens (in C/ 40’s-low 50’sF) to 0C or colder. Slight furries and freezing mix threaten us, and it’s common for winter to come late. An insensate can understand that we are experiencing a change in the patterns of weather. Heavy rains, when there shouldn’t be any, have washed out much of Central Europe. The Danube flows high and fast along the walkways here in the Slovak capital. Fed by watersheds further North and West in Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic there will water down here for quite some time through the winter. We can only hope that the freeze makes the ground stiffen and hold the water until Spring. Otherwise we will be looking at hard times for our farmers, and a tough planting season. This could filter down, leading to higher food prices, even at the farmer’s markets where I like to shop in season. I know too, after speaking to family and friends in the US, they experiencing a deep freeze in the Midwest. Weather can have a major influence in our lives. Although I rarely mention it, weather had a major impact on Europe in the 19th century. There were famines as a result of crop failures due to the weather. Weather also influenced the outcomes of many battles… and so we enter into the beginning of the 1850’s in the continued struggle for our Slovaks to be heard and ultimately recognized there are many forces influencing the outcome.

HISTORY CORNER

After the uprisings/revolutions of 1848/49, the powers-that-be in Europe were divided in their reaction to the demands of the disorganized attempts to change the various societies and cultures. Some populations were able to affect change (France, Germany) that were if not lasting, aided their goals. In Austria and Hungary however, things were much different. Hungary’s uprising/revolt was the the longest on the continent, and early on may have yielded concessions by the Habsburgs, but as they waged a war to secede from the Habsburgs, their defeat by the combined Austrian and Russian armies led to crushing martial law imposed by the Habsburgs, a reneging on earlier reforms, and in the end more pressure on the minorities in the Magyar-controlled lands of Hungary. Alexander Bach was now minister of the Interior under Franz Joseph and instituted a system of strong central control. Bach was unprincipled, and would would waffle a great deal, but he eventually garnered conservative opinions, and backing from such forces that would allow this behavior – especially the Austrian and Hungarian upper nobility. Bach was behind policies that limited freedom of the press and sought to deny public trials… not the ideals of the revolutionaries, who were hoping for change from the Habsburg monarchy. Like Bach, Franz Joseph, Ludovit Stur and others, there are a great many actors on the grand stage of 1848/49; in my opinion Lajos Kossuth would be both an indelible figure for the Hungarians, and a deterent to the energies of our Slovaks.

Initially, Kossuth praised Stur’s 6-point plan. Kossuth would make an abrupt turn as his Magyar nationalism became more fervent and deeply narrowed against the voices striving to heard. Kossuth challenged the Habsburgs for control of Hungary… all of Hungary – for Hungarians alone. The full scope of Magyarization, begun in the 1830’s, would come to bear on our Slovaks after the failed uprisings in 1848/49, and it affected the other Slav minorities. By July of 1849 with Alexander Bach centralizing power from Vienna, Tsar Nicholas I of Russia aiding Franz Joseph against the Hungarians, and Kossuth flip-flopping on promises for minority autonomy… the Slovaks were virtually back to square one.

Here, we must back-track for a moment regarding Lajos Kossuth. Kossuth was a man of shared heritage; born to a Slovak father – a Lutheran, and a mother who was not only Lutheran, but also primarily 75% “magyarized-German”. Both parents descended from houses of lesser nobility, and both houses originating in the Upper Kingdom (Slovakia). He was born in Northeast Hungary (near present-day Slovakia). Kossuth, early on before the revolts, as a brilliant and gifted speaker, championed the first minority rights in Europe. This gave the minorities in the Hungarian territiories the right to use their own language in their local administration/courts, schools/community life, and local councils as well. Kossuth would not support any sort of regional authority within Hungary based on nationality though. Even so, Kossuth accepted national demands from Romanians, Serbs, and Croats – but showed no favor to the Slovaks. It should be noted also that in September of 1848, Kossuth’s followers called for temporary dictatorial powers for him as the situation in Hungary became more desperate. Kossuth was invested with increased amounts of power, a definite lack of military experience, and a dearth of generals to lead his armies (he continually sacked them and rehired them), and this didn’t help against the Austrian (and eventually Russian) military might. In the end, despite the fact that Kossuth’s uncle, Gyorgy Kossuth, was main supporter of the Slovak national movement, it would seem the younger Kossuth feared that any autonomy for the ethnic groups would lead to Hungary becoming fragmented and tested on its territorial borders. This unwavering stance would cost him, and Hungary, dearly as he fled to exile and the Habsburgs established dominance over Hungarian affairs for another 25+ years, and affect it until WWI.

As I mentioned earlier, the Slovaks were nearly back to square-one, but not entirely on their back foot. For their activities in mid-1848, Magyar historians have called Stur and the Slovaks “counter-revolutionaries” due to their cooperation with the Court in Vienna, and the Imperial Army. The numbers simply don’t support this claim. The actual count of the Slovaks fighting for Hungary was between 20 and 30,00 (the highest claim here is 50,000 men)… while those that fought for the Austrian crown may have been around 2/3,000 (the highest claim is 10,000 men). These numbers are contended by both Slovak and Magyar historians. We do know that there was resistance by many Slovaks to be pressed into the Magyar army, and also there were many pro-Hungarian Slovaks (loyalists) that went to the aid of Kossuth’s cause. Again… a very complex history that is harder to unwrap than a bowl of spaghetti noodles.

Here at the end of the national uprising we have to take a “realpolitik” look at what the Slovaks are thinking and feeling heading into 1850. It is always my most basic approach to get a solid look at what was occuring at the time. In using an archaic historical/political/diplomatic approach, I get a better sense of what is happening on the common level. Asking “what is happening in terms of the practical, or material?”, as opposed to the existential or theoretical situations or outcomes. The Magyars were actually the minority in their own “kingdom”, from 1830 to to nearly the turn of the 20th century they comprised less than 50% of the population, and yet they still feared that any number of changes in Central Europe would put Hungary out of the standing of nationhood… making them a minority oddly enough. Here are my “worst-case” scenarios: 1) German unification engulfing the complete entirety of the Habsburg lands/realm; 2) a restructuring of the Austrian Empire based on ethnicity; and 3) any re-alignment in the power structure and geographic territories being transferred to nations other than those ruling at this time in history. While there are many other possible constructs, in the overall scheme of things as they stand in 1850, the changes that are afoot do not justify the complete suppression of the minorities (Slovaks included) in the Magyar kingdom. Hungary is still tied to Austria, Kossuth has fled to the Ottomans – eventually to the US (fascinating story), and the Slovaks remain undaunted in the face of challenges to their culture.

In a “realpolitik” look at the end of the 1848 uprisings, and heading into the 1850’s, we want to get a sense of what concerned most Slovaks. The lower classes were primarily concerned with the abolition of serfdom and the chance to increase their own welfare without the interference of the nobility. Also the Slovaks have to come to terms with the gulf in the the confessional divide which led to the apathy of the Slovak Catholicsduring the uprising – which was led by mostly Lutheran leadership. These are just two of the many pressing issues of the Slovaks in practical and material terms. There are too many to list.

Before I set us up for 1850 and beyond, I must say that I am deeply obliged to my dear cousin Pat for always asking…”what about women during this time?…etc”, I will put this humble promise forward: that I will look into the nature of woman’s historical struggle in the “ancien regimes” of both Austria, Hungary and Slovakia.

Our next post will have us forge on into the 1850’s and I want to touch on the ever-present emerging feminist political realities, as well as a few other factors that fell into place to make the uprisings happen. Here we must apply two of the “Five C’s” of historical thinking; causality and contingency are very important. Causality allows us to see many of the various factors coming into play in order for the uprisings/revolts of 1848 to occur. Contingency is one of the most difficult of the “5 C’s” to apply. This is a big leap-of-faith in that we (historians) are stating that any event depends on prior conditions. Without any one of a few factors, history would turn out differently. Thus the march of man’s deeds (or misdeeds) will effect change in the 50 years of the 19th century.

Thank you all for following and reading my posts. I am eternally grateful for your interest and curiosity. Until we meet again, please take care of yourselves, and take care of each other