Re: Questions on ch.5
> Slovakian consciousness in 1600 is a joke.A well phrased argument.
> I also can not agree, that Slovaks as being farmers were noCheck the chapter we're reading and discussing, please. The number of
> different than other ethnicities;Jews were not farmers, Roma
> were not farmers.
Jews was negligible in the sum total of the Slovak majority areas and
I explicitly excluded the Gypsies, Croats, Rusyns. I was talking
about the Slovaks, Germans, Hungarians.
> however he counts, he can not findThat is the root of the problem. Ethnic pride, patriotism based on
> more than 50 distinguished and active patriots.
ethnicity are modern things in Central Europe that began to emerge
200-250 years ago. No one was an active _ethnic_ patriot earlier.
There were country patriots, for the Kingdom of Hungary in this
instance, of many ethnicities including the Slovaks. When some people
imagine that there was no Slovak consciousness 250+ years ago, they
mean there were no Slovaks who demanded self-government, wrote poems
about their ethnic past, etc. That's perfectly true for the Slovaks,
Hungarians, Moravians, Poles, etc. It does not make any of the groups
different from the others.
But the "Slavic speakers" in Trencin County were called Slovaks just
like the the "Slavic speakers" in Spis County were, and the "Hungarian
speakers" from Novohrad County were called Hungarians just like the
"Hungarian speakers" from Baranya Country although their respective
dialects differed quite a bit. On the other hand the "Slavic
speakers" of Saris Country were clearly differentiated into Slovaks
and Rusyns although they both spoke "Slavic" and therefore, according
to those who say there was no Slovak awareness, only Slavic, these
Slavs and their languages should not be differentiated. Contrary to
claims that there was none, that people thought of themselves as
"Slavs," there was a well-documented differentiation and awareness of
belonging to the sets of inhabitants called "Slovaks," or "Rusyns," or
"Poles," or "Hungarians," etc.
> Bratislava, if I am not mistaking, there were only aboutThis may partly be a misunderstanding caused by the words I used.
> 19 % Slovaks, many of them servants/maids.
> Look at the cemetery names of Kosice.
When I said "burghers," I meant the people who lived in towns in
whatever capacity and for whatever reason, the councilors and servants
alike. And 19% is plenty by comparison to the claims that there were
none. But mainly, I meant the towns in the Slovak majority areas
(both Bratislava and Kosice were in the Slovak/non-Slovak borderlands,
additionally, the names in the Kosice cemetery partly reflect the
results of 100 years of Hungarianization in the 19th century). Those
towns were "towns" by the local standards in the the chapter we're
reading now, no matter how much or little resemblance they bore to
towns like Kosice and Bratislava.
So let me clarify -- during the period discussed in the chapter we're
reading now, there were plenty (15%-95%) Slovak inhabitants in towns
in the Slovak majority areas -- plenty by contrasts to claims that
there were none or barely any -- and there was so much intermarriage
between the Slovaks and Germans that large farming areas that used to
be almost exclusively German had significant Slovak minorities, or
Slovak majorities by the 19th century. The same applied to the
inhabitants of towns.
This is as much as I'll have to say on this. I'm reluctant to mix
"jokes" with factual discussion.
- For a view of the current attitudes and German-American interpretation
of the history of Germans in Slovakia, it may be good to start with
several pages and some writings by one of S-W contributors, Thomas
and perhaps two variations on the same web page,
I say German-American much the same as I would say Slovak-American.
Our American view is not necessarily the same as the home-grown Slovak
view. There is a lot on politics and not so much on life style and
culture over the centuries. The writing harks back to the old style
before the more modern histories and writings started to appear in the
1990's. Much like the Hungarian writing of the old era the history is
presented as that of Germans to the point of neglecting other ethnic
groups (and the Hungarians!) and presenting most all location names in
German only, making it difficult to follow with modern maps and names.
Including modern place names in parentheses would be a great help and
service a broader audience. Recent Hungarian histories seem to have
overcome these boundaries.
--- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, "Helen Fedor" <hfed@...> wrote:
> Ther Germans and Slovaks seemed to be two groups living side by side
in Slovakia. Was there much contact/mixing/intermarriage was there
between the two? Did they consider themselves separate social
classes, seeing that the Germans were concentrated in the cities and
mining operations while the Slovaks were mainly farmers?
> Spiesz mentions the Catholic institutions of higher learning, as
well as the Protestant lyceum in Pres~ov. Given that the Lutherans
placed great importance on people reading the Bible for themselves,
were lower-level Lutheran schools established at this time? Were
girls also included among the pupils? Were the other lower-level
schools at that time run mainly by the Catholic Church or the state?