| Revision as of 21:55, 4 April 2011 view sourcePepeto11 (talk | contribs)12 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:18, 5 April 2011 view source Hobartimus (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,944 edits rv blanking of user:Pepeto11Next edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| ==Outline of the events== | ==Outline of the events== | ||
| In Černová, the inhabitants decided to build a Catholic church from their own and ]' finances, and from the initiative of ], their own native priest. Construction started in April 1907 and by the autumn, the church was ready for consecration.<ref name="cernova">http://www.cernova.sk/sublinks/cernovska_masakra1.html {{sk icon}}</ref> At that time, Hlinka was suspended by his bishop ] because he supported |
In Černová, the inhabitants decided to build a Catholic church from their own and ]' finances, and from the initiative of ], their own native priest. Construction started in April 1907 and by the autumn, the church was ready for consecration.<ref name="cernova">http://www.cernova.sk/sublinks/cernovska_masakra1.html {{sk icon}}</ref> At that time, Hlinka was suspended by his bishop ] because he supported the opponent (also known for his ]) of the Catholic People's Party in the election campaign. Moreover, Hlinka was sentenced for two years in jail because his campaign speeches were considered ] according to 172th § of the 1878 ]<ref> - 1878. évi V. törvénycikk a magyar büntetőtörvénykönyv a büntettekről és vétségekről ''(Act No. 5 (1878): on the Hungarian Penal Code for crimes and offences)''</ref>. However, the inhabitants requested that Hlinka should consecrate the church; otherwise' they requested to delay the consecration. So the people of Černová requested the consecration of the church in a letter (worded by Hlinka). Párvy gave his consent to that. In a second letter (also worded by Hlinka), the people requested that Hlinka be present at the consecration and in a third one, that he himself consecrates the church. Párvy—according to the ]--refused to cancel Hlinka' suspension. Instead, he appointed ] Anton Kurimsky, the former ] of ]. | ||
| Hlinka was getting prepared for a lecture tour in ]. Before he left, the people of Černová once again wrote a letter to bishop Párvy. He delayed the consecration with a few days, but appointed again Kurimsky. | Hlinka was getting prepared for a lecture tour in ]. Before he left, the people of Černová once again wrote a letter to bishop Párvy. He delayed the consecration with a few days, but appointed again Kurimsky. When Hlinka left, he told to the people: ''"If you want, consecrate the church, if not, well, not!"''. The people were not aware of the canon law, and Hlinka took no effort to tell them that he had no right to consecrate the church. Instead of explaining that, he left his worshipers with the belief that they had the right to review the bishop's decision. This lack of disclosure was one of the main factors leading to the tragedy. | ||
| Dean Pazúrik, Hlinka's superior upon learning the new date, asked for a further delay so Hlinka could return to take part. The bishop agreed, but Hlinka wrote in his response (24 October): ''"I won't participate on the consecration on any conditions.... Try to dissuade Kurimsky if you can and you yourself consecrate the church. I also don't want to be present because I don't want to be responsible for any possible events."'' This letter makes clear that Hlinka was aware of the risk of "possible events" (though probably not a massacre), but he refused to return to calm down his people. (Although he was suspended as a parish priest, he was welcome to participate as a worshiper but seemed to be too offended to do so.) | |||
| ⚫ | The people of Černová kept on organizing in favor of Hlinka. | ||
| ⚫ | The people of Černová knew nothing about this letter and kept on organizing in favor of Hlinka. | ||
| ⚫ | ] came to sanctify the church on 27 October in a ] with 15 Hungarian |
||
| ⚫ | ] came to sanctify the church on 27 October in a ] with 15 Hungarian<ref>{{cite book|last=Wingfield|first=Nancy Meriwether |title=reating the other: ethnic conflict and nationalism in Habsburg Central Europe|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=R43P5vJQDkoC&pg=PA170&dq=cernova+hungarian+gendarmes&ei=sCwVTIbhJ47ezQTE5bS9Cg&cd=5#v=onepage&q=cernova%20hungarian%20gendarmes&f=false}}</ref> gendarmes (all<ref>{{cite web|url=http://szombat.portalinternet.hu/ujhirek/1031_hlinkapolitika_egyszerfennegyszerlenn_atortenelemsulya.htm|title=Hlinka-politika: egyszer fenn, egyszer lenn – A történelem súlya|date=2007-09-31|work=Szombat (Hungarian Jewish magazine)}}</ref> or the majority of them were ethnic ]<ref name="holec"> Interview with Roman Holec, historian</ref>. When the coach turned into the narrow street leading to the church, the crowd (some 400 local people) obstructed the path and started to scrum. After being attacked by the mob throwing stones, the gendarmes lost control and ] Ján Ladiczky<ref name="holec" />, an ethnic Slovak<ref></ref> gave the order to open fire. The gendarmes fired four times, killing 15 people, seriously injuring 12 and lightly injuring 40.<ref>http://www.cernova.sk/sublinks/cernovska_masakra3.html {{sk icon}}</ref> | ||
| ==Consequences== | ==Consequences== | ||
| Although police force fire was not uncommon that time in many parts of the world (in 1871, the ] in Paris; in 1886, the ] in the USA; in 1905, the killing of 1000 workers by Russian army in ], the killing of 11.000 rioting peasants in Romania, in 1907, the ] by the British India Army) the Černová incident received special international attention as a result of Czech and Slovak intervention. | |||
| ⚫ | Many could politically capitalize on the events, Czech and Slovak nationalists in general, and Hlinka himself in particular. On the one hand, Hlinka's appeal against his 1906 verdict was rejected, thus, on November 30, 1907 Hlinka started to serve his jail term in the Csillagbörtön (''Star Prison''), ]. On the other hand, Hlinka appealed with success his suspension at the Holy See, so it was cancelled on 8 April 1909. When Hlinka left the prison, bishop Párvy appointed him again to his Ružomberok parish, and Hlinka consecrated the church in Černová with Párvy's consent. | ||
| ⚫ | Hlinka's appeal against his 1906 verdict was rejected, thus, on November 30, 1907 Hlinka started to serve his jail term in the Csillagbörtön (''Star Prison''), ]. On the other hand, Hlinka appealed with success his suspension at the Holy See, so it was cancelled on 8 April 1909. | ||
| The tragedy sparked huge protests in the ]an and US press and it turned world's attention to the attitude to the minorities in Hungary. Important protesting European personalities included the Norwegian Nobel Prize holder ], the Oxford historian ], the speaker of the Austrian parliament etc. | The tragedy sparked huge protests in the ]an and US press and it turned world's attention to the attitude to the minorities in Hungary. Important protesting European personalities included the Norwegian Nobel Prize holder ], the Oxford historian ], the speaker of the Austrian parliament etc. | ||
| Today's |
Today's Slovak politicians—especially the members of the ] -, even though all perpetrators were Slovaks, interpret the event as "Hungarian gendarmes shooting at innocent Slovaks" (during the legal actions after the massacre, some gendarmes refused to testify as witnesses, because the victims were their relatives). With many of their claims regarding the events, the ] continues to perpetuate a "false myth of Černová".<ref> <small> A szóvivő Rafael Rafaj aláírásával ellátott dokumentum annak ellenére ápolja tovább csernova hamis mítoszát, hogy egy évtizede már komoly, a legendákkal, tévhitekkel leszámoló monográfia szól az esetről egy szlovák történész, Roman Holec tollából.</small></ref> Some Slovak sources claim that the gendarmes were ethnic Hungarian <ref>{{cite book|last=Felak|first=James Ramon |title=At the price of the Republic: Hlinka's Slovak People's Party, 1929-1938|publisher=University of Pittsburgh Press|pages=12|year=1994}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Kirschbaum|first=Joseph M. |title=Slovakia in the 19th & 20th centuries|publisher=Slovak World Congress|year=1978|pages=464}}</ref> even though there were very small number of ethnic Hungarians in the region where the gendarmes were recruited. According to Slovak historian Roman Holec, professor at the Komenský University the majority of the gendarmes had Slovak origin and were from ]. (According to the official 1910 census, over 90% of the population were ethnic Slovaks in that county.) They were nevertheless honored for the deed, because they were in the service of Hungarian state and in that time it was the decisive factor (regardless of their ethnic origin). Yet both the rioters and the gendarmes can be held responsible for the massacre. The rioters were violent due to the lack of fear from getting shot at (i.e. that the sergeant would refrain from giving an order of fire or use blanks). The gendarmes on the other hand were shooting in all directions instead of aiming for feet or into the air (most victims died due to their head and chest injuries).<ref name="holec" /> | ||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 03:18, 5 April 2011
The Černová tragedy (or Černová massacre, Template:Lang-sk, Template:Lang-hu) was a shooting that happened in Csernova (today Černová, part of Ružomberok) on 27 October 1907.
Outline of the events
In Černová, the inhabitants decided to build a Catholic church from their own and Slovak Americans' finances, and from the initiative of Andrej Hlinka, their own native priest. Construction started in April 1907 and by the autumn, the church was ready for consecration. At that time, Hlinka was suspended by his bishop Sándor Párvy because he supported the opponent (also known for his anti-clericalism) of the Catholic People's Party in the election campaign. Moreover, Hlinka was sentenced for two years in jail because his campaign speeches were considered incitement according to 172th § of the 1878 Penal Code. However, the inhabitants requested that Hlinka should consecrate the church; otherwise' they requested to delay the consecration. So the people of Černová requested the consecration of the church in a letter (worded by Hlinka). Párvy gave his consent to that. In a second letter (also worded by Hlinka), the people requested that Hlinka be present at the consecration and in a third one, that he himself consecrates the church. Párvy—according to the canon law--refused to cancel Hlinka' suspension. Instead, he appointed canon Anton Kurimsky, the former parish priest of Ružomberok.
Hlinka was getting prepared for a lecture tour in Moravia. Before he left, the people of Černová once again wrote a letter to bishop Párvy. He delayed the consecration with a few days, but appointed again Kurimsky. When Hlinka left, he told to the people: "If you want, consecrate the church, if not, well, not!". The people were not aware of the canon law, and Hlinka took no effort to tell them that he had no right to consecrate the church. Instead of explaining that, he left his worshipers with the belief that they had the right to review the bishop's decision. This lack of disclosure was one of the main factors leading to the tragedy.
Dean Pazúrik, Hlinka's superior upon learning the new date, asked for a further delay so Hlinka could return to take part. The bishop agreed, but Hlinka wrote in his response (24 October): "I won't participate on the consecration on any conditions.... Try to dissuade Kurimsky if you can and you yourself consecrate the church. I also don't want to be present because I don't want to be responsible for any possible events." This letter makes clear that Hlinka was aware of the risk of "possible events" (though probably not a massacre), but he refused to return to calm down his people. (Although he was suspended as a parish priest, he was welcome to participate as a worshiper but seemed to be too offended to do so.)
The people of Černová knew nothing about this letter and kept on organizing in favor of Hlinka.
Martin Pazúrik came to sanctify the church on 27 October in a coach with 15 Hungarian gendarmes (all or the majority of them were ethnic Slovaks. When the coach turned into the narrow street leading to the church, the crowd (some 400 local people) obstructed the path and started to scrum. After being attacked by the mob throwing stones, the gendarmes lost control and sergeant Ján Ladiczky, an ethnic Slovak gave the order to open fire. The gendarmes fired four times, killing 15 people, seriously injuring 12 and lightly injuring 40.
Consequences
Although police force fire was not uncommon that time in many parts of the world (in 1871, the massacre of the Communards in Paris; in 1886, the Haymarket affair in the USA; in 1905, the killing of 1000 workers by Russian army in Petrograd, the killing of 11.000 rioting peasants in Romania, in 1907, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre by the British India Army) the Černová incident received special international attention as a result of Czech and Slovak intervention.
Many could politically capitalize on the events, Czech and Slovak nationalists in general, and Hlinka himself in particular. On the one hand, Hlinka's appeal against his 1906 verdict was rejected, thus, on November 30, 1907 Hlinka started to serve his jail term in the Csillagbörtön (Star Prison), Szeged. On the other hand, Hlinka appealed with success his suspension at the Holy See, so it was cancelled on 8 April 1909. When Hlinka left the prison, bishop Párvy appointed him again to his Ružomberok parish, and Hlinka consecrated the church in Černová with Párvy's consent.
The tragedy sparked huge protests in the European and US press and it turned world's attention to the attitude to the minorities in Hungary. Important protesting European personalities included the Norwegian Nobel Prize holder Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson, the Oxford historian Robert William Seton-Watson, the speaker of the Austrian parliament etc.
Today's Slovak politicians—especially the members of the Slovak National Party -, even though all perpetrators were Slovaks, interpret the event as "Hungarian gendarmes shooting at innocent Slovaks" (during the legal actions after the massacre, some gendarmes refused to testify as witnesses, because the victims were their relatives). With many of their claims regarding the events, the Slovak National Party continues to perpetuate a "false myth of Černová". Some Slovak sources claim that the gendarmes were ethnic Hungarian even though there were very small number of ethnic Hungarians in the region where the gendarmes were recruited. According to Slovak historian Roman Holec, professor at the Komenský University the majority of the gendarmes had Slovak origin and were from Liptó county. (According to the official 1910 census, over 90% of the population were ethnic Slovaks in that county.) They were nevertheless honored for the deed, because they were in the service of Hungarian state and in that time it was the decisive factor (regardless of their ethnic origin). Yet both the rioters and the gendarmes can be held responsible for the massacre. The rioters were violent due to the lack of fear from getting shot at (i.e. that the sergeant would refrain from giving an order of fire or use blanks). The gendarmes on the other hand were shooting in all directions instead of aiming for feet or into the air (most victims died due to their head and chest injuries).
References
- Frucht, Richard C. (2005). Eastern Europe: an introduction to the people, lands, and culture. ABC-CLIO. p. 294. ISBN 978-1-57607-801-3.
{{cite book}}: Check|authorlink=value (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help); External link in|authorlink= - http://www.cernova.sk/sublinks/cernovska_masakra1.html Template:Sk icon
- 1000 év törvényei - 1878. évi V. törvénycikk a magyar büntetőtörvénykönyv a büntettekről és vétségekről (Act No. 5 (1878): on the Hungarian Penal Code for crimes and offences)
- Wingfield, Nancy Meriwether. reating the other: ethnic conflict and nationalism in Habsburg Central Europe.
- "Hlinka-politika: egyszer fenn, egyszer lenn – A történelem súlya". Szombat (Hungarian Jewish magazine). 2007-09-31.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Roman Holec szerint egyes politikusok régi mítoszokat próbálnak újraéleszteni Interview with Roman Holec, historian
- Slota újabb kirohanása: tovább sértegeti a magyarokat
- http://www.cernova.sk/sublinks/cernovska_masakra3.html Template:Sk icon
- Egy elfelejtett sortűz nyomában A szóvivő Rafael Rafaj aláírásával ellátott dokumentum annak ellenére ápolja tovább csernova hamis mítoszát, hogy egy évtizede már komoly, a legendákkal, tévhitekkel leszámoló monográfia szól az esetről egy szlovák történész, Roman Holec tollából.
- Felak, James Ramon (1994). At the price of the Republic: Hlinka's Slovak People's Party, 1929-1938. University of Pittsburgh Press. p. 12.
- Kirschbaum, Joseph M. (1978). Slovakia in the 19th & 20th centuries. Slovak World Congress. p. 464.
External links
- Anniversary overshadowed by Černová tragedy
- 100 years of the Tragedy in Černová
- Brutal Hungarian and innocent Slovaks - a myth from Felvidek ma
- Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson - the dissolution of the Norw.-Swedish union and his support to the Slovakian liberation movement