Page 289 - Weiss, Jernej, ur. 2017. Glasbene migracije: stičišče evropske glasbene raznolikosti - Musical Migrations: Crossroads of European Musical Diversity. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 1
P. 289
bankers, medical doctors, teachers, priests, musicians, all czechs, kind gentlefolk ...”
These and similar statements were not directed so much against the Czech
immigrants themselves as against the Czechs’ more liberal political poli-
cy, which initially was not welcomed in particular by conservative circles.
Among those who were especially critical towards the Czech newcomers
was Bishop Anton Mahnič, who in his criticisms demonstrated the harm-
fulness of young Czech liberalism for both Czechs and Slovenes.5 The fact
that this was not the unified position of the clerical camp is evident in the
statements of Christian Socialist Janez Evangelist Krek, who, like the long-
standing mayor of Ljubljana, Ivan Hribar, looked on the Czech capital led
by Masaryk as the centre of Slavism.6 In particular, even in the second half
of the 19th century, people were still giving priority to personal interests be-
fore national differences when creating friendships. Although the nation-
alism of political and thinking elites had penetrated deeply into the lives of
the masses, it was the horrific experience of World War I that finally shaped
the “man without particularities” into a member of the fighting nation-
al collective who felt threatened to death by anything that was different. It
should, however, be noted that there was no great need more explicitly to
demonstrate national allegiance particularly among those inhabitants who
had politically and economically assimilated more quickly. Given that the
majority of Czech immigrants had assimilated with the population, they
could hardly be unambiguously labelled immigrants. Despite its historical,
civilizational, religious and national differences, the Habsburg Monarchy
was, until its disintegration, nevertheless perceived as a unified state by the
majority of its population.
The newcomers from the Czech lands thus wrote to their fellow coun-
trymen about the situation in Slovene territory, arousing their interest in
the Slovene lands. One of the most active newcomers in this respect was
Jan Lego, referred to as the “apostle of Slovene-Czech reciprocity”.7 So with
this well-functioning network of institutional links, among which I should
5 Anton Mahnič, “Slovenci, pazimo s kom se bratimo,” Rimski katolik, (1889): 386.
6 Already in July 1894, Krek participated in the first Czech Catholic assembly in Brno,
where the main topic of discussion was the growing threat of Hussism and liberalism
in the Czech lands. At the assembly, Krek hailed the idea of organizing the assembly
in Brno, claiming they were the first to recognize the threat of Hussism and libera-
lism, and were the only ones among Czechs who had actually preserved the Catho-
lic faith. Janez Evangelist Krek, “Pozdrav češko-slovanskim katolikom v Brnu,” Slo-
venec, 30. 7. 1894.
7 Irena Gantar Godina, “Češki politični realizem med hrvaškimi in slovenskimi štu-
denti v Pragi (1895–1900),” Zgodovinski časopis, 39 (1985): 269. See also: Irena Gan-
tar Godina, “Jan Lego,” Razgledi, 17 (1998): 13–15.
287
These and similar statements were not directed so much against the Czech
immigrants themselves as against the Czechs’ more liberal political poli-
cy, which initially was not welcomed in particular by conservative circles.
Among those who were especially critical towards the Czech newcomers
was Bishop Anton Mahnič, who in his criticisms demonstrated the harm-
fulness of young Czech liberalism for both Czechs and Slovenes.5 The fact
that this was not the unified position of the clerical camp is evident in the
statements of Christian Socialist Janez Evangelist Krek, who, like the long-
standing mayor of Ljubljana, Ivan Hribar, looked on the Czech capital led
by Masaryk as the centre of Slavism.6 In particular, even in the second half
of the 19th century, people were still giving priority to personal interests be-
fore national differences when creating friendships. Although the nation-
alism of political and thinking elites had penetrated deeply into the lives of
the masses, it was the horrific experience of World War I that finally shaped
the “man without particularities” into a member of the fighting nation-
al collective who felt threatened to death by anything that was different. It
should, however, be noted that there was no great need more explicitly to
demonstrate national allegiance particularly among those inhabitants who
had politically and economically assimilated more quickly. Given that the
majority of Czech immigrants had assimilated with the population, they
could hardly be unambiguously labelled immigrants. Despite its historical,
civilizational, religious and national differences, the Habsburg Monarchy
was, until its disintegration, nevertheless perceived as a unified state by the
majority of its population.
The newcomers from the Czech lands thus wrote to their fellow coun-
trymen about the situation in Slovene territory, arousing their interest in
the Slovene lands. One of the most active newcomers in this respect was
Jan Lego, referred to as the “apostle of Slovene-Czech reciprocity”.7 So with
this well-functioning network of institutional links, among which I should
5 Anton Mahnič, “Slovenci, pazimo s kom se bratimo,” Rimski katolik, (1889): 386.
6 Already in July 1894, Krek participated in the first Czech Catholic assembly in Brno,
where the main topic of discussion was the growing threat of Hussism and liberalism
in the Czech lands. At the assembly, Krek hailed the idea of organizing the assembly
in Brno, claiming they were the first to recognize the threat of Hussism and libera-
lism, and were the only ones among Czechs who had actually preserved the Catho-
lic faith. Janez Evangelist Krek, “Pozdrav češko-slovanskim katolikom v Brnu,” Slo-
venec, 30. 7. 1894.
7 Irena Gantar Godina, “Češki politični realizem med hrvaškimi in slovenskimi štu-
denti v Pragi (1895–1900),” Zgodovinski časopis, 39 (1985): 269. See also: Irena Gan-
tar Godina, “Jan Lego,” Razgledi, 17 (1998): 13–15.
287
