• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Czechoslovakia keeps Carpathian Ruthenia

Ricardolindo

Well-known member
Location
Portugal
What if Czechoslovakia had kept Carpathian Ruthenia? It was definitely plausible. Stalin only decided to annex it very late on. Once Czechoslovakia federalized, would Carpathian Ruthenia become its own entity? If so, once Czechoslovakia dissolved, would it have become independent? It's poor and small. Maybe it would have become independent but kept an economic union with Slovakia.
 
Seems dependent on how the area is treated under Czechoslovakian rule, i.e. how much is its local culture and people stepped on to keep them in Prague's control. I don't think Prague's going to be as good at it as Moscow was, which would leave the area more likely to seperate as its own small country in the 1990s (it'd be poor and small but that hasn't stopped other countries).
 
I wonder what its religious demographics would be (while by no means was the area solidly Catholic even before Soviet annexation, religious identities IIRC were not set in stone as much as other places then and now.) I doubt Prague would have been as insistent on "reuniting" all Ruthenians with the Russian Orthodox Church, though Greek Catholics would likely still be persecuted at least in the early years.

Another thought is historically the region was a stronghold of the Communist Party - which may have knock on effects later on especially in ITTL's 1989.
 
I wonder what its religious demographics would be (while by no means was the area solidly Catholic even before Soviet annexation, religious identities IIRC were not set in stone as much as other places then and now.) I doubt Prague would have been as insistent on "reuniting" all Ruthenians with the Russian Orthodox Church, though Greek Catholics would likely still be persecuted at least in the early years.

Another thought is historically the region was a stronghold of the Communist Party - which may have knock on effects later on especially in ITTL's 1989.
IIRC religious identity was a bit fluid but still insistent on having its own institutions separate from the Ukrainians. Now, what would be interesting there would be if the history of the formation of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church went differently so that it could function as a proper Eastern Orthodox Church, with some peculiarities of its own. That could absorb the PA-based Rusyn Orthodox diocese and form one form of commonality within Czechoslovakia, even if Subcarpathian Rus' had a majority of the believers. Most, OTOH, are Greek Catholics who would still be its own thing; how it would all work out I don't know.
 
IIRC religious identity was a bit fluid but still insistent on having its own institutions separate from the Ukrainians. Now, what would be interesting there would be if the history of the formation of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church went differently so that it could function as a proper Eastern Orthodox Church, with some peculiarities of its own. That could absorb the PA-based Rusyn Orthodox diocese and form one form of commonality within Czechoslovakia, even if Subcarpathian Rus' had a majority of the believers. Most, OTOH, are Greek Catholics who would still be its own thing; how it would all work out I don't know.
From my anecdotal knowledge in the Ruthenian GC Church there's actually a but of a quiet tension between Ruthenophiles and Ukrainophiles (see the Dzhublyk issue).

I do not think Hussitism is going to reconcile with the Orthodox. Not after those anathemas.
 
One interesting almost certain divergence is that Theodore Romzha isn't assassinated by the NKVD. The Czechoslovaks after 1948 will almost certainly imprison him, but he's to Gottwald and Co. likely no more a threat than most other Catholic bishops, as IIRC he supported autonomy within ČS.
 
I do not think Hussitism is going to reconcile with the Orthodox. Not after those anathemas.
AFAIK, the initial negotiations were more or less reasonable between the Hussites and the Serbian Orthodox Church. The main problem was Dr. Farský and his faction, who wanted to go much further than could be allowed within Western Christianity at that time, and Dr. Farský's overall attitude. Sideline them early on (even if it means they form a dissident breakaway), and it could be possible to make it work before the anathemas are in place.
 
I think the premise itself is a bit hard to accomplish, although far from impossible. Czechoslovak authorities' fears that the Soviets would annex Slovakia and Stalin's own views on national identity, and the strength of the local Communists - on top of the Red Army's presence - all made it harder for Prague to hold on it. (See: Seeking Peace in the Wake of War. Europe, 1943-1947)

But assuming this did not happen. The Czechoslovak Constitution of 1920 already - in theory - granted Ruthenia a great deal of autonomy, including its own legislature and a directly-elected Governor, as well as the right to its own symbols and the use of Russian/Rusyn/Ukrainian in all administrative and public functions. Now in practice, unit 1938 most of these provisions are not actually implented.

The Diet was treated like any other county/land assembly and governed as such by laws from Prague, and although the Governor did exist, most of its powers were taken over by the Prague-appointed Land Administrator.

The interesting thing here is the impact that an autonomous Ruthenia would have on the reividications of Slovaks, which were not really taken on board by the Communists after taking power in 1948 until 1968. Even if under Communist rule, Ruthenia remains an autonomous area, that will upset further the balance of power in Czechoslovakia.

In terms of local impact, Czechoslovak authorities during the inter-war period, greatly supported mass education and development of sanitary conditions, electricity and generally the modernisation of cities and the countryside. In general, I don't think it was a bad period for the region, which living conditions and education levels raising fast. HOWEVER, Czechoslovak authorities sent a lot of Czech-speaking civil servants to run the region.

While it was always the understanding of Ruthenian elites that as there were not enough university-educated Ruthenians to run the region, by the late 30s, Czechs still continued to run the region despite some timid efforts to recruit more locals. Uzhorod could easily end up as a Czech-speaking island in Ruthenia.

In religious terms, yes, Czechoslovak authorities favoured the Eastern Orthodox Church over the Greek Catholic Church, as it was of the belief - not wholly wrong - that a great deal of the Greek Catholic priesthood was pro-Hungarian. My understanding (but don't quote me on this) it's that by the late 30s, postures had relaxed as new priests were running the Greek Catholic Church, which adopted a far more neutral note on the state issue.

Identity-wise, that's the fun part. When you exclude the Communists and the Czechoslovak parties (only the Agrarians would have mattered) the political issue of the time was Ukrainophilia versus Russophilia. Czechoslovak authorities first favoured the latter, then 'Rusyn-philia' (to little success).

The division between these two camps ran deep within most aspects of the region. Different grammar books, different schools, different reference authors, different threates, etc. Almost churches too, as the Greek Catholic Church was very split between the different factions. The Eastern Orthodox one was not, it was Russophilic. In 1938, there was a referendum on which grammar book to use in schools, a Russian-based one or a Ukrainian-based one. The former won, but not convincingly enough to put an end to the divisions. They will remain there.

In fact, in a non-Soviet Ruthenia, these issues will remain at the forefront of regional politics. During the brief democratic period of the Third Czechoslovak Republic (1945-48), I am curious as to what kind of parties may appear. No doubt a Communist Party of Ruthenia would exist, apart from either the KSČ or the KSS, but the question is what other party. With the Agrarians banned under the Kosič programme, and the other parties (ČSDSD, ČSNS, ČSL) barely existing in the region, I would not be surprised if a bunch of former agrarian voters end up voting Communist. The remaining ones, I suppose might vote ČSNS if better off and more urban.

It's likely at least one party, à la DSS, would be allowed to be formed to represent the right-wing of society, but I would expect said party to be fairly divided by the same Russophilic vs Ukrainophilic divide that has endured for the first half of the 20th century.
 
Almost churches too, as the Greek Catholic Church was very split between the different factions. The Eastern Orthodox one was not, it was Russophilic.
This is still the case today, except Russophilia has been replaced by Rutentsvo in the Ukrainian context. IIRC which language a RGCC service is in (Ukrainian or Church Slavonic) is somewhat controversial, though not as much as it was two decades ago.

There is occasionally controversy when a Ruthenist clergyman tries to use Church Slavonic at Dzhublyk (which is a shrine in an intensely Ukrainophile part of Zakarpattia).
 
Back
Top