Politics of the past: the use and abuse of history - Socialists ...

It is extremely important to note, however, that since 1989 the most
important academic workshops of Slovak historiography generated
a process of self-revision. Slovak historians now consistently dismiss
earlier efforts of de-Magyarisation. They no longer point to the
attempts at Czech and Slovak unification, from the Přemysls and
Bohemians up to Masaryk, but rather to the Kingdom of Hungary as
the real, original context of Slovak national history.
Thousand years together
The theme of a thousand years of common history and the Hungarian
and Slovak myths surrounding it merits a short digression.
The Moravian and Slovak theory of continuity is linked to the Christian
traditions of Saints Cyril and Methodius. More recent folk and
official memory, as well as Slovak archaeology and historiography,
regard the Slavic population of the Carpathian Basin as the bearers
of Christianity. Slovak historiography regards the baptism of the
Slavs as conclusive proof of the cultural, political and economic superiority
of the Slavs over the Hungarians. Asserting the destructive
consequences of the Hungarian conquest, their arrival in the
Carpathian Basin in several waves during the 10 th century is to have
liquidated Slavic culture in Pannonia.
The most stubborn and most common Slovak historical stereotype
relating to the Hungarian state is the myth of a thousand years of
oppression. This theme can be traced back to the philological struggles
of the 18th and 19th centuries. In the book Mýty naše slovenské
(‘Our Slovak myths’, 2005), Andrej Findor contends that it can
be proven that ‘the myth of a thousand years of national oppression
was the product of the special historical circumstances and sharpened
national conflicts of the 19 th century. This kind of chiliastic approach
to history was consistent with the language struggles that
developed during the 18 th and 19 th centuries’.
For Hungarians, the myth of a community of brother peoples under
Hungarian leadership in the spirit of Saint Stephen conflicts with the
theme of ‘a thousand years of oppression’. While the leaders of the
Hungarian age of reform, the Hungarian Revolution and the Compromise
period – Wesselényi, Kölcsey, Kossuth, Deák, Eötvös and
the two Tiszas – basically aimed at reinforcing Hungarian positions
and the Hungarian nature of the country, the idea of a community
185 László Szarka