Ukrainian vs Ruthenian

[ByzCathCantor]

Personally to me it makes more sense to retain “Ruthenian” as a jurisdictional term per the original separation of that jurisdiction from Bishop +Soter rather than the even more ambiguous “Byzantine” as all Greek Catholics are essentially “Byzantine”.

Well I would certainly agree. In so naming ourselves, we certainly did not distinguish ourselves. The use of the term “Byzantine” is too ambiguous to be used in a proper name, unless all Churches of the Byzantine Rite chose to do so with some uniformly chosen qualifier to denote each individual Church’s unique character, heritage and leadership.

The fact remains that Rusyns are a people. In our respective Churches, both the similarities and the differences in our liturgical traditions, especially our chant traditions, bear witness to this in part. For example, Prostopinije didn’t evolve as a result of Ukrainians in a given region adapting Kievan and Galician chant uniquely. The influence of a distinct cultural identity is evident in this chant tradition. Yet these chant traditions are related, coming from the same root influences (Znamenny chant, etc.).

We as a people are surely related, yet different. Some have suggested that Rusyns are best classified as a sub-group of ethnic Ukrainians. That may well be true in modern terms, but that does support a distinction worthy of recognition, mutual respect and preservation.

I personally have great respect and admiration for our Ukrainian cousins, the UGCC and His Beatitude Sviatoslav. The Ruthenian Church could only pray for such leadership and example. I don’t press for acknowledgement of Rusyn identity out of blind pride or with any bias against Ukrainians or the UGCC - I simply prefer truthful acknowledgement of facts and circumstances. Nor am I trying to be overtly judgmental of the current state of relations between Rusyns in the Ukraine and the government’s position on these peoples. It is what it is, and it is not a new situation for the Rusyn peoples in their native lands. I do pray it can be resolved with mutual respect and Christian charity.

We have many who identify themselves as Ukrainian in our parish (and indeed throughout the Ruthenian Church in America), yet recognize their Rusyn heritage. Often they are more familiar with paraliturgical hymns and other chants and melodies that are in more common usage in Mukachevo than in Presov. One can hear these hymns and melodies both in Mukachevo and Kiev. As a cantor, I have made a point of learning these hymns and melodies, and have also studied Kievan and Galician chant more closely (I hope to have it mastered soon, so I feel more confident chanting along when visiting our local UGCC parish as a guest, or on the special occasions when we are fortunate to have our local UGCC priest serve the DL as a substitute for our own pastor).

We often do mix usage of hymnody and chant in our Church to reflect the full diversity of identified nationalities of many of our parishioners which, as you know, is largely dependent on the political situation in the greater region of sub-Carpathian Rus at the time they or their families immigrated to the U.S. It is also a characteristic of the composition of the faithful of the Ruthenian Church, especially in America. As you’ve said, nationally Poles, Slovaks, Czechs, Hungarians, Croatians, Serbians, etc.

One trait we all share in common - we’re stubborn. However, looking back, honest people would surely admit that Rusyns were better served under the leadership of +Bishop Soter than others that followed him, as appointed for the Rusyns at their own behest. They even later balked when a “Hungarian” was appointed as episcopal Shepherd. That your Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in America stayed largely intact and did not suffer the scale of losses of the Ruthenian Church through the Ea Semper and Cum Data Fuerit debates stands as proof. Some of my fellow Ruthenians might argue otherwise. I would not, as the truth points otherwise.

 

[Diak]

My own Austro-Hungarian Empire Hutsul ancestors would surely have considered themselves “Rusyny” when they came in the 19th century as there was no political Ukraine; some of my relatives also came from what is now within the Eparchy of Mukachevo.

Patriarch (Emeritus) +Lubomyr suggested the Eparchy of Mukachevo would be much stronger ecclesiastically as its own Metropolia within the patriarchal UGCC maintaining its own unique Rusyn character with its own chant tradition, Slavonic, etc. I think it is worth considering if this would bring greater mutual Greek Catholic strength, being a voting and participating member of a patriarchate with metropolitan status, giving greater Greek Catholic unity rather than Uzhorod/Mukachevo continue in this completely bizarre status of a single “eparchial Church sui iuris” that it has now, namely relying hand and foot on Rome for all canonical determinations, appointments to the episcopacy, etc. This makes it a divided “Uniate Church” needing Rome for essentially every higher-level canonical determination (which is certainly a fear of many Orthodox when the possibility of union is presented). I don’t ever see it being elevated to a sui iuris Metropolitan status since there is likely little chance of any suffragan eparchy being established by Rome. The Studites, Basilians and Redemptorists from L’viv and points eastward all have ongoing minstry in the Eparchy of Mukachevo and priests go back and forth all the time. Both BCCA and UGCC eparchies in the US have had priests from Mukachevo serving.

With regard to “prostopinje”, Galician and Carpatho-Rusyn plainchant are not unrelated and most definitely share similarities. When one looks at the Bulharsky and Znamenny melodies in the old Irmologia between the Galician and Carpatho-Rusyn variants many melodic similarities are present. A “Ruthenian” parish I attended in the more distant past often used Galician variants like the “Only Begotten Son”; in the UGCC Anthology recently printed there are some Carpatho-Rusyn variants of chant included that I use at times.

Is worldwide unity and Greek Catholic evangelism something we should be concerned about? How is that best served worldwide? By small microdivisions totally reliant upon Rome for their existence and appointing their bishops, or multi-continental patriarchates that can actually act as sui iuris Greek Catholic churches, with functional synods? +Lubomyr’s retirement was accepted in February, and a new Patriarch elected synodally in March. It took Rome a year and half to get around to a replacement for +Basil, and it was Rome who decided, and all bets were on +William from the beginning. Which one of these gives a more authentic Eastern witness to ecclesiology?

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Patriarch (Emeritus) +Lubomyr suggested the Eparchy of Mukachevo would be much stronger ecclesiastically as its own Metropolia within the patriarchal UGCC maintaining its own unique Rusyn character with its own chant tradition, Slavonic, etc. I think it is worth considering if this would bring greater mutual Greek Catholic strength, being a voting and participating member of a patriarchate with metropolitan status, giving greater Greek Catholic unity rather than Uzhorod/Mukachevo continue in this completely bizarre status of a single “eparchial Church sui iuris” that it has now, namely relying hand and foot on Rome for all canonical determinations, appointments to the episcopacy, etc.

Is worldwide unity and Greek Catholic evangelism something we should be concerned about? How is that best served worldwide? By small microdivisions totally reliant upon Rome for their existence and appointing their bishops, or multi-continental patriarchates that can actually act as sui iuris Greek Catholic churches, with functional synods? +Lubomyr’s retirement was accepted in February, and a new Patriarch elected synodally in March. It took Rome a year and half to get around to a replacement for +Basil, and it was Rome who decided, and all bets were on +William from the beginning. Which one of these gives a more authentic Eastern witness to ecclesiology?

There is great merit to what is suggested by His Beatitude Cardinal Lubomyr, so long as the particular character of the Rusyn patrimony and tradition is respected and maintained.

IMHO, especially with someone as dynamic as His Beatitude Sviatoslav at the helm, it could be a very happy marriage with many benefits for all.

The current condition and organization of the Ruthenian Church globally was necessitated in large part by the suppression of Mukachevo in the Communist era, without the pre-existence of strong, formal ecclesiastical ties to the other Rusyn churches. Of course, our reception in the U.S. didn’t help, as the Iron Curtain fell amid the most turbulent times, before the Exarchate was elevated to an Eparchy. Ideally, Mukachevo should have been our Kyiv-Galicia all along.

My sense is the UGCC in the U.S. and Canada maintained stronger ties to “the Old Country” through force of will and numbers, even throughout the years of the Soviet era. The immigrants were also more effective at avoiding the severe limitations placed on the Ruthenian Church in the U.S. Fair statements?

Now that the Cold War is over and borders have been resettled, so to speak, Rome has reorganized this already fractured Church according to current political and national boundaries. Several of these eparchies and exarchates were recently created from sub-divisions of Mukachevo. We thus have:

• the Eparchy of Mukachevo [1646]
• the Eparchy of Križevci [1777]
• the Archeparchy of Presov [1818] and the Eparchy of Toronto [1980]
• the Eparchy of Hajdúdorog [1912]
• the Metropolitan Archeparchy of Pittsburgh sui juris [1963]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Serbia and Montenegro [2003]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Prague [2006]

All of these Churches (sui juris or particular) essentially share the same patrimony and have Rusyn roots and influence, and were either formed from or connected to Mukachevo. Yet to the uninitiated it would appear from this list as if they are completely different, separate churches of Byzantine tradition. That said, the faithful from these jurisdictions could visit any one of the more metropolitan churches in any one of these jurisdictions and feel completely at home liturgically, but for perhaps a lack of familiarity with the vernacular (my Hungarian is improving, though). I have dozens of recently recorded Divine Liturgies and other services attesting to that, as well as my personal witness.

Short of all of these being reorganized under a Mukachevo-based hierarchical structure (which doesn’t even appear to be a consideration), I would advocate and agree that merging all under the UGCC Major Archiepiscopal [hopefully soon, true Patriarchial] structure would make sense, again so long as the character of these Churches and their unique traditions are respected and maintained. For me, being a member of a 5 million+ strong Byzantine Catholic Church (more appropriate usage of the more general term “Byzantine” in this scenario) would be preferable to being a member of a 600,000 member sui juris Church disconnected other than through kinship from the other Churches with which it shares a patrimony.

There were rumors of this at one point in the U.S. Do you have any insight?

 

[CDB1718]

I think it is worth considering if this would bring greater mutual Greek Catholic strength, being a voting and participating member of a patriarchate with metropolitan status, giving greater Greek Catholic unity rather than Uzhorod/Mukachevo continue in this completely bizarre status of a single “eparchial Church sui iuris” that it has now, namely relying hand and foot on Rome for all canonical determinations, appointments to the episcopacy, etc.

I updated our article. Did I word the last point incorrectly?

There are three Catholic Churches represented in Ukraine today:

• The Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church (UGCC) has more than 3317 communities, the majority of which function in western Ukraine.
• The Roman Catholic Church has more than 807 communities, most of which function in the central regions.
• The Ruthenian Catholic Church has more than 380 parishes in the far west of Ukraine in a territory that was historically Hungarian but is now Ukrainian.

 

[Kielbasi]

Question here, if anyone knows.

The Rusyns were apparently split between the Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires at the time that America had the largest immigration wave of Rusyn people.

Did those that came to America come from both empires equally, or did they predominately just come from one?

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Question here, if anyone knows.

The Rusyns were apparently split between the Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires at the time that America had the largest immigration wave of Rusyn people.

Did those that came to America come from both empires equally, or did they predominately just come from one?

If you take a peak at the first few posts on this thread, you will see maps indicating the homeland areas of the Rusyns, which spread across modern Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland and the Ukraine, with “pockets” in Romania, Croatia and Serbia.

As I understand it, the initial waves of immigrants came from the western areas (Hungary and the Czech Republic), then from Poland and Slovakia, and later from the Ukraine (west to east, basically). I remember seeing stats a long time ago and will try to dig them up.

Even in my current parish, you have Rusyns who would identify themselves as Ukrainian, Slovakian, Czech, Polish and Hungarian - it would depend on which country controlled the territory in which they lived when their family decided to emigrate.

My grandmother used to sing a folk song in Rusyn on this theme - “one week Hungarian, next week Ukrainian” - something like that … (I really wish I could remember it).

 

[Vico]

… We thus have:

• the Eparchy of Mukachevo [1646]
• the Eparchy of Križevci [1777]
• the Archeparchy of Presov [1818] and the Eparchy of Toronto [1980]
• the Eparchy of Hajdúdorog [1912]
• the Metropolitan Archeparchy of Pittsburgh sui juris [1963]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Serbia and Montenegro [2003]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Prague [2006]

…

And others too (combined), now of several sui juris churches:

• the Eparchy of Mukachevo - Hungary [1646]
• the Eparchy of Križevci (Gornji Tkalec) - Holy Roman Empire [1777]
• the Eparchy of Presov - Hungary [1818] - Archeparchy [2008]
• the Eparchy of Hajdúdorog - Hungary [1912]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Miskolc - Hungary [1924]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of USA Oriental Rite [1924] - later Archeparchy and 3 Eparchies
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Sofia - Bulgaria [1926]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Greece [1932]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Czech Republic [1996]
• the Eparchy of Toronto [1980]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Kosice - Slovakia [1997] - Eparchy [2008]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Macedonia [2001] - [est. 1918, and back to 1883]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Serbia and Montenegro [2003]
• the Eparchy of Brataslava - Slovakia [2008]
• the Eparchy of Lungro degli Italo-Albanesi [1919]
• the Territorial Abbacy of Santa Maria di Grottaferrata [1937]
• the Apostolic Administration of S. Albania [1939]
• the Eparchy of Piana degli Albanesi [1941]

 

[ByzCathCantor]

And others too (combined), now of several sui juris churches:

• the Eparchy of Mukachevo - Hungary [1646]
• the Eparchy of Križevci (Gornji Tkalec) - Holy Roman Empire [1777]
• the Eparchy of Presov - Hungary [1818] - Archeparchy [2008]
• the Eparchy of Hajdúdorog - Hungary [1912]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Miskolc - Hungary [1924]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of USA Oriental Rite [1924] - later Archeparchy and 3 Eparchies
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Sofia - Bulgaria [1926]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Greece [1932]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Czech Republic [1996]
• the Eparchy of Toronto [1980]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Kosice - Slovakia [1997] - Eparchy [2008]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Macedonia [2001] - [est. 1918, and back to 1883]
• the Apostolic Exarchate of Serbia and Montenegro [2003]
• the Eparchy of Brataslava - Slovakia [2008]
• the Eparchy of Lungro degli Italo-Albanesi [1919]
• the Territorial Abbacy of Santa Maria di Grottaferrata [1937]
• the Apostolic Administration of S. Albania [1939]
• the Eparchy of Piana degli Albanesi [1941]

Thanks for this list Vico. I tried to restrict mine to (i) currently active (excluding suffragen Eparchies) and (ii) only those of the so-called Byzantine-Slavonic tradition. There was some “shorthand” in my list.

That said, what I was attempting to do and suggest is that these jurisdictions could be grouped together similarly to constitute a mini-UGCC, if you will, a united particular sui juris Church, with Mukachevo as the seat.

Does my list make sense to you in that context? Your edits and enhancements are always welcome!

 

[Vico]

Thanks for this list Vico. I tried to restrict mine to (i) currently active (excluding suffragen Eparchies) and (ii) only those of the so-called Byzantine-Slavonic tradition. There was some “shorthand” in my list.

That said, what I was attempting to do and suggest is that these jurisdictions could be grouped together similarly to constitute a mini-UGCC, if you will, a united particular sui juris Church, with Mukachevo as the seat.

Does my list make sense to you in that context? Your edits and enhancements are always welcome!

Yes, it makes a lot of sense. I’ve been noticing that the Church has been going in the other direction lately, splitting up an eparchy for to incorporate the faithful in a Church sui iuris, such as Presov being split into a few (from GCatholic):

• 1818.09.22: Established as Diocese of Prešov / Eperies / Eperjes / Prjašev / Prešovien(sis) (Latin) (from Diocese of Mukacheve)
• 1996.01.18: Lost territory to establish Apostolic Exarchate of Czech Republic
• 1997.01.27: Lost territory to establish Apostolic Exarchate of Košice
• 2008.01.30: Promoted as Metropolitan Archdiocese of Prešov / Eperies / Eperjes / Prjašev / Prešovien(sis) (Latin) (lost territory to establish Diocese of Bratislava

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Yes, it makes a lot of sense. I’ve been noticing that the Church has been going in the other direction lately, splitting up an eparchy for to incorporate the faithful in a Church sui iuris, such as Presov being split into a few …

Yes, that is correct. There seems to be a reorganization of sorts along national lines.

 

[Marhitych]

Perhaps it will be indepent again.

http://media.economist.com/images/20090314/CEU916.gif

The country you are referring to is Carpatho-Ukraine, a state that existed around one day, on March 15, 1939 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpatho-Ukraine. Notice the flag and the anthem . Also, I don’t think that map is right, because there were two Ukraines at that time, not just one as it shows.

Again, this is largely to do with history. Around the same time, two other Ukrainian republics also declared independence - the Western Ukrainian Peoples Republic (covering… western Ukraine ), and simply “Ukraine” (covering central and eastern Ukraine).

Interestingly, all three of these Ukrainian republics (Carpatho-Ukraine or Subcarpathian Rus, the Western Ukrainian Peoples Republic, and Ukraine) declared independence from three seperate countries, which shows why the matter is so complicated .

 

[Marhitych]

Is there really a difference or are they the same culture? Just trying to understand the Ethnic parts to these two Eastern Catholic churches. Thanks

I’m a Ruthenian, so I think I could help .

Essentially, it’s largely to do with politics. Ruthenian is the old term that was used to describe Ukrainians, and when you look for old documents, beyond the 19th century, regarding Ukrainians or Ukraine, they were always called “Rusyn/Ruthenian”.

In fact, the term “Ukrainian” only began being used recently, some in Ukraine want even change the name of Ukraine to “Rus”, but very few . In Ukraine itself, being Ruthenian is kind of like saying you are Bavarian in Germany, for example, it’s kind of a “type” of Ukrainian.

 

[Marhitych]

This is very edifying to me, as a daughter of immigrant parents. Here in the US, I noticed that many of our Ukrainian friends would also go to the Byzantine Catholic churches. My mother said they were “Lemkos”, from the Carpathians. So, are Lemkos a kind of, or another name for, Rusyns?

Yes, for Ukrainians, especially immigrants, going to a Lemko Church would kind of be like a German immigrant going to a Bavarian Church .

 

[Marhitych]

I updated our article. Did I word the last point incorrectly?

Not quite . I don’t know if it’s correct to say the territory is historically Hungarian, because originally, the territory was part of Kievian Rus before Hungary as a state existed (as we know it today). Prior to that, it was controlled by Bulgarians, Turkic peoples, etc etc.

As for the Ruthenian Catholic Church in Ukraine, than as of now, most members of it want to unite with the Ukrainian Catholic Church, and recently a movement was started in Zakarpattia (the region it’s found in) called “щоб усі були одно” or “may all be one”, aimed at uniting the Churces.

The leaders of the Ruthenian Catholic Church are somewhat divided, some are for unification, some don’t want to make any sudden moves. As far as I know, if the Ukrainian Catholic Church gets Patriarchate status, it will almost guarantee unification, but that most likely won’t be for at least a decade.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Yes, for Ukrainians, especially immigrants, going to a Lemko Church would kind of be like a German immigrant going to a Bavarian Church .

Interesting analogy …

 

[ByzCathCantor]

As for the Ruthenian Catholic Church in Ukraine, than as of now, most members of it want to unite with the Ukrainian Catholic Church, and recently a movement was started in Zakarpattia (the region it’s found in) called “щоб усі були одно” or “may all be one”, aimed at uniting the Churces.

The leaders of the Ruthenian Catholic Church are somewhat divided, some are for unification, some don’t want to make any sudden moves. As far as I know, if the Ukrainian Catholic Church gets Patriarchate status, it will almost guarantee unification, but that most likely won’t be for at least a decade.

What is the source of this information? Mukachevo is the Mother Church of Ruthenian Catholics. What happens to the Churches in the diaspora if the Mother Church (only recently restored) is simply absorbed into the UGCC?

 

[ByzCathCantor]

In Ukraine itself, being Ruthenian is kind of like saying you are Bavarian in Germany, for example, it’s kind of a “type” of Ukrainian.

Only difference is that Rusyns are a true ethic group. The Ukrainian government is unique among its neighbors, many of whom also have Rusyn populations, in that it does not recognize the Rusyns as an ethnic minority.

So, in the Ukraine, there is no Bavaria …

 

[Marhitych]

What is the source of this information? Mukachevo is the Mother Church of Ruthenian Catholics. What happens to the Churches in the diaspora if the Mother Church (only recently restored) is simply absorbed into the UGCC?

Personally, I don’t think Churches should be divided secularly. I am against this practice of having “cultural” Churches, Catholics are one I think there should be one, “eastern Catholic Church”, which has Churches in different countries but who are not specific.

As such, my personal view is that if it united with the UGCC, the UGCC would ultimately unite with other eastern Catholic Churches and make one official eastern Catholic Church, perhaps just called “Byzantine Catholic Church”, whose leaders would meet together, along with the Pope.

However, I don’t think many have my view, yet. As such, what would likely happen is something similar to the Russian Orthodox Church now, with it all being relatively united (i.e. Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and the abroad one), but meetings discussing possible difference of opinions, etc.

As for my sources, well this shows the head of the Mukachevo church recently at some important events with the UGCC 89.162.227.180/News/91367-Hlava-hreko-katolykiv-Zakarpattia-vziav-uchast-u-znakovykh-podiiakh-UHKTS-FOTO. Obviously it means nothing literally but it shows they are getting a lot closer. Here the head of the Mukachevo church is saying there is no such thing as a Ruthenian church, only a Mukachevo church goloskarpat.info/zakarpattya/item/8239-niyakoyi-rusynskoyi-mytropoliyi-ne-isnue-vladyka-milan.

As for what I said about them uniting, or as they call it “re-uniting”, here is an example:
zakarpattya.net.ua/Gromada/89731-Hreko-katolyky-Rakhova-prahnut-iednosti-z-UHKTS

It is a letter from Greek-Catholics in Rakhove (near Mukachevo) asking the head of the Mukachevo church to do what he can to unite with the UGCC, it talks about different things, how some people left Greek-Catholicism and went to the Orthodox Church because they’re divided, etc. In general it is an example of what I was mentioning, that for them, they just say “Greek Catholic”, they might go to a Mukachevo-led Church, or a UGCC-led Church.

Here is some information on recent (Feb. 2012) on trying to unite the two Churches zakarpattya.net.ua/Gromada/89723-ShCHOB-USI-BULY-ODNO, just says “we cannot force it but we ask leaders of UGCC and Mukachevo to understand we are one, etc”.

 

[Marhitych]

Only difference is that Rusyns are a true ethic group. The Ukrainian government is unique among its neighbors, many of whom also have Rusyn populations, in that it does not recognize the Rusyns as an ethnic minority.

So, in the Ukraine, there is no Bavaria …

I disagree, as again, I am Rusyn/Ruthenian, it’s like saying Lemko, for example, or like saying Bavarian, Sicilian, etc. There is often a disconnect between Rusyns who left Ukraine a long time ago and recent emmigres or people still there, it would be like people from Prussia who left 300 years ago and kept their culture being compared to ethnic Germans who left Germany recently.

The neighbours of Ukraine who do recognize Rusyns (which is not all of them) did not always. Census’ from 30 or 40 years ago didn’t list two seperate ethnicities, only one, which was always much bigger (i.e. it either would say Rusyns, 150 000 total or Ukrainians, 150 000 total, where as now they list both with much less). It would also be like Ukrainians calling themselves malorosy today, another term that was used to describe them, and saying malorusian is a seperate ethnicity.

And again, it’s very important to know the history of it all and especially understand that Ukrainians were, on numerous occassions in history, referred to as a people as “Rusyns”, the King would be called the Rusyn king, as opposed to the Russian or white-Russian king, etc. In fact it was very rare for Ukrainians to be called “Ukrainians”.

 

[Marhitych]

(from wikipedia to illustrate what I am saying)…

"… The Slovak national militia Hlinka Guard participated in these clashes. The ineffectiveness of the Prague government in protecting their interests stirred Slovak and Ruthene nationalism further. On November 8, 1938, the Slovak National Unity Party got 97.5% of the Slovak votes, and a one-party state was instituted. Slovak autonomy was formalised by the Prague parliament on November 19, and to symbolise this new Slovak assertiveness, the country’s name was then altered to Czecho-Slovakia. Ruthenia, or Carpatho-Ukraine, was also given autonomy.

Slovak and Ruthene nationalism grew more intense, and on March 10, there were demonstrations by the Hlinka Guard and Volksdeutsche, demanding their independence from Czecho-Slovakia.

In the evening of March 13, Jozef Tiso (the Slovak leader) and Durcanský met German leader Adolf Hitler, Joachim von Ribbentrop and Generals Walther von Brauchitsch and Wilhelm Keitel in Berlin. Hitler made it absolutely clear that either Slovakia declared independence immediately and associated itself with the Reich, or he would let the Hungarians, who were reported by Ribbentrop to be massing on the border, take the country over. In fact, encouraged by the Germans, the Hungarians were largely massing on the adjacent Ruthene border.

During the afternoon and night of March 14, the Slovak people proclaimed their independence from Czecho-Slovakia, and at 5:00 a.m. on March 15, 1939, Hitler declared that the unrest in Czecho-Slovakia was a threat to the German security, and sent his troops into Bohemia and Moravia, meeting virtually no resistance.

Following the Slovak proclamation of independence on March 14 and the Nazis’ seizure of Czech lands on March 15, Carpatho-Ruthenia declared its independence as the Republic of Carpatho-Ukraine, with the Reverend Avgustyn Voloshyn (Авґустин Волошин) as head of state.

“The First Constitutional Law of Carpatho-Ukraine” of March 15, 1939 defined the new status of the country as follows:

Carpatho-Ukraine is an independent state.
The name of the state is: Carpatho-Ukraine.
Carpatho-Ukraine is a republic, headed by a president elected by the Sojm of Carpatho-Ukraine.
**The state language of Carpatho-Ukraine is the Ukrainian language**.
**The colors of the national flag of the Carpatho-Ukraine are blue and yellow, blue on top and yellow on the bottom**.
The state emblem of Carpatho-Ukraine is as follows: a bear on a red field on the sinister side, four blue and three yellow stripes on the dexter side, as well as the trident of Saint Volodymyr the Great.
**The national anthem of Carpatho-Ukraine is "Sche ne vmerla Ukraina" ("Ukraine has not perished").**
This act comes valid immediately after its promulgation."