The Rusyns live in Europe on the border between East and West. This geographical fact has shaped their history and continues to influence their existence. The Rusyns are East Slavs. Russian historians often identify them as "Russians," and Ukrainians often identify them as "Ukrainians." Some historians identify the Rusyns as a unique people.1

A border also divided the Rusyns. Before the division of Poland in 1772, the Galician Rusyns lived in Poland and the Subcarpathian Rusyns lived in northeastern Hungary. The Rusyns in Subcarpathia were separated geographically from their kin in Galicia by the Carpathian mountain range. They were also separated by cultural influences. The Rusyns south of the Carpathians are influenced by Hungarian and Slovak culture. North of the Carpathians the Rusyns were influenced by Polish and Ukrainian culture.

The "border" nature of the Rusyns' culture is most noticeable in their church. Their church has become the symbol of their existence. They were "Greek Catholics." The "Greek" does not stand for "Greek" as a nationality, it stands for "Greek Orthodox Christianity" or, more appropriately, "Eastern Orthodox Christianity." The "Catholic" in the term does stand for "Catholic," specifically the "Catholic" church with its headquarters in Rome.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries these Rusyns were converted from Orthodoxy to Catholicism. But most Rusyns were illiterate peasants, and they were attached to the traditional practices of their faith. They did not wish to adopt the Latin rite. Compromises were worked out at the Union of Brest in 1595 and the Union of Uzhhorod in 1646. These compromises allowed the Rusyns to continue their traditional religious practices, but their bishops owed their allegiance to the Catholic pope. 2

This "practical" accommodation in religious practices merely reflected a shift in the political border in Eastern Europe. Prior to the sixteenth century these Rusyns had been oriented toward the East. Since the seventeenth century, the Rusyns in Hungary and Poland lived in the "Latin" West. In 1772, Austria annexed Galicia. Since then, the Rusyns, both Galicians and Subcarpathians, lived in the Austro-Hungarian empire.3

The disposition of these Rusyn areas then became "the Rusyn question." In examining the cultural options of the Rusyns in Eastern Europe and in the United States, this study will focus on the Russian interests in the Rusyn Question. In so doing it is important not to overlook the Hungarian and Ukrainian perspectives in this "quest for the Rusyn soul." All parties involved seemed to be anticipating the Wilsonian principle of self-determination. They operated as if the cultural orientation of the Rusyn population would some day determine whether the Rusyn areas would be annexed to Russia or be directed toward some other cultural objective.

Present day scholars generally study the Rusyns in Galicia and the Rusyns in Subcarpathia separately. It is true that both groups, while living in the same empire, did not share a common existence. But there have been several times in the last 200 years when the Rusyns themselves thought they had a common heritage and made some effort to work together to establish a single Rusyn culture. One of those instances occurred after the death of Andrei Bachyns'kyi, the Greek Catholic Bishop of Presov (in Subcarpathia). The Greek Catholic Metropolitanate of Galicia was reestablished in Peremysl about the time Bachyns'kyi died in 1809. Bachyns'kyi and others had recognized the common heritage of the Greek Catholic Rusyns and had worked tirelessly to join Galician and Subcarpathian Rusyns into a single metropolia. It would have been reasonable to place the Subcarpathian diocese under the metropolia of Peremysl. However, Hungarian exclusivity prevented such ecclesiastical foundation for ethnic unity.4

The above incident occurred before the period covered by this study. Within the scope of this study there were two occasions when the Rusyns from both sides of the Carpathians investigated the possibility of establishing a working relationship. Chapter I briefly surveys cross-Carpathian Rusyn communication in the period after 1848 when national identity became such a powerful force. The second occasion occurred among the Rusyn immigrants to North America. Rusyns from both sides of the Carpathians emigrated to the United States and many of them settled in the same communities. In those communities early missionaries such as Father John Voliansky from Galicia and Father Alexis Toth from Subcarpathia established parishes that had members from both sides of the Carpathians.5

This study does not focus on the common interests of the two Rusyn groups; in fact, it focuses on their differences. In spite of early attempts at cooperation, the differences prevailed. Many of the problems faced by these Rusyns were problems that were shared by both groups of Rusyns, but the resolutions of these problems differed. When research focuses exclusively on the Galicians or exclusively on the Subcarpathians, the researcher often underemphasizes the commonality of the problems and generally is critical of the "other" Rusyns for not joining to solve the problem "their way."

Some Rusyns, especially those from Subcarpathia, suspected they were Rusyns with no grander identity, but many others suggested the Rusyns harbored a "greater" heritage. There were many players seeking the "Rusyn soul." They included Russian Pan-Slavists who advocated a Russian identity, and the Russian Orthodox church, which reminded the Rusyns of their sixteenth-century Orthodox heritage. They included the Ukrainians who suggested that Rusyns were Ukrainians. The Ukrainians were not so concerned if the Rusyns were Greek Catholic or Orthodox. (The Ukrainian Orthodox church was founded after the period under discussion.) The Ukrainian identification was more readily acceptable in Galicia than Subcarparthia.6

The Hungarians were also determined to win the soul of the Subcarpathian Rusyns. The Hungarians had no interest in the Galicians; in fact, they had little interest in Rusyns as Rusyns. They insisted that all citizens of Hungary be Magyars (Hungarians) and therefore the Rusyns should speak Magyar.7 Even when the Subcarpathian Rusyns migrated to the United States, the Hungarian government wished them to be identified as Magyars. Within Hungary the Rusyns shared territory with fellow Slavs identified as Slovaks. The Slovaks identified the Rusyns as "Greek Catholic Slovaks" but made little attempt to change them. Especially in the United States, the Slovaks often acted as helpful brothers to the Rusyns.8

The Catholic church had an interest in the Rusyns from both sides of the Carpathians. The Roman hierarchy was determined that no Catholics—Greek or Latin—should be lost to the church. In the new world such an exodus seemed likely if the Rusyns were not allowed to practice their traditions. There the American Catholic church was determined that only the Latin rite should be transplanted to the United States.9

These contestants in the quest for the Rusyns' soul were activists whose programs created an environment of international intrigue. The significance of these events was heightened because Europe was dividing into armed camps. These contestants for the Rusyn soul were also divided between those two alliances led by Russia on one side and the Habsburg Empire on the other. All these events took place in the long shadow being cast by events leading to the First World War. Thus the Rusyn soul was sought by two empires that wished to control the border occupied by those Rusyns.10

The quest for the allegiance of the Rusyns was a reasonable one. The ethnic or national identity of these people was in doubt even by the Rusyns themselves. They could have been a separate nationality or they could have been Polish, Hungarian, Russian, or Ukrainian.

For several decades prior to the outbreak of the First World War, Russian Slavonic Benevolent Societies, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox church, and the Russian government attempted to demonstrate that these Rusyns were ethnic Russians. These Russian institutions also sought to convert the Rusyns to Orthodoxy and convince them they were members of the Great Russian family.11

This Russian cultural mission concentrated its activities in Galicia, but extended them to Subcarpathia and to the Rusyn immigrants in the United States. Russian activities among citizens of the Austro-Hungarian Empire naturally caused concern among the leadership in that empire. It also became apparent that Russia wished to annex the Rusyn territories, while Austria and Hungary wished to hold on to them.

Officially and privately, the Russians tried to win the sympathy and support of the East European Slavs (not just the Rusyns) for the Russian cause in the competition with the Habsburg Empire prior to the First World War. In some cases, especially among the Rusyns in eastern Galicia and the Carpathian Mountain region, the Russians went so far as to try to convince the Slavic population that it was Russian with a Russian cultural heritage, and that these Slavs should strive for "reunification" with their motherland.12

Between 1880 and the outbreak of the First World War, a large number of these Rusyns immigrated to the United States. The American immigration authorities, however, often did not recognize them as a nationality so these Rusyns were often identified as Poles (since many were from Galicia, which had a large Polish population when it was under Austria), or Hungarians (since many were from Subcarpathia, which was under Hungary), or Austrians (because the entire area from which they came was within the Austrian Empire), or Russians (because the language they spoke was often identified as Russian). Very few were ever identified as Ukrainian, but most of the area from which they came is now a part of Ukraine and the people are now generally identified as Ukrainian. Probably three hundred thousand to four hundred thousand Rusyns immigrated to the United States before 1914.13

By 1890, both Russia and Austria recognized the strategic importance of the Rusyns to the future interests of their respective empires. The Austrian government was interested in the solution to the Rusyn question because a pro-Russian solution would gravely threaten the integrity of Austrian Imperial territory. As a result, the Austrian government supported the Ukrainian movement as the most effective way to reverse the Russification trend among the Rusyns.

Russia responded by initiating an intensive cultural drive in both Europe and America to encourage Rusyns to become Russians. Their chief instrument for this cultural drive was the Russian Orthodox church.

The Austro-Hungarian Empire tried to counter the Russian effort in a number of ways. In Galicia the Austrian government made sporadic efforts to improve the lot of the Rusyns in relation to the Poles who controlled the government in Galicia. The Austrians also lent encouragement to the developing Ukrainian movement in Galicia. The Ukrainian movement was in competition with the Russian cultural effort and was thus a useful tool in Austria's opposition to "Russian cultural imperialism.'"14

In Subcarpathia, however, the Hungarians determined the strategy, and their approach was to Magyarize the Rusyn population by eliminating Rusyn institutions such as schools. Their method also called for Magyar control of the hierarchy of the Greek Catholic church, which represented the Rusyn people. When this approach was extended to the immigrants in America, it was not as easily executed. Magyar efforts, directed by the Hungarian prime minister in Budapest, resulted in intrigues designed to frustrate the growing Rusyn national identification among the immigrants in America.15

The Greek Catholic church maintained a central position in the lives of the Rusyn people. The Greek Catholic church is essentially a church of the Rusyn people. Its authority is based on Ullia agreements between the formerly Orthodox church leaders of the Rusyn people and the Roman Catholic church. The first agreement, which placed the Galician Rusyns in communion with Rome, was signed at Brest in 1596. The Rusyns in northern Hungary came under Roman Catholic authority by an oral agreement at Uzhhorod in 1646 that was later confirmed by written agreements in 1664 and 1713. These agreements allowed the Rusyns to maintain their Eastern church traditions, which included worship services with Church Slavonic as the liturgical language. The parish priests could continue to be married, and the priests could continue to administer the sacrament of confirmation at baptism. These were traditions that obviously differed from those of the Roman church where the liturgical language was Latin, the priests were celibate, and the bishop, not the priest, administered the sacrament of confirmation.16

Throughout the centuries that followed, the Greek Catholic church remained uniquely the church of the Rusyn people. This church received some legal protection and some ecclesiastical protection. As a result the church became the bulwark against assimilation of the Rusyns by the Roman Catholic majorities in both Galicia and Hungary. These legal and ecclesiastical rights were greatly strengthened under Maria Theresa and Joseph II who, in theory, made the Greek Catholic church coequal to the Roman Catholic church.17

As long as the Austrian government had control over the Rusyn provinces, the Rusyns had some chance of maintaining their identity as a separate nationality. However, in the years following the revolutions of 1848, Galicia received a Polish governor and in 1867 Hungary received the power to govern itself. From then on governmental policies, especially in Hungary, were often directed at absorbing the Rusyn peoples into the majority population.18

Interest in the cultural and political destiny of the Rusyns in Galicia and Subcarpathia motivated the quest for the Rusyn soul. Between 1848, and the First World War, 1914, this interest expressed itself in a variety of proposals. The Polish population in Galicia wished to absorb the Rusyn population. The Hungarians in Hungary also wished to Magyarize the Rusyn population in northern Hungary. The Russian government, the Russian Orthodox church, and numerous Slavic societies planned to absorb the Rusyns into the mainstream of Great Russian culture in preparation for future annexation. The Rusyns themselves, especially for a while after 1848, wished to form a unified Rusyn state with autonomy directly under the Austrian monarch. This Rusyn movement, however, remained divided by the Carpathian mountains, which divided Austrian Galicia from Hungarian Subcarpathia. In Galicia the Rusyns gradually split into a pro-Russian movement and a pro-Ukrainian movement with the pro-Ukrainian movement becoming a popular majority movement. The Ukrainians wished to unite the Rusyn people with the people of eastern Ukraine, which was under Russian control at that time.19

While the first attempts to unite the Rusyns with Russian culture and Orthodoxy occurred in Galicia, the most successful endeavor occurred in the United States. The first conversion in the new world took place in Minneapolis at the St. Mary's Greek Catholic Church under the direction of the Subcarpathian priest, Father Alexis G. Toth.20 The conversion of St. Mary's Greek Orthodox Catholic Church to Russian Orthodoxy began a movement that led to the conversion of over one-third of the Rusyn immigrants.

In view of this cultural conflict centering on the Rusyns, it may be well to inquire: "Who were the Rusyns?" They were not Poles, Hungarians, or Russians. They would have had to change in some way to become one of those three options: 1) to become Poles (in Galicia), they would have had to adopt the Polish language and become Roman Catholic. 2) To become Magyars (in Subcarpathia), they would have had to adopt the Magyar language. 3) To become Russians (in either Galicia or Subcarpathia), it was not quite so clear. They should become Orthodox, but not necessarily. They should adopt Muscovite Russian as their literary language since their spoken language was a "vulgar dialect" of Great Russian.

To become Ukrainian, however, required no change at all. They could be Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic, or Orthodox. Their language was acceptable as it was spoken: dialectical differences were no problem and the written literary language was only a standardized version of the spoken language. Indeed Ukrainians have consistently identified Rusyns as Ukrainians. However, during the period under discussion, some Galicians and most Subcarpathian Rusyns did not wish to be so identified. (The Rusyns in the Presov area of Subcarpathia could also have been Slovaks if they had so chosen.) So who were the Rusyns? They were Greek Catholic Slavs of peasant stock who lived in Galicia (and Bukovina) and Subcarpathia. That definition, while adequate for this study, is not comprehensive because there were communities of Rusyns elsewhere in Eastern Europe, and there were also some Slovaks, Magyars, Romanians, and Croatians who were Greek Catholics.

The Rusyn community in the United States took seriously President Wilson's concept of "self-determination" and consulted with the president, hoping to aid him in making a decision on the new boundaries in Eastern Europe at the close of the war. The policy of self-determination reinforced the judgment that it did make a difference who the Rusyns thought they were, not only in Eastern Europe but also in America. So it seems that Russian cultural policy had been founded on astute reasoning. However, by 1918, the Bolshevik Revolution had taken Russia out of the war, alienated her from the victorious Allies, and eliminated all chance that Russian interests would be favorably considered at the Paris Peace Conference. Perhaps the fact that the Bolshevik Revolution nullified a carefully executed plan of Russian cultural imperialism has led historians to overlook a very interesting and unique aspect of Russian foreign policy.

Return to Carpatho-Rusyn Knowledge Base Main Page

Purchase this book from the Carpatho-Rusyn Research Center