Eastern Slovakia

Where can I learn more about the history and culture this place? My family comes from Levoča, Spišska Nová Ves, and Snina in Eastern Slovakia. I want to learn more about this place and it’s interactions with its neighbors. From what I read, it seems eastern Slovakia tends to be a bit different from the rest of Slovakia and is more similar to Poles and Rusyns than to Czechs. Is this true, and if so why? Any help and info is appreciated.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I do not really see why Eastern Slovakia should be more connected with Czechs than Poles. Especially if you are talking about Spisz, an area of which some parts were under Polish rule from 1412ish up to just before the partitions (late 18th century).

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I’ve seen this before. Ive read that the eastern Slovak dialect has more Polish and Rusyn features, but that it’s still closest to Czech, making me think they’re still more adjacent to Czechs linguistically/culturally.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Also, when you look at the religions, you may see that Poles and Slovakians are Roman Catholic while Czechs are... Czechs. Rusyns are either Orthodox or Greek Catholic, I can't remember.
        But yes, perhaps I live too close to the border to see the difference.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        But I admit that I can barely see and hear the difference between Czech and Slovakian.
        Yes, Polish and Slovakian highlanders are quite similar, but Poles from Kashubia and Poles from the mountains are perhaps less alike than the previous example.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/A1iNqyX.png

      Where can I learn more about the history and culture this place? My family comes from Levoča, Spišska Nová Ves, and Snina in Eastern Slovakia. I want to learn more about this place and it’s interactions with its neighbors. From what I read, it seems eastern Slovakia tends to be a bit different from the rest of Slovakia and is more similar to Poles and Rusyns than to Czechs. Is this true, and if so why? Any help and info is appreciated.

      Yes. As I've said, Spiska Nowa Wieś was Polish between 1412, when it was bought from Hungary for the money the Teutonic Order had to pay after losing at Grunwald, and 1769, when Austria de facto annexed it.
      When it comes to the Rusyns, East Slovakia is basically right next to, if not including, their fatherland. See ,,Carpathian Ruthenia".
      Those lands are right next to the Tatra mountains, the highes range of Carpathians and are the place where Górale live. Those on the Polish side were even considered Aryan by the 3rd Reich. See ,,Goralenvolk".
      Of course, I slightly Polonized the entire post, but since my house is literally on the map, I don't see that much of a problem.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Also, when you look at the religions, you may see that Poles and Slovakians are Roman Catholic while Czechs are... Czechs. Rusyns are either Orthodox or Greek Catholic, I can't remember.
        But yes, perhaps I live too close to the border to see the difference.

        But I admit that I can barely see and hear the difference between Czech and Slovakian.
        Yes, Polish and Slovakian highlanders are quite similar, but Poles from Kashubia and Poles from the mountains are perhaps less alike than the previous example.

        So, you, as someone who lives there, would say that southern Poles and eastern Slovaks are really similar in most ways except for language? Interesting. Is there anything you can tell me about Poles moving to Slovakia or Slovaks moving to southern Poland, historically?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          It wasn't incommon to do so. Keep in mind that in the 19th century it was the same country (Austria), and, since it was in the mountains, the state's authority wasn't very respected. See ,,Janosik", a folk hero on both sides of the Tatras.
          It was also the Polish Górale who defended themselves from Swedes in the Deluge and later staged several uprisings. Naturally, it meant that the local population had the ability of leaving their villages without their masters' permission (the opposite was a thing in Poland) and mixing with their neighbours.
          It also should be noted that every year, Polish Górals make a pilgrimage to Lewocza, which has something to do with John Paul II, although there is also a closer site in Ludźmierz (Poland).
          The differences are there, but mainly in language. For example, a very small delegation of Górals from Spisz and Orawa went to Versailles and met Wilson in order to negotiate joining Poland. Google "Ferdynand Machay".
          I can also think of architecture. Compare the roofs in Chochołów and Głodówka and you'll see a small slope on the Slovakian ones.
          Honestly, the linguistic difference probably wouldn't be that sharp it it weren't for standardization of national languages.
          And the entire point of that division being there is geography and especially ridges. Compare the local drainage basins to borders to better see what I mean.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            And by "language" I mean, by extension, ethnic identity.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It wasn't incommon to do so. Keep in mind that in the 19th century it was the same country (Austria), and, since it was in the mountains, the state's authority wasn't very respected. See ,,Janosik", a folk hero on both sides of the Tatras.
            It was also the Polish Górale who defended themselves from Swedes in the Deluge and later staged several uprisings. Naturally, it meant that the local population had the ability of leaving their villages without their masters' permission (the opposite was a thing in Poland) and mixing with their neighbours.
            It also should be noted that every year, Polish Górals make a pilgrimage to Lewocza, which has something to do with John Paul II, although there is also a closer site in Ludźmierz (Poland).
            The differences are there, but mainly in language. For example, a very small delegation of Górals from Spisz and Orawa went to Versailles and met Wilson in order to negotiate joining Poland. Google "Ferdynand Machay".
            I can also think of architecture. Compare the roofs in Chochołów and Głodówka and you'll see a small slope on the Slovakian ones.
            Honestly, the linguistic difference probably wouldn't be that sharp it it weren't for standardization of national languages.
            And the entire point of that division being there is geography and especially ridges. Compare the local drainage basins to borders to better see what I mean.

            Interesting. So, genetically, would you say southern poles and eastern Slovaks are essentially the same? Also, assuming you’re a Pole, how much of the eastern dialect can you understand without help?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I wouldn't say "the same", I would say "very similar". Mountains are afterall a very solid natural border.
            When it comes to comprehension, I must first say that I am not American and therefore I usually don't travel too far from my home. But I recall a time when at a large hotel I switched from English to Polish, because it was easier for me to speak, and both me and the receptionist could understand each other perfectly.
            When it comes to differences between the two languages, they are quite anecdotical. For example the word "czerstwy" means "stale" (bread) in Polish and "fresh" (bread) in Slovakian. Or "napad" means "a robbery" and "an idea" respectively (both come from combining the words on+fall). I can also say from experience that Slovakians can't understand the Polish adjective "szybki" ("fast") and use something similar to "rychły", which in Polish is about as old-fashioned as saying "thou" in English.
            So yeah, similar, but not the same.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I appreciate the info. It’s helped my to contextualize this area of the world. I have a couple more questions though.
            Are there any English sources I can use to learn more about the local history of this area? Like books and articles, not just Wikipedia.
            Who do you think would have an easier time the eastern dialect: a Czech or a Pole?
            Were the Gorale exclusively Poles ethnically (as in they were essentially genetic/ethnic Poles that moved there) or were they a mix of Poles/Slovaks/Rusyns who mixed, learned the same languages and formed the Gorale?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Czechs. Slovakians regularily watch Czech TV broadcasts, so thair languages must be very similar.
            The ancestors of Górale are unclear, although not ancient. I can say that the first town on the Polish side (Nowy Targ) was founded in the 13th century. The most widely accepted theory is that they are Slavs (Poles and Slovakians) who were culturally influenced by Vlach shepherds. There is surely some German admixture, since Germans settlers were invited there, mainly to Polish Spisz and eastern Podhale, but there's nothing special about that, except for place names (Frydland etc).
            And no, they didn't learn the same language. They just happened to ones that were very similar already and maybe influenced each other a bit.
            Keep in mind that I speak mostly of the Polish side of the Tatras. And no, I don't know any other sources, especially in English.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Also, In the 13th century, Poles and Czechs were similar enough for the Przemyślids (Czechs) to try to unite them both.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            So is it fair to say that all western Slavs are brotherly nations? That they descended from closely related tribes but diverged since the 13th century or so? They’re the same, but Czechs have more German influence, Slovaks have more Hungarian influence, and Poles developed in their own way?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Yes... Didn't you know that?
            It is basic historic knowledge that cultures change, split and diverge (and influence each other and sometimes merge).
            13th Century may be late estimate, since the West Slavic cultures were diverging ever since different Slavic states were created around the 10th century, but it is the time that the first Polish sentence was recorded in the Księga henrykowska. Interestingly, it was pronounced by a Czech. Also, the unification I was talking about was in very early 14th century.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, but I wasn’t sure how distant or close the relationship was. With stories like Lech and Czech, I thought the relationship was more distant. I didn’t know they were close enough to make unification plausible in the early 14th century.

          • 2 years ago
            A Pneumatic

            >plausible
            plausible is the keyword and the secret ingredient is imperialism

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >I didn’t know they were close enough to make unification plausible in the early 14th century
            Czechopolakia really as a thing. Unfortunately, it didn't last long. Blame Germs.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >Also, In the 13th century, Poles and Czechs were similar enough for the Przemyślids (Czechs) to try to unite them both.

            So is it fair to say that all western Slavs are brotherly nations? That they descended from closely related tribes but diverged since the 13th century or so? They’re the same, but Czechs have more German influence, Slovaks have more Hungarian influence, and Poles developed in their own way?

            >So is it fair to say that all western Slavs are brotherly nations? That they descended from closely related tribes but diverged since the 13th century or so?
            Great Moravia (modern Eastern Czech Republic/Moravia and Western Slovakia) had to conquer Bohemia and Bohemians were also resisting its rule from start to end, helping to destroy the nation in the end and cannibalising the modern Moravian parts for themselves.
            I wouldn't go too far with the brotherhood.
            Modern Czechs and Poles aren't Balkan-tier neighbours because of USSR, not because there's any innate brotherhood to be found between the two.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >there's any innate brotherhood to be found between the two
            But whyyyy?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >Or "napad" means "a robbery" and "an idea" respectively
            But CZ/SK "napad" has that meaning like it has in Polish! I remembered when I read a Czech Wikipedia article about Polish history and I swear there was a sentence: "Nemecko napadlo Poľsko v roce 1939".

            So how would you explain this?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            No. You've been tricked.
            You didn't even bother checking it on an online dictionary, did you?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Now, I checked on Google Translate:

            SK: napadnutie
            PL: napaść

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Are you dumb, moronic or admitting defeat?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Now translate "nápad".

            SK: napadnutie
            PL: napadnięcie

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            So you're moronic. Or baiting.
            Listen. I'm talking about NÁPAD. You're talking about NAPADNUTIE.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Oooo kurwa... co mnie napadło? ://

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Każdemu się zdarzy. XD

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Now translate "nápad".

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Tell me, does the existance of "an idea" prove the existence of "to idea"?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I wouldn't say "the same", I would say "very similar". Mountains are afterall a very solid natural border.
            When it comes to comprehension, I must first say that I am not American and therefore I usually don't travel too far from my home. But I recall a time when at a large hotel I switched from English to Polish, because it was easier for me to speak, and both me and the receptionist could understand each other perfectly.
            When it comes to differences between the two languages, they are quite anecdotical. For example the word "czerstwy" means "stale" (bread) in Polish and "fresh" (bread) in Slovakian. Or "napad" means "a robbery" and "an idea" respectively (both come from combining the words on+fall). I can also say from experience that Slovakians can't understand the Polish adjective "szybki" ("fast") and use something similar to "rychły", which in Polish is about as old-fashioned as saying "thou" in English.
            So yeah, similar, but not the same.

            And that is assuming that you mean the Poles inabiting the Carpathians, especially the Tatras. People from Kraków are almost completely different by West Slavic standards.
            There was even an opera called "Krakowiacy i Górale" in which these two ethnic groups are more or less enemies.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            Interesting. So, genetically, would you say southern poles and eastern Slovaks are essentially the same? Also, assuming you’re a Pole, how much of the eastern dialect can you understand without help?

            I should also recall that ethnic identity and language are standardized on a national scale.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            *national identity

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a part of Hungary, that’s all you need to know about it.
    >My family comes from Levoča, Spišska Nová Ves, and Snina in Eastern Slovakia.
    I think you mean Lőcse, Igló, and Szinna, dumbfrick.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      So, can I larp as a Hungarian steppe chad?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Yes! But first you must learn Hungarian and repeat after me: “Tót nem ember”

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Hungarians and Slovaks don’t actually have that much bad blood do they?
          Not like Romanians and Hungarians.
          Weren’t Slovaks cool with Hungarians until they started trying to make them speak Hungarian?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It’s mostly a joke these days. But between 1920-1948 and 1990-2000, you could have easily ended up being beaten just for being Hungarian/Slovak on the wrong side of the border. In those times these sentiments were officially fuelled on both sides and bydlo were very receptive to it. Things are much calmer these days.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Also, have some Slovak propaganda depicting le evil swarthy Hungarian beating up the poor aryan Slovaks

            So, is the animosity mostly a late 19th century and 20th century phenomenon?
            What was it like before then? I read that the Hungarian National Army of 1848 has 25,000 Slovaks in it—that 40% of the Army was non-Hungarian. So, were they something equivalent to Scottish Highlanders that never stopped speaking their native language? I imagine the relationship between the two must have been good for Slovaks to overwhelmingly join the Hungarians in that war. I also read something about how many Slavs of upper Hungary originally submitted to the Hungarians peacefully and their local leaders ended up assimilating into Hungarian nobility? What is the truth of this?
            Also, just what was the pre-nationalism relationship between Slovaks and Hungarians generally?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I think all of that is pretty accurate. I like the Scottish Highlander analogy. Before 19th century nationalism, people didn’t really identify based on their language. They were all subjects of the same king and living in the same geographical area, so there was a sense of fighting for the common cause and Lebensraum. I’m not sure if Slovak nobles would have had to learn much Hungarian. From the late seventeenth century, they would have been learning German instead. Maybe it could have happened during the nineteenth century, when Magyarisation was underway and Hungary was once again an entity that mattered as half of Austria-Hungary. I can see how it would have been expedient for Slovak nobles to learn Hungarian then.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            So, if we can call Slovaks the Scottish highlanders of the Hungarian UK, where was the breaking point? Why did they end up hating each other enough for Slovakia to leave? Did that really happen or did they just go because the rest left? I read that Hungary was pretty liberal and civic nationalist-minded around the 1860s. Everyone was equal as a Hungarian citizen, but then they started really pushing the language issue and they became the main problem. Was that it?
            Also, is it conceivable at all that Slovaks might have stayed a part of Hungary?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Slovaks started feeling very strongly about nationalism just like most other peoples in Europe at that time, and yes, mainly because Hungarians wanted to kill the Slovak language, in reaction they doubled down and went instead in a Pan-Slavic direction. They saw the Czechs as their brother Slavs also oppressed in the same country. Very importantly, Hungarians became the big bads because they were no longer another oppressed nation in Austria, they were now one of the two big oppressors in Austria-Hungary.
            It is also true that Hungarians went full moronic with Magyarisation, and it was also related to Austria becoming Austria-Hungary. They were thinking, “great, now we’re equal with Austrians, now we most stop any further attempts at devolution or federalisation”. Which they of course promoted up to that point, so it’s hilarious. So they started stomping down on all minorities in A-H hard.
            If Hungarians never gained powered in Austria, Slovaks would have probably continued to ally more with Hungarians (with whom they share a lot) instead of Czechs, with whom they share much less history and culture but of course they share a language family.
            As a side note, Pan-Slavism was just as moronic as Pan-Romanticisim would be. Slavic is a language family, not a nation, you can’t just unite these nations based on having similar words. Of course Russians and Serbs push it because they think of themselves as the “master Slavs” who would rule over the rest.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >Slovaks would have probably continued to ally more with Hungarians (with whom they share a lot) instead of Czechs, with whom they share much less history and culture but of course they share a language family.
            So Slovaks see Czechs as brothers only because of language? Lame.

            And why do Czechs see Slovaks as brothers then? Normally, they should ignore them as for them Slovakia is just a poor rural Hungarian province to the East.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            That's exactly what Czechs have always done and still do. Slovaks had a rough time in Czechoslovakia. Also Czechs have this delusion that they're more Germanic than Slavic.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            pesky czechs

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >ally more with Hungarians (with whom they share a lot)
            What exactly do Slovaks and Hungarians share? I know that, next to Czechs, Hungarians are the closest to Slovaks genetically, especially after Slovaks helped repopulate Hungary after the Ottomans. But Hungarian history seems to be a Hungarian thing. I don’t see many Slovaks mentioned and if they were born in Slovakia, they’re still called Magyars.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Slovaks consider themselves to be a part of the old Kingdom of Hungary and its history. They have a separate word for that country - they call it Uharsko (from the same root as Hungary) and they call the post-WW1 Hungary, Maďarsko (Magyaria, more or less). Of course they don't consider themselves part of Maďarsko's history. But Uharsko in this framework is a multi-ethnic country to which they belonged (like Scots to Britain).

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >ally more with Hungarians (with whom they share a lot)
            What exactly do Slovaks and Hungarians share? I know that, next to Czechs, Hungarians are the closest to Slovaks genetically, especially after Slovaks helped repopulate Hungary after the Ottomans. But Hungarian history seems to be a Hungarian thing. I don’t see many Slovaks mentioned and if they were born in Slovakia, they’re still called Magyars.

            A further analogy here is Uharsko is to Maďarsko as Great Britain is to England. Scots have nothing to do with England but everything to do with Britain.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >ally more with Hungarians (with whom they share a lot)
            What exactly do Slovaks and Hungarians share? I know that, next to Czechs, Hungarians are the closest to Slovaks genetically, especially after Slovaks helped repopulate Hungary after the Ottomans. But Hungarian history seems to be a Hungarian thing. I don’t see many Slovaks mentioned and if they were born in Slovakia, they’re still called Magyars.

            And yet another (if strained) analogy: Scots have more in common with the English than they do with people in Brittany, even though the latter are Celts like Scots. It's similar with Slovaks, Hungarians, and the Czech.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            As to Czechs and Slovaks though, they do have much more in common compared to Scotland and Brittany because they were a part of the same country. Wasn’t there also a decent amount of cultural and linguistic exchange between them throughout history?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >cultural and linguistic exchange
            >exchange
            Just Czechs czechizing everything. I don't think there was a Slovak influence on the Czechs.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            How much czechizing was there? Was it only in Czechoslovakia, or was there influence before?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >How much czechizing was there?
            Plenty. In pretty much every field. After all, Czechs wanted to create a "Czechoslovak" nation, which in fact was just an excuse for a bigger Czech expansion which was in plans. Most of Slovaks opposed that.
            >was there influence before?
            There was, but that one was their own choice. In the 19th century when almost magyarized Slovaks felt their national consciousness, they decided to create their own language. They had two languages to choose from which they would borrow a great portion of vocabulary: Polish or Czech. They chose Czech.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            This also shows what a bullshit idea “Pan-Slavism” is. Czechs tried to erase Slovaks just as much as le Turkic Hungarians (also Slavs btw just with Finnish grammar) did. Poles and Croats could also tell tales how much they suffered under their “brother Slavs”

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You’re right that Czechs and Slovaks of course had a closer relationship. But there wasn’t all that much cultural transfer before Czechoslovakia (more than zero, but not a whole lot)

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >Uharsko
            Very interesting. So many non-Magyars really did think of themselves as a part of the Natio Hungarica before magyarizarion? Are there any sources, books or articles, you can recommend for me to read about it?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Not sure of any good sources, sorry, I picked up most of this from krautchan IQfy lmao

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >So many non-Magyars really did think of themselves as a part of the Natio Hungarica before magyarizarion?
            Natio Hungarica was a monarchial concept. Like everywhere else in Europe, the divide was not based on who spoke what language, but which caste their belonged to.
            French Anjou kings were obviously part of the Natio Hungarica, a Hungarian peasant farming fields around Pest was not. The term is stressed in a medieval chronicle which details basically that, a book explaining the history behind the upper and lower classes and why that's the way it's supposed to be (in a sort of funny mirror to modern nationalism using history to explain its own primacy). There's a great paper on this topic comparing the peasant rebellions of late medieval Spain and Hungary. Basically in Spain the story told was that the nobles were descendants of the Frankish conquerors saving the lands and the commoners were rabble which suffered the Muslim heathens and hence got reduced to servitude by God. In Hungary the Natio Hungarica was explained as the people/tribes which took up arms to build and defend the country with the earliest kings and the commoners (Magyar or otherwise) were the other tribes and people who were cowards and so set their status in stone. The interesting bits were how the peasant rebellions marshalled around any signs of bravery and wish to battle as they could find trying to "prove" they were every bit as worthy of the noble life, not cowards, etc. I didn't bookmark it but with a topic so obscure, I'm sure you'll be able to google it.

            You’re right that Czechs and Slovaks of course had a closer relationship. But there wasn’t all that much cultural transfer before Czechoslovakia (more than zero, but not a whole lot)

            >But there wasn’t all that much cultural transfer before Czechoslovakia (more than zero, but not a whole lot)
            Complete bullshit. When reformation first hit and Bible got translated into understandable vernacular, the Czech Bible became the standard in Upper Hungary. And the written language spread to most cities with any notable Slavic (Slovak) speaking populace. Charles Uni was the sole uni in the region. Etc.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Pretty sure the Pecs University was closer to Upper Hungary than fricking Prague

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, sure. The younger and also quickly disbanded university was definitely a great place to study at.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            ... and (frick you post size limit) that includes Eastern Slovakia. Here's a list from 1493 addressed to Bardejov (marked even on OP's map).
            "Vy zly a nespravedlivy lvde Bardiowcy, vi ste naszych bratow daly zveszaty, lvdy dobrich a nevinnich, iako mordere necnotlyvy, ktory any vam, ani zadnomv nicz nebili vinni. A pretos, gestli nam priatelom a rodovi ich za nich nepolozite czeteri sta zolotich ve zoloce do troch nedeli v klastore v Mogili v Cracova alebo v cartvsov v Lechniczi, tedi na vaszych hordlech y na vaszym ymaniv y na vaszich podanich se bvd dvlvho, bvd cratko takto se mstiti budemy pocvd naszeho rodv stava. Tot list pysan s hor dzen svateho Jacvba."

            It's undeniably eastern Slovak (czeteri (četery, not štyri), zoloce (not zlate), zadnomv (žadnomu, not žiadnemu), tedi (not tak) hordlech (hardloch, not hrdlách), Tot (not tento), dzen (dzeň, not ďeň)) as well as showing clear influence of Czech orthography (using i/y without using it in speech (Vy/vi, naszych/vaszich, any/ani), g for y sound except in Biblical terms, gestli (lit. 'jestli' still used in modern Czech)) with some of these words absent in modern E.Slovak but present in Czech.
            Likewise, the place became one of the strongholds for Hussites fleeing Bohemia whom greatly expanded the Spiš Castle and dicked around many of the local towns (obviously the locals were not always too happy about a foreign militant group ighting the kingdom on their doorstep).

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >"Vy zly a nespravedlivy lvde Bardiowcy, vi ste naszych bratow daly zveszaty, lvdy dobrich a nevinnich, iako mordere necnotlyvy, ktory any vam, ani zadnomv nicz nebili vinni. A pretos, gestli nam priatelom a rodovi ich za nich nepolozite czeteri sta zolotich ve zoloce do troch nedeli v klastore v Mogili v Cracova alebo v cartvsov v Lechniczi, tedi na vaszych hordlech y na vaszym ymaniv y na vaszich podanich se bvd dvlvho, bvd cratko takto se mstiti budemy pocvd naszeho rodv stava. Tot list pysan s hor dzen svateho Jacvba."
            Looks like a mix of Polish, Czech and Ukrainian.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I forgot the image.
            And yeah, it's a bit closer to Czech than std. Slovak, Polish and German loanwords are everywhere, if you reach the Ruthenian highlands people start swapping e's for i's everywhere (ďid instead of děd, dižď instad of déžď>déšt, ambrila instead of umbrella), more to the south you get more Hungarian loanwords (gamby, valal, ladička, šarkaň,...), etc.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The orthography definitely looks like a mess (especially "v" spelled like "u").

            Btw, pic related is a re-created 19th century Czech with (mostly) Polish spelling.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Also, have some Slovak propaganda depicting le evil swarthy Hungarian beating up the poor aryan Slovaks

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I've been to all of the cities you named, it's a very comfy region. Bit of a sleepy backwater without much economic opportunity, but probably a good place to raise a family.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      There is one great barrier for almost anyone to enjoy eastern Slovakia - Gypsy wienerroaches. They are everywhere, they are moronic (cause incest babies or alcohol or toluene), they are pets of Brussels and Bratislava bureaucracy and the only feasible plan to deal with them is practically a cultural genocide (take them young, educate them and isolate them from negative cultural impacts of their families)

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So much suffering and unresolvable existential neuroses caused by communities being created for no other reason than imperial geopolitics thinking it would be convenient to have central-european allies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *