* Research for this study was supported in part by a grant from the International Research and Exchanges Board, with funds provided by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the United States Information Agency, and the US Department of State, which administers the Russian European Research Program.Google Scholar

1. The words “nationalism,” “nationalist consciousness,” and “nationalist struggle” are used in this study as parallels, although they have slightly different meanings. “Feminism” in this study refers to all ideology concerned with women's issues.Google Scholar

2. Kirschbaum, Stanislav J., A History of Slovakia. The Struggle for Survival (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995), p. 87. Kirschbaum, J. points out that although the political history of Hungary was also the history of the Slovaks, the Slovaks also had their own cultural history and language and were very conscious of their own distinct national heritage.Google Scholar

3. Matula, Vladimír, “The Conception and the Development of Slovak National Culture in the Period of National Revival,” Studia Historica Slovaka, Vol. XVII, 1990, p. 156. Vladimir Matula asserted that the national revival in Slovakia was characterized by its original “linguocentrism.” The issue of a nation-wide standard language played an important part in the Slovak national emancipation, as it was closely related to the implementation of the ideological conception of the Slovaks as an autonomous and equal Slavonic nation, and to the objective historical need and main task of developing bourgeois national unity. The solution of this cardinal issue came with the codification of standard Slovak by Ľudovít Štúr's group (Štúrists) which had a decisive influence on the comprehensive conception of the national culture of the Slovaks and its subsequent development.Google Scholar

4. Živena or Živa was an old Slavic goddess of life. Mother Earth was personified also in other goddesses such as: Maja, Svetoploza, Divila, and Devana. Google Scholar

5. The Hlasists named themselves after their journal Hlas (“The Voice”).Google Scholar

6. Kocák, Michal, ed., Listy Ľudmily Ríznerovej-Podjavorinskej (Martin: Matica Slovenská, 1988), p. 232. Letter number 191 addressed to Vansová.Google Scholar

7. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská Papers, Folder number 1.Google Scholar

8. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská did not carry out this natural “duty” because she had lost one eye in childhood. Physically crippled and frequently sick, she never married although she wanted to. This unsatisfied craving for a quiet married life probably partly fueled her antifeminism. At the same, the life of a single woman, although filled with household duties, allowed her to direct her creative energy to nationalist endeavors and literature.Google Scholar

9. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská Papers, Literary Archive of Matica Slovenská, Martin. In an undated letter, Ľudmila Podjavorinská-Ríznerová stated: “If I become a post-officer, I have to give up my nation, my dreams, and my ideals. This is for me a very painful decision.” Listy Lîudmily Ríznerovej-Podjavorinskej, p. 104. Letter number 53 addressed to Ľudovít V. Rízner. In this letter Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská revealed that she wanted to work exclusively for the nationalist cause.Google Scholar

10. Ríznerová-Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, Kytka veršov pre slovenské dietky (Bratislava, 1920).Google Scholar

11. Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, Z vesny života (Ružomberok: Karol Salva, 1895).Google Scholar

12. Ibid. Google Scholar

13. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská popularized Slovak embroideries and woodcarvings that depicted women together with trees and flowers as national symbols. Slovak goddesses were associated with vegetation and fertility and, therefore, often pictured with plants and vegetation. In the embroideries, tendrils often grow from the goddesses' heads; they have branches and flowers for headdresses, and flowers and plants are overlaid on their figures. The ancient “Tree of Life” is often pictured with goddess images because both were supposed to encourage plant or crop fertility. Others echo actual rituals, enacted in the villages. One such spring ritual, occurring all over Slovakia and practiced only by women, was the taking of the Morena figure out of the village. The Morena, symbolizing the death of winter, was made of sticks, dressed in women's clothes, and was led out of the village accompanied by songs. The figure was either burned in the surrounding fields, or sent down a nearby river. The Morena was replaced by the “New Summer,” which represented new spring life by its decorations of birds, eggs, and goddesses.Google Scholar

14. Václavíková-Matulay, Margita, Tvorba Ľudmily Podjavorinskej (Bratislava: Čas, 1942).Google Scholar

15. Ibid., p. 3.Google Scholar

16. Hurban-Vajanský, Svätozár, “Reč tajomníka na XXIII. valnom zhromaždení Živeny,” Národnie Noviny, 6 August 1902, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

17. Mráz, Andrej, Literárne dielo Terézie Vansovej (Martin: Živena, 1937).Google Scholar

18. Ríznerová-Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, Dielo (Bratislava: Tatran, 1987), p. 384.Google Scholar

19. Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, “Ľena a právo,” Dennica, 1914, p. 17. In this article Ríznerová-Podjavorinská admitted that although women have the same ambitions as men in the legal profession, they cannot achieve the same success because of the strong conventional belief in men's superior capacities. She insisted on complete separation of the spheres of men and women. It is much better for women, she maintained, to be good originals, rather than bad imitations.Google Scholar

20. Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, “Ešte raz o ženskej otázke,” Dennica, 1913, p. 301.Google Scholar

21. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská criticized mainly Mary Pankhurst.Google Scholar

22. , Ľ. P. Sufragetky; “Ihla zbraňou. Zubné módy. A ešte nová móda,” Dennica, 1913, p. 60.Google Scholar

23. Ríznerová-Podjavorinská, Ľudmila, “Drobnosti o ženách,” Národnie Noviny, 1913, p. 59.Google Scholar

24. “Sufragetky,” Dennica , No. 2, 1913, p. 59.Google Scholar

25. Listy Ľudmily Ríznerovej-Podjavorinskej, pp. 286–287. This feminism appreciated Svätozár Hurban-Vajanský, Drahotína Križko-Kardossová, and František Klimeš.Google Scholar

26. Her novels Blud and V otroctve. Google Scholar

27. Listy Ľudmily Riznerovej-Podjavorinskej, p. 232. Letter number 191 from 1907.Google Scholar

28. Podjavorinská, Ľ., “Naše práva,” Dermica , 1914, p. 65.Google Scholar

29. Ibid., p. 66. Ľudmila Ríznerová-Podjavorinská claimed that the mother is as important to the nation as the Prime Minister is vital to the state. The woman is the soul and the center of the nation, and mistaken are those people who think that domestic chores, such as cooking, cleaning the house, and needlework lower women's status. All work, including domestic, uplifts a people. The slogan, “Away from domestic duties!” is very dangerous for the well-being of our families and nation.Google Scholar

30. Listy Ľudmily Riznerovej-Podjavorinskej, p. 301. Both letters were written on 11 November 1918.Google Scholar

31. Ibid. The letter number 271 from 15 November 1918.Google Scholar

32. “List Slovenským ženám,” Považské hlasy, 1918, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

33. Elena Maróthy-Šolthésová (1855-1939) was arguably the finest Slovak woman writer and a prominent nationalist activist. She was the daughter of the patriotic Slovak pastor Daniel Maróthy, and as a teenage girl she wanted more than anything to serve the nation. Instead, she was encouraged to marry. At the age of eighteen she married Michal Šolthés, a businessman from Turčiansky Svätý Martin.Google Scholar

34. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Potreba vzdelanosti pre ženu, zvlášï stanoviska mravnosti. Príspevok k ženskej otázke,” Letopis Živeny, No. II, 1898, pp. 154-190. In this essay Maróthy-Šolthésová claimed that proper moral education is critical for national survival. The contemporary lack of girls' schools was appalling for Slovak women, who bear, along with Slovak men, the same responsibilities for the national future.Google Scholar

35. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Potreba vzdelanosti pre ženu, zvlášť zo stanoviska mravnosti,” pp. 145–146.Google Scholar

36. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists: Women Writers in the Slovak National Revival (Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers, 1991), p. 127.Google Scholar

37. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Potreba vzdelanosti pre ženu, zvlášť so stanoviska mravnosti,” p. 156.Google Scholar

38. Ibid., p. 156.Google Scholar

39. Ibid., p. 157.Google Scholar

40. Ibid., p. 158.Google Scholar

41. Šolthésová, Elena, “Úlohy ženy. Žena v spoločnosti,” Dennica, 1902, p. 111.Google Scholar

42. Antónia Gebauerová Papers, Literary Archive of the Memorial of National Writing, Prague. The letter of Antónia Gebauerová to Elena Maróthy-Šolthésová on 18 November 1918.Google Scholar

43. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Potreba vzdelanosti pre ženu, zlášť zo stanoviska mravnosti,” p. 154.Google Scholar

44. Ibid., p. 109.Google Scholar

45. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 128.Google Scholar

46. Mrázová, Lea, ed., Začatá cesta (Martin: Živena, 1934), p. 107.Google Scholar

47. Ibid., p. 155.Google Scholar

48. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 127.Google Scholar

49. Votrubová, Štefana, Myšlienky Eleny Maróthy-Šolthesovej (Žilina: Travníček, 1935), p. 15. Equality of men and women in a moral sense was for Maróthy-Šolthésová the only sound base for creating a national identity. An educated man and an uneducated woman can never be happy together. Nor can an educated woman and an uneducated man be happy either. Only an educated woman can contribute to the moral improvement qf society and can become an esteemed member of society. Maróthy-Šolthésová advocated a compassionate marriage based on trust and equality. She attributed the lack of trust to the differences in education and age of the partners. The kind of equality in marriage advocated by Maróthy-Šolthésová could exist only if the marriage was devoid of fear and subordination.Google Scholar

50. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 158. There is no clear evidence that Elena Maróthy-Šolthésová read the books of these authors, but their books were available in Slovakia at that time. The ideas of Flóra Tristan, especially those about how an inner change in women would change society, also might have influenced her, although Jarmila Tkadlečková-Vantuchová had no reason to believe that Maróthy-Šolthésová ever read Tristan's books.Google Scholar

51. Key, Ellen, “Žena XX. veku,” Dennica, 1911, p. 57.Google Scholar

52. Key, Ellen, Mibbrauchte Frauenkraft (Paris: Albert Langen, 1898), p. 15.Google Scholar

53. Ibid., p. 10.Google Scholar

54. Register, Cheri, “Motherhood at Center: Ellen Key's Social Vision,” Women's Studies International Forum, 1982, p. 600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. Vansová, Terézia, “Ženské hnutie. Poznámka redakcie,” Dennica, 1902, pp. 34-35. In this essay Terézia Vansová discussed the emancipation movement in general, not the Slovak women's movement in particular.Google Scholar

56. Václavíková-Matulayova, Margita, Život Terézie Vansovej (Bratislava: Slovenská, Liga, 1937), p. 116. Svätozár Hurban-Vajanský, Jozef Škulthéty, and Ambro Pietor, the chief editors of Národnie Novini, claimed that it was ridiculous to publish a special women's magazine when there was no similar forum for men. They thought that it was an absurd idea to talk about women's emancipation when women were equal to men in every sphere of private and social life and “had what they needed.” Male nationalist leaders claimed that the women's campaign had a socialist edge. Vansová encountered a similar reaction from some Slovak middle-class women. When she campaigned among women in Tisovec entreating them to sign up for Ženská bibliotéka (“Women's Library”) and Ženský svět (“Women's World”), many women rejected her offer.Google Scholar

57. Vansová, Terézia, “Nový rok, Nový krok,” Dennica , Vol. 1, No. 1, 1898, pp. 2–3, translated by Rudinsky, Norma L..Google Scholar

58. Vansová, Terézia, “Píla v Gemeri. Sestrám Slovenským,” Dom a škola, 1897, p. 127.Google Scholar

59. Mikulová, Marcela, “Ženy a národ na prelome 19. a 20. storočia,” Aspekt, No. II, 1994, p. 74.Google Scholar

60. Ibid., p. 101.Google Scholar

61. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “O Dennici,” Dennica, 1899, p. 40. Terézia Vansová was the chief editor until 1907, when František Votruba assumed the editorship.Google Scholar

62. Vansová, Terézia, “O nas,” Dennica , 1898, pp. 11-13. See also Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 96. It is my considered opinion that this essay did not intend to give guidance to the women's movement and that its only purpose was to show that Christianity made women equal to men.Google Scholar

63. Félix, Ján, “Všetkým ľudóm dobrej vóľe,” Koridor, 1992, p. 3.Google Scholar

64. Kocák, Michal Dr., Ľudmila Podjavorinská-Ríznerová (Martin: Matica Slovenská, 1988), p. 131. Ríznerová-Podjavorinská noted that her Czech friends claimed that Dennica was unpolished. According to Ríznerová-Podjavorinská, the fairy-tales in Dennica were ridiculous and inappropriate for a women's journal.Google Scholar

65. Ibid., p. 3.Google Scholar

66. Národnie Novini and Slovenské pohľady published many critical comments on Dennica's first issue.Google Scholar

67. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Načo sú tie ženské časopisy?” Dennica, 1898, pp. 17–19.Google Scholar

68. Ibid. Google Scholar

69. Maróthy-Šolthésová, Elena, “Naco sú tie ženské časopisy?” p. 19.Google Scholar

70. Votrubová, Štefana, Živena. Jej osudy a práca (Martin: Živena, 1931), p. 24. Dennica condemned the Magyarization ushered in by Felsö Magyarországi Kozmúvelódési Egyelet (The Upper Hungarian Education Society, FEMKE). The society rewarded Magyar teachers and supported Magyar kindergarten teachers. FEMKE demanded that only Magyar-speaking teachers teach at these establishments and that no Slovak-speaking omen's Teaching Academy be allowed. In 1874, FEMKE started to deport Slovak children to Magyar counties. In 1887, for example, this society deported 170 children from Trenčín county, and in 1888, it deported 88 children. Magyar state authorities violently separated the children from their mothers and the new Magyar sponsors often beat these children. Dermica and foreign newspapers protested against these cruelties. See also the article “Femka a slovenské siroty,” Národnie Novini, 1892, p. 1. Národnie Noviny criticized the relocations of Slovak orphans to “the Low Land” (today, Hungary) and informed the public that the children often tried to escape back to their old homes.Google Scholar

71. Milina Laciaková-Zochová “discovered” her indigent relation Božena Slančíková, who lived in Polichno. She sent Božena Slančíková free copies of Dennica. Božena Slančíková was a very talented writer and eventually wrote novels, which were published in Dennica. Google Scholar

72. In 1899, the journalist Dr. Aletta Jakobs exhibited a complete collection of Dennica at the World Congress of Women in Amsterdam.Google Scholar

73. Vilma Seidlová-Sokolová, “Z mých vzpomínek na Slovensko,” Slovenské pohľady, pp. 192–477.Google Scholar

74. Ormis, Ján, ed., Marína Ormisová spomína (Martin: Osveta, 1979), p. 285.Google Scholar

75. Sládkovič, Andrej, “Marina,” Sobrane basne (Martin: Matica Slovenská, 1939), p. 73.Google Scholar

76. Marína Ormisová spomína, p. 264.Google Scholar

77. Ibid., p. 302. Ormisová-Maliaková's pupils came from different family backgrounds, and because of this, all understood Ormisová-Maliaková's patriotic efforts differently. She had two pupils from Orava and Liptov counties, both full-blooded Slovaks. The Magyar-speaking Šárika Ecseghyová, a daughter of a state officer in Revúca, came to this course too. Once Šárika clashed with the girls from Liptov county. This encounter would have ended with serious wounds on both sides if the teacher had not intervened.Google Scholar

78. Vilma Seidlová-Sokolová Papers, Literary Archive of Memorial and National Writing, Prague. The letter of Marina Ormisová-Maliaková to Vilma Seidlová-Sokolová from 29 December 1889, material number 34/40.Google Scholar

79. Ormisová, Marina, “Zo života Horvátskych žien,” Dennica, 1907, p. 298. Ormisová-Maliaková appealed to Slovak mothers in Croatia to teach their children Slovak culture. “I am turning to you, Slovak mothers, because in these difficult times you can help a lot. You shall teach your offspring love to our nation and good work. Good work ennobles people spiritually and materially. We live a hard life. We thought that we were already in good standing and suddenly such hardship once again befell upon us. Until now, we had at least religious schools, now we are going to lose even those. Therefore, wake up, Slovak mothers! We can foster our national spirit only in our homes. When we build a solid foundation in the family, we can hope for a better future!”Google Scholar

80. She founded two such clubs in a short period of time.Google Scholar

81. Hana Lilge-Gregorová was the first feminist in Slovakia. Lilge's family came to Slovakia from Denmark in the seventeenth century. Its major occupation for generations was the dyeing business. Her grandfather, Ján Samuel Lilge, was the founding member of Matica Slovenská and fought in the Revolution of 1848. His son, Karol, was dismissed from school because the schoolmaster found Slovak books in his desk. Karol Lilge emigrated to America. Hana Lilge married at the age of eighteen the distinguished Slovak writer and intellectual Jozef Gregor-Tajovský. Tatjana Štefanovičová, Mária Pietorová, and Margita Paulíny-Tóthová belonged to Lilge-Gregorová's feminist circle.Google Scholar

82. Gregorová, Hana, Ženy (Mikulás: Klimeš, 1912), the front page.Google Scholar

83. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 176.Google Scholar

84. Ibid., p. 176.Google Scholar

85. Gregorová-Prášilová, Dagmar, Spomienky (Bratislava: Tatran, 1979), p. 94. Lilge-Gregorová recalled that her first book acted as a catalyst in the Slovak community, evoking both negative and positive reactions. The 32nd issue of Národnie Noviny published a devastating critique of Ženy, while Czech literary critics praised the new spirit of this book.Google Scholar

86. Glossy, in Národnie Noviny , 1912, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

87. When Hurban-Vajanský met Lilge-Gregorová in downtown Turčiansky Svätý Martin, he spit at her in front of a crowd of people to show his disgust.Google Scholar

88. Rudinsky, Norma L., Incipient Feminists, p. 177. Hurban-Vajanský's hostile reception of Ženy fanned the controversy between Hurban-Vajanský and Gregor-Tajovský over realism in literature. Hurban-Vajanský preferred idealized main characters, while Gregor-Tajovský favored an almost ingenuous reality.Google Scholar

89. Gregorová-Prášilová, Dagmar, Spomienky (Bratislava: Tatran, 1979), p. 94. According to the Czech literary critic Félix Šalda, Lilge-Gregorová presented a true picture of women's life and he praised her work.Google Scholar

90. Šrobár, Vavro Dr., “K ženskej otázke,” Slovenský denník, 1912, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

91. Gregorová-Prášilová, Dagmar, Spomienky, p. 130. Lilge-Gregorová highly esteemed Ľudmila Markovičová. She recalled that, although Markovičová was often sick, she was able to overcome her illness and energetically help the Slovak cultural and nationalist efforts. Markovičová headed a theatrical group, disseminated newspapers, organized women's clubs and never wasted her time with dull conversations.Google Scholar

92. Ibid., p. 97.Google Scholar

93. Ibid., p. 98.Google Scholar

94. Kusý, Ivan Dr., ed., Pohľady na literatúru (Bratislava: Slovenské vydavatelstvo krásnej literatúry, 1958), pp. 131–136.Google Scholar

95. Lajčiak, Ján, Slovensko a kultúra (Bratislava: Slovenská evanjelická Akadémia, 1921), p. 137.Google Scholar

96. Ibid., pp. 139-143. Ján Lajčiak wrote a detailed analysis of Ženy. He applauded Hana Lilge-Gregorová's ingenuousness and courage. In his opinion feminism was important for strengthening an otherwise weak national character.Google Scholar

97. Ibid., pp. 150–151.Google Scholar

98. Interview with Dagmar Gregorová-Prášilová, the daughter of Hana Lilge-Gregorová, Prague, June 1992.Google Scholar

99. Lilge-Gregorová, Hana, K ženskej otázke na Slovensku, Prúdy, 1912/1913, pp. 278–279.Google Scholar

100. Janosková, Oľga, Úvaha o prednáške pani Hany Gregorovej, in Dennica, 1912, p. 67.Google Scholar

101. Ibid., p. 68. Olga Janošková and her sisters participated in revolutionary demonstrations in Liptovský Svätý Mikuláš and Turčiansky Svätý Martin in 1916 and 1918. See also Soňa Kovačevičová, Liptovský Svätý Mikuláš. Mesto spolkov a kultúry v rokoch 1830-1945 (Mikuláš, L.: Tranoscius, 1992), p. 71; and Vladislav Dangl, Čierny orol (Bratislava: NKP, 1970), p. 19.Google Scholar

102. Národnie Noviny, pp. 191–223.Google Scholar

103. “Prednáška Hany Gregorovej,” Živena, pp. 191–298.Google Scholar

104. Lilge-Gregorová, Hana, Spomienky, p. 164.Google Scholar

105. “Úvaha o prednáske Hany Gregorovej,” Dennica, pp. 191–267.Google Scholar