Bohemian ancestors claiming Austrian citizenship...Why?

Share information, resources and strategies related to genealogical research.

Moderators: Sova, gementricxs, My Czech Republic

Hackl/Salava26
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 21-Oct-05 4:10
Location: Wisconsin

Bohemian ancestors claiming Austrian citizenship...Why?

Postby Hackl/Salava26 » 21-Oct-05 21:23

My great-grandfather was born in Bohemia and left for the US in the late 1880's. On his naturalization records he claimed to be a citizen of Austria though. I saw something similar to this in another posting and was wondering if anyone knew why ancestors were claiming Austrian citizenship if they came from Bohemia. Can anybody help?
User avatar
Sova
Moderator
Posts: 1500
Joined: 05-Jan-04 7:01
Location: NY, USA

Postby Sova » 21-Oct-05 23:18

Bohemia was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire at that time. Hence, your great-grandfather was indeed an Austrian citizen, even if ethnically he was Bohemian.
User avatar
Ceit
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 08-Jul-05 17:55

Postby Ceit » 21-Oct-05 23:31

Don't you think it's because Bohemia was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire? If you have time and reason to browse the Ellis Island records - www.ellisisland.org - you'll see lots of mixes of ethnicity and nationality. Germans from Russia, Slovaks from Hungary...and Bohemians from Austria. My own great-grandfather was one of those, in fact. And my gg-grandparents, his in-laws, were also Bohemians but labeled Germans on the ship's manifest. Can't explain that one with politics I don't think.
Karel Fous
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 18-Feb-05 19:06
Location: Praha, Czech rep.
Contact:

Postby Karel Fous » 23-Oct-05 13:07

The lists at Ellis Island was filled by information from passangers, i.e. by informations, which gave people about themselves. For someone couldn't ne nationality such important as for second. Some of them indicate Austria, because no-one knows about Bohemia, but Austria-Hungaria was official state, great Europian Imperium.
Do you distinguish nationality of people immigrated from Vietnam? Hardly. They are just Vietnamese. The same it was with immigrants from Bohemia (so called province Bohemia), more correct from Austria-Hungaria.
Karel :wink:
User avatar
Ceit
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 08-Jul-05 17:55

Postby Ceit » 24-Oct-05 11:37

I think lots of people refer to their ancestors as "Bohemian" because it's constant - my relatives now live in the region of Bohemia in the country of the Czech Republic; 20 years ago they lived in the region of Bohemia in the country of Czechoslovakia; 100 years ago they lived in the region of Bohemia in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The national name changes but not the regional name. It's just a better description. You could show off your historical knowledge and use the techinically correct terminology for the time frame, but it becomes problematic when you use a word like "Austrian" which still exists and has a somewhat more limited definition.
By the way, there are plenty of people from Southeast Asia who proudly identify themselves by their ethnic name (the Hmong and Mien from Laos), as well as their political nationality, although more from Laos, Cambodia or Thailand than Vietnam.
Karel Fous
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 18-Feb-05 19:06
Location: Praha, Czech rep.
Contact:

Postby Karel Fous » 24-Oct-05 16:23

An example: At east part of Germany, at border with Poland, is a region of Slavic nationality named Wend. They lived at this region over 1000 years, however last 700 was pretty difficult due strong influence of German ethnic.
What do you think, will the Wend, if he fills applications form, say, that he is Wend or that he is German?
The similar situation was here some 100 years ago. People here distinguish between nationality and nation, esspecialy here, at former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. 15 years ago it was shown up, that Czechs felt themelves firstly like Czechoslovakian and then like Czechs, conversely Slovaks felt themselves first like Slovaks and then like Czechoslovak.
Find absolutely true is impossible, the indication of nationality depended by education, family roots and tradition, knowledge of English (understanding), information which the people had, personal cognition what would be better for the start at new country etc. Do not find in this any deep philosophy...
Karel :)
User avatar
Ceit
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 08-Jul-05 17:55

Postby Ceit » 25-Oct-05 12:25

Karel Fous wrote:\ Czechs felt themelves firstly like Czechoslovakian and then like Czechs, conversely Slovaks felt themselves first like Slovaks and then like Czechoslovak.

Hmm, I didn't know that, interesting. Why would knowledge of English be a factor? Maybe the worldliness involved in learning it?

Karel Fous wrote:\Do not find in this any deep philosophy...
Karel :)

No, no philosophy, but I think psychology is definitely involved. We seem to be veering off quite a way from the original question here. Not that I'm complaining, mind you, there's little I love more than a tangential debate. :twisted: I see three points of view being compared with each other:
1. self-definition of American descendents of immigrants
2. self-definition of the immigrants themselves, and modern Europeans
3. self-definition of Asians

1 has been heavily influenced by 2 or 3, sometimes 2 and 3, but 2 and 3 don't have a heck of a lot to do with each other inspite of colonization, so let's just throw 3 out. Now, we descendents of immigrants often have little idea of how our ancestors viewed themselves, if we're lucky we have some documents and a few family stories. Hackl/Salava26 (who may be mourning for her hijacked thread :wink: ) calls her g-grandfather Bohemian, or says he was from Bohemia. Where did this information come from? I would guess great-grampa himself. Hackl's original question: why did he have Austrian citizenship? Because the territory of Bohemia was under Austrian control at the time. Pretty straight-forward. Things get sticky when we start labeling people's view of themselves as "correct" and "incorrect", when better words might be "realistic", "nostalgic" or "politically expediant". If we look at the manifests listed on the Ellis Island site, we see that many of them have two descriptions of ethnicity (but not all of them), not just for residents of Austria-Hungary but for Germany and Russia as well. We can also see that not all ethnic Austro-Bohemians lived in Bohemia, or even Austria. I suppose the extra details were requested by US Immigration, especially from those coming from multi-ethnic conglomerate empires like Austria-Hungary. We were very concerned about ethnicity in the past, and to some extent still are.
Now Karel, if you want to play the example game, what can you tell me about the Basques and Catalans?
Karel Fous
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 18-Feb-05 19:06
Location: Praha, Czech rep.
Contact:

Postby Karel Fous » 26-Oct-05 23:18

As my informations allow, I know, that field in form was named "Nationality" (manifest of passengers, which I have to use, from 1922). I assume the form was the same before 1918. Some of passengers wrote there Bohemian, because they had Bohemian nationality, some wrote there Austrian, because they was citizen of Austria-Hungary (note, that no one use term Austro-Hungarian). Perception of word "nationality" is maybe behind the differencies and maybe was evoked by level of English.
I understand, that people want know their roots, but my note about philosophy was aimed to person who had filled the papers, not to present genealogist. I am sure, there are not more other reasons why people have signed themselves as Bohemian or Austrian, as was written here. It was not philosophy, someone wrote this, someone other.
I don't want play with examples, but if you ask... I believe all depends on conditions - where the question was asked, what is reason of the question ets. In case of lost passport Bask answer will be another than in explaining diferencies of Spanish nationalities. I think, that if an officer (police, immigration) asks Bask (or Catalan) by his desk about nationality, they reply "from Spain" or maybe "Bask from Spain".
This is really silly discusion, absolutely academic, theoretic... :shock:
Karel Fous
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 18-Feb-05 19:06
Location: Praha, Czech rep.
Contact:

Postby Karel Fous » 26-Oct-05 23:38

Ceit, there are many reasons, influences, why people react how they react and why they indicate themselves or as Bohemians or as Austrian. I am affraid, that we can't understand or incept it on the whole. I am believe that there are not "deep philosophy" as political program (as Irish movement against England or movement in Corsica against France) , strong ethnical feeling (as Bask in Spain or Armenian in Turkey) or so (sorry for examples :wink: ).
People just filled the field as they thought what is the best. And there was projection of feeling what will be the best for the future, what make the minimum problems with clerks, proudness to be Bohemian (stronger, or weaker) and meny many other things.
Pay attention also how strongly the Czech minority keeps together during years in new world in comparison with Italian, Irish or others.
Regards Karel :)
User avatar
Ceit
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 08-Jul-05 17:55

Postby Ceit » 29-Oct-05 13:41

Yes, there are many reasons why people define themselves the way they do, but I don't think it's up to us to judge them as right or wrong. You seemed to be impying that it was incorrect or inappropriate for immigrants to call themselves Bohemian instead of, or along with, in many cases, Austrian. I humbly beg to differ. There's nothing wrong with people being proud of their roots, whether that means ethnicity, nationality, or even just the city their family stems from. I also suggested in my last post that US Immigration officials prompted these "excessive" responses, not because of their own perceptions, or philosophy as you say, but because of government immigration policy. I'm sure you know that there were strict quotas on national and ethnic groups entering the US, in the 20th century especially. Besides, saying that people should or should not have called themselves by a certain national/ethnic name on official documents is really a moot point because, obviously, they were called by those names. End of "silly" discussion.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest