Ukraine

A few years ago on my old walking route, I came across a woman often see working in her front yard, usually tending the flowers she planted along the edge of her driveway. After a few varied small conversations, I asked her, due to her strong accent, if she was Eastern Europe. She said, yes she was from the Ukraine. I come to find out that she moved to the US with her husband a few years earlier, after the Russian "annexation" of the Crimean Peninsula. Her husband had relatives already in the US. The Russia-Ukraine crisis has me thinking of her and the family members she said she still had living there. Let me just say, she is not a big fan of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. Every morning the news begins with the situation in Ukraine. There are over a 1,000 of years of history involved in culture and ethnography and how these interacted to create settlements, and later states. Yet, there is a more recent thirty year history behind the story of Ukraine today. 

Ukraine Protest

On 1 December 1991 the people of Ukraine, with over 90% concurring, agreed to separate from the Soviet Union. Ukraine, being in the western part of the former Soviet Union at the time of its creation, had the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the planet.  Most of them aimed at Westerrn Europe. The administration of George H. W. Bush, was concerned about this large amount of nuclear weapons and that it would (1) lead to more nuclear states in the world, (2) that peaceful transitions could not be counted on, and (3) that a violent breakup of the Soviet Union may lead to a catastrophic event. The Clinton Administration concurred with the policy establish by the Bush Administration. Hence, both administrations pursued a deal that would have Ukraine give up its nuclear weapons. This ended in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, that was signed by the United States, Great Britain, Russia and two other former Soviet Republics.

Major players in the current situation

For giving up its nuclear weapons, even though many viewed them as a key deterrent to possible future Russian aggression, Ukraine requested three things. First, compensation for the enriched uranium; second, the cost of decommissioning the nuclear arsenal be born by others, in this case the United States covered the cost; finally, it wanted guarantees, or assurances that its people, and territory would be respected. This last point was the key to the agreement. 

Because Ukraine was not then, nor today a member of NATO, there has always been a question of the use of US military force, although the US has made some supplies of military equipment. Boris Yeltsin, who signed the agreement for Russia, accepted Ukrainian sovereignty, Vlad Putin does not. In early 2014 Russia illegally annexed Crimea from Ukraine, and following that Russia has had proxies, the separatists in two the two regions Russia recently claimed as independent fight for them, claiming about 13,000 lives and creating two million refugees. That was proceeded by an incursion into the Republic of Georgia in 2008 which went quickly and with little reaction. Russia was successful in getting a country that was more amenable to its own wishes.

Hitler greeting Chamberlain, Sept 1938

Has the west enabled Russian militarization? Some seem to think so.  This article in The Atlantic Council in August of 2021 certainly argues that position by noting in part:

The international reaction to Russia’s military campaign in Georgia was to prove remarkably muted, with Moscow suffering few negative consequences. On the contrary, EU leaders led calls for a ceasefire that appeared to favor Russian interests, while the US under the new Obama administration was soon calling for a reset in relations with the Kremlin.

Understandably, many in Moscow interpreted this accommodating approach as an informal invitation for further acts of aggression in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. Six years after the Russo-Georgian War, Russia embarked on a far more comprehensive military campaign against Ukraine, where Moscow continues to occupy Crimea and large swathes of eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region.

Of course, in 2022 the Moscow movement to Ukraine is much greater than six months ago. In 1993 University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer, wrote that without a nuclear deterrent Ukraine would be subject to Russian aggression. Ukraine did the right thing by giving up its nuclear arsenal, but 19 years later is Mearsheimer's prediction coming true? In 1994 the United States told Ukraine that any Russian incursion would entail a strong US response. What the US meant by a response may vary in opinion, and who is in NATO. 

A mutual aid pact, NATO members will go to the military aid of other NATO members. Ukraine is not a member of NATO. There are former Soviet Republics that are members of NATO, the three Baltic states come to mind. Russia wants assurances that NATO will not allow Ukraine as a member. Why Ukraine and not the Baltic states? This may have to do more with the resources of Ukraine than the cultural make up of the Ukraine. 

Munich Accord Summit, Sept. 1938

This past weekend, varied officials were involved in meetings in Munich, which included the President of Ukraine and US Vice President Harris. Interestingly, it was also in Munich that world leaders met with Hitler and gave away the Sudetenland of then Czechoslovakia to Germany. Germany claimed the Sudetenland was culturally part of its country. Germans, in the 13th century, were invited to settle parts of what became Czechoslovakia in 1918, and these areas became known as the Sudetenland. Putin said the same thing about Crimea, has said the same message about at least two regions of the Ukraine (which he claims are now independent), and basically now the same message about all of Ukraine. As any student of history well knows, the world did not long get "peace in our time" following the 1938 Munich Accords. Although it did get it for about one year. Showing that military aid pacts mean very little, Czechoslovakia, which had such a pact with France, was left alone to face Germany if it wished, and was not even invited to the Munich pact discussions in September 1938. Czechs refer to this agreement as the Munich Betrayal. At least this past weekend, the Ukrainian president was at the meeting. 

Do pacts matter? I suppose that Ukraine thinks of aid through the Budapest agreement as more than viewed by the US. But, Ukraine matters not simply because of British and US commitments through the Budapest Memorandum. It is a country being bullied. It matters because of its mineral wealth, it has significant deposits of coal, iron ore, natural gas, manganese, salt, oil, graphite, sulfur, kaolin, titanium, nickel, magnesium, timber, and mercury.  Think of the importance of just titanium in aerospace, sports and medicine, to name a few areas. Most replacement joints are titanium. China has been very aggressive at purchasing mineral rights around the world, realizing that who holds the key to mineral wealth holds the key to economic power. That is why China has been acquiring mineral rights for those rare earth minerals used to make high technology equipment and Prius automobiles.

I don't know that any talking head can accurately predict what Russia's endgame is in the Ukraine situation. Of course, there are enough views out there that one person will be correct, and like the false fact checkers no one will let them know they were wrong. I tend to think Russia wishes to make Ukraine more subservient to Russian rule--essentially be a puppet. I suppose there are ways to do this without all out war. Cyber attacks are now going on. Russia has also indicated it will provide a response to US and European sanctions. In the meantime, the US and Europe are holding back some sanctions that will be imposed if Russia moves further into the Ukraine. President Biden, last May allowed the Nordstream 2 pipeline to proceed with construction by removing sanctions imposed by President Trump in 2019.  On February 23, Biden reimposed sanctions on Nordstream 2. Nordstream 2 allows Russian fossil fuels to flow Germany and other European countries, and bypass pipelines through Ukraine. The Trump administration, per a BBC report, thought the line a security risk. 

Looking at history there is one thing I do know--events and actions are intractable. Unknown consequences will result, different roads will be taken and events and actions will change over time. They can take on a life of their own. This gets us back to the Budapest Memorandum where Russia has done its job by breaking its agreements, and time will tell if US and European sanctions can revert some of the damage that has been done. Although there is no way 13,000 plus lives are coming back--those already lost by separatist actions (in those two regions Russia now claims are independent from Ukraine), over the past eight years. I do know that that resident I used to talk to on my walking route is lucky to be out of that country, and given what she said in the past she is well aware of how fortunate she

Quadraklafter

Every now and then while doing genealogical research I come across something that is intriguing. A previous post was about Rosalie (nee Pelinka) Duscheck, one of my second great grandmothers. In that post I noted how part of my ancestral tree--the Duschecks and Pelinkas--were cottagers. Under the peasant system a cottager generally did not hold any land, although they may have had a small area for a garden. The Havel family, from available records, was somewhat different. By the end of the 18th century the Havel family were sedlaks, a higher level peasant farmer, and had land under their control. This blog post will present basic information on the land holdings under the control of Franz and then Josef Havel in the small village of Dolni Chrastany in southern Bohemia.  Josef and his family would emigrate to the United States in 1868, and by 1872 owned an eighty acre farm north of Fort Atkinson, WI. In departing Dolni Chrastany they left behind a land area measured in jochs and quadraklafters.

Unter Groschum German name for
Dolni Chrastany, part of 1837 Indication Sketch

Before I get into the land holdings of Frantisek (also referred to as Franz (German)) and his son Josef Havel a few things are important to know. First, land that a peasant held was not owned by that peasant, it was more like a long-term lease or permanent easement, with much power and authority still retained by the domain, under the control of the lord. With the 1848 peasant land reform the peasants were able to purchase the property they had used and on which they had paid taxes and rent. The payments could be spread out over 20 years. This is interesting as 1868 is the year the Hawel's migrated to the United States. The value of the purchase of the land from the domain was set by a special committee. The land reform act canceled all corvee (unpaid labor due to the estate or lord, also referred to as robota) and taxes due to the estate or manor. Second, Frantisek and Josef, given the land they possessed in 1837, would likely have been considered a sedlak farmer in that they had more than about 10 hectares (about 24 acres). Frantisek's father, Matheous Hawel, by some parish records, is noted as a sedlak farmer in Ratiborova Lhota. Frantisek was born in Ratiborova Lhota and moved to Dolni Chrastany upon his marriage to Teresia Jiral. They farmed on the land previously controlled by her deceased father.

18 Dolni Chrastany, c 1990
Photo by Mary B Hovel

Third, is the unit of measurement, the Klafter. Previously I had written about the hide, an earlier measure of area. Quadraklafter appears in specific land records from about 1837. Thus, the quadraklafter and joch replaced the hide. Klafter was a unit of measurement that could be used to measure distance, area or volume. A klafter in length was about a fathom, or often stated as an arm spread of about 1.8 meters. One Joch, a larger unit of area, is equal to 1600 quadraklafters, so it is not unlike our square feet and acres. To better understand in our terminology, one Joch is equal to somewhere between 1.42 to 1.43 acres.  

Part of Land Register
Source: https://digi.ceskearchivy.cz/720659/445/1798/1226/31/0

Let us delve further into the peasant system, particularly as it relates to sedlaks. A sedlak, (Bauer in German) "owned enough arable land for agricultural subsistence, paid the highest manorial dues and state taxes and owed the most forced labour to the overlord, often with draft animals as well as human labor." (Klein and Ogilve, 2016, p 505). Generally, according to Klein and Ogilve (p 504) 10.7 acres was the minimum required to support a family of five. In the case of Josef Hawel, in 1859 he had five living children and he and his wife to support. Three more children would be born from 1960- 1967. Klein and Ogilvie infer a different area than the 25 acres noted earlier from which I confirmation of from two separate sources (John Cherney, 1994 and Judy Nelson). Those latter sources noted the requirement for 10 hectares of land for a farmer to be a sedlak.  Part of the difference may be time-Klein was writing about the 17th century while the others primary focus was on 18-19th century; another may be that Klein notes arable land, while the others did not have that specific distinction. Richard D'Amelio, who knows a great deal in this area notes that generally a sedlak would have had a team of horses to assist in field planting and harvesting, hence making it more than simple acreage. In any event, it appears the importance of a sedlak was the level of self sufficiency by having more than the minimum area to support a family. Some cottagers, who were lucky to have had land, may have had up to 10 or 11 acres.  Most Bohemian farmers would have less than 10 acres under their control. A sedlak had land, horses and livestock. But, they had also an obligation to raise some livestock and horses for the estate as part of that corvee system. Like other peasants, they would also have been required to provide other goods, like food, to the estate. 

Klein and Ogilvie (p. 505) also note that the social stratum of sedlaks, chalupniks (and a whole host of other terms) was not necessarily a social or economic stratum, but one defined institutionally and legally, and hence likely why it shows up in many records. However, this status was changed in 1781 with the peasant emancipation promulgated by Josef II. At this point people could chose where they lived, how much education they wished to receive, who to marry, and their occupation all without the approval of the lord of the manor. Thus, when Frantisek married Teresia Jiral in 1796 he did not need the permission of the lord. However, judicially they still were under control of the manor (Olomouc, 2003, p. 116), and had to provide the corvee, that forced labor and material to the lord. The peasant terminology and status thus carried beyond the peasant emancipation of 1781. In 1848 the land reform act ended the noble's rights of property, the corvee, and serf allegiance once and for all.

1839-1842 Seignorial Register
Listing Franz Hawel, wife Katherina (2nd spouse)
son Josef and daughter Katherine
Source: https://digi.ceskearchivy.cz/53269/30/2724/2691/68/0

There was a strong incentive for peasants to properly take care of the property under their control, and from which they would derive their subsistence and livelihood. We know that the robota system required payment of money, goods and services to the domain. Yet, as noted by Family Search,  "there were also many heavy restrictions of serfs. One of these was called Odumrt or escheat reversion." That link goes on to say that at the death of a peasant "the lord could take a share of his possessions. Also at any time the lord could confiscate land with or without compensation." What would lead to land confiscation? Usually land mismanagement or poor behavior. Although, since they did not need a reason, it may simply have been because they wanted to.  A serf would need, until the peasant emancipation of 1781, the lord’s permission to move, putting serfs in a bind. Loss of serfs could lead to less income from rent and taxes, not to mention less free labor as required by the robota or corvee system. Although, the link also notes that "farmers did move within the lord’s holdings frequently."  One could easily lose their livelihood to a lord at the whim of the lord. The lord was not someone you would want to tick off.

Hawel Family 1838 Seignorial Register
Source: https://digi.ceskearchivy.cz/53268/31/2917/2376/64/0

Let me start to synthesize, and put this in perspective. By the time Frantisek married Teresia Jiral the control of the domain over peasants had lessened due primarily due to the peasant emancipation of 1781, but also due to a number of previous reforms dating as far back as 1680. With the ability to decide where they wished to live, who to marry, what to do, gave a whole new set of decisions to the individuals, more freedom. Over a several year period, starting about 1825, the empire undertook a specific survey of property often referred to as the Stable Cadastre. This survey appears to have been completed for Dolni Chrastany about 1837. I suspect that the empire knew what they planned to do and the survey was a method to obtain data for the final land reform of 1848. The survey maps are available online. A link to the Indication Map for Dolni Chrastany, like a draft map, may be found here. This map provides the owner name on each parcel so one can tell where and what property Frantisek Hawel, (or Franz Habl as it shows on the maps) controlled in 1837.  Associated with the 1837 Stable Cadastre, was a book that specifically laid out, in over more than 60 pages, the owner of each parcel, the use of the property (meadow, field, forest, vineyard) and the annual value of the yield from the parcel. 

Part Dolni Chrastany Indication Sketch, village is near top
Notice the long narrow land parcels

If one were to look at the parcel arrangement at the link in the above paragraph (or the map posted above), one can see a great deal of parcel fragmentation. One element of manorial control was that the manor often prohibited further division of property on the bases of the existing high level of fragmentation that is in place. As you peruse the map you can generally see long narrow parcels. Over the years the parcels were often divided lengthwise from the village out with the thought that was the most equitable distribution of property. The downside was the fragmentation that was created.

Part of 1 sheet Basic Plot Protocol, with headings
Habl Josef is identified in second row

Frantisek, and later Josef, according to the 1837 Basic Plot Protocol records had under their control 61 parcels of land. Some of the parcels were attached, most were not. It could not have been easy for our ancestors to plant, tend, and harvest such scattered parcels. Just the time frame of walking from one parcel to another would have affected their productivity. As a sedlak, the Hawel's likely used the labor of their children, but they also would have engaged hired help. For example, they would have employed a chalupnik, or cottager (someone akin to Theresa Pelinka's father, although he was in a far different part of Bohemia), or perhaps had a baracnik or celedin who were farm laborers and would have lived in the barn. Lodging was likely part of the payment to the workers. 

When I happened across the 1837 recording of the Stable Cadastre a few months ago, I took the time to create a spreadsheet of the Hawel land holdings. With this, I was able to more easily count the number of parcels they had under their control, and obtain other data. What I have not done is to try and figure out the wording on the parcels that may provide an inkling of what the parcel was used for, and perhaps what crop may have been grown. I would likely need some professional assistance to figure out and translate the wording. Heck, I had trouble deciphering the headings which were in type set, soI got some assistance from Richard D'Amelio and a few others.

Basic Plot Protocol, image 5 of record

Let us examine one of the many sheets where Hawel (Habl in the plot records) is identified. Above is the first sheet where Hawel (Habl) shows in the Basic Plot Protocol. This would be image 5 (of 66 images). Looking at Habl we will move left to right, by column. First is the plot number which would be consistent with those available on the Stable Cadastre map(s). There is a small mark in the second column to the right of the parcel number. This marks that the land is rustical ground (under control of the owner, and not domain land) and the parcel is tied to a house. A good deal of information for one small mark, but one needs to interpret the headings, which are not shown in the above image. The column where "18" appears is the house number, or address, of the Hawel house followed by the name of the owner. Then we see his standing, that he is a farmer. Things get more interesting on the right side of the page. Here we see the land classification, which in this case is forest. Following, as we go right, is the area, the first column is for joch, which is empty in this instance,with the next indicating the number of quadraklafter for the parcel. Here we see the two parcels owned by the Hawel's on this image are 963 (parcel 37) and 354 (parcel 38) quadraklafters, which would equate to about .86 and .31 acres respectively. Finally, we get to the annual yield measured in guilders (column is empty in this instance) and/or Kroners, which reads 54 and 20 for each parcel. Given annual yield, I interpret this to mean that the value of wood harvested off the property was 54 and 20 kroners. It could have been an assessed value, and the best indication of which it actually is lies in some obscure book written in German. Unfortunately, I do not have a good means of what kroner means in today's terminology of dollars or euros. The following is a map (this link indicates one of a few maps for Dolni Chrastany) of the two parcels mentioned in this inventory (parcel numbers highlighted).

We know that in 1837 our ancestors, Frantisek and his son Josef, had 61 parcels of land identified in the Stable Cadastre survey and land use records. These lands were spread out among the land that comprises Dolni Chrastany. If I did my calculations correct, the Hawel family in 1837 "owned" about 42 acres of land. I would have to go through each parcel to identify what was meadow, forest, or tilled, and to more easily do that I need to figure out their handwriting. The Germans liked their records, but whoever invented the Kurrent script should have been sent to the loony farm, preferably before they invented it. Experts even have a hard time figuring out the scribbles. We also know that the totaled annual yield for the property was 107 guilders and 2,025 kroners. 

Present day, 18 Dolni Chrastany

At this point we know about how much land the Hawel's owned in Dolni Chrastany. But, there was one more parcel which was identified in a separate record, and that was the Building Protocol record. From the Basic Protocol, and the parish records of births, deaths and marriages, we know the Hawel family resided at 18 Dolni Chrastany. The building parcel record, below, shows that the Hawel house, was on parcel #23, associated with house number 18. The area of parcel 23, the building parcel, which is not counted with the basic parcels, is 239 quadraklafters. The area is equal to 9,253 sq ft. The record indicates an annual value of 51 kroners. By comparison, the area of my lot is about 17,000 sq ft.

The maps also give us more information. We can see that many of the buildings were attached and formed an upside down L shape. The front part, which comprised the living quarters, being of masonry construction in keeping with government mandates to limit fires. The outbuildings at the rear of the site are attached to the house and are of wood construction. The wood buildings may not have been fully enclosed and had no wall on the side by the courtyard. There is also a small building to the right side of the courtyard sharing a wall with address #17. You can read more about house, or a dum in the blog post from a year ago at this link.  Likely with his retirement from farming Frantisek lived with his wife in what was referred to as the "Outer house." This separate house could be that building. From present day air photo we can see this outer house seems less wide than on the map from 1837. Further, the opening to the street has been enclosed with additional building construction--likely what we see as garage doors. The whole front of the house is about 46 feet. Behind the house and the attached outbuildings are gardens and orchard. The village chapel sits near the Hawel house.

Hawel House in Dolni Chrastany
Indication Sketch

What is interesting is the number of similarities we see today with our ancestors of 185 years ago. We still tax parcels, we have parcel numbers, parcel area is important, we have land use. Like the 1837 maps of Bohemia which identified building construction, we an get similar information from Sanborn maps of the 19th century. In fact, that Bohemian Stable Cadastre provides more information than we have mapped today, the key piece being they mapped type of building construction which the Sanborn maps did, but is not mapped, in many localities, today. Yet our lives and lifestyles were much different. We have central heating in our homes, they would have been lucky to have a wood stove; I type this on a computer, they used pen and paper. We drive, they walked. Some of the problems are still the same, fragmentation of the land resource being one. Fragmentation led to the domain to regulate land division, and in many cases, to allow no more division. Most municipalities regulate land divisions today. The domains highly regulated the land and who it could be passed down to, although they generally allowed it to be passed down to family members. In a sense there was an understanding of some of the same problems we share today.  

Part of Habl Franz owned land Dolni Chrastany
Indication map

Frantisek's father was referred to as a sedlak, which shows that the Hawel's were near, or at the top of the peasant structure. When Frantisek's father sold his farm to his son Johann in 1805 it notes arable land area of 14 jochs and 280 quadraklafter (20 acres), meadow 6 and 1002 (9.4 acres), and woodlot of 4 and 362 (6 acres). This is the first recorded reference of which I am aware identifying a Hawel as a sedlak, Matheous, Frantisek's dad, owned land in Ratiborova Lhota, while Frantisek would marry Teresa Jiral and acquire the Jiral property. Mathous Hawel's position is in contrast to some of our other ancestors at a similar point in time (late 1700's to early 1900's). The Duschecks, were identified as landed cottagers, the Pelinka's who were cottagers, and even lower were our Appl ancestors who were small cottagers.* We may never know the reasons why Josef, and Anna Hawel and their children emigrated to the United States, but one has to think it was the abundance of farming opportunity available in the United States for a family of four living sons and four daughters. The Hawel family would see their land area measured differently in the United States as they would need to change their methods of calculations from jochs to acres, and from quadraflafters to square feet. 

Footnote: 

*The difference between small cottager and cottager is not well defined. Some sources indicate that a cottager worked perhaps a couple hectares of land, and a small cottager none. Other sources say most cottagers may have been lucky to have a garden. In a sense I think it is more a social type of distinction, than a purely economic one.  A cottager would work for a farmer (such as a sedlack) or plied another trade. I have seen two different, but reliable sources that do not agree on the listed occupation with one listing chalupnik as a cottager or upper cottager, and the other chalupnik as a small peasant cottager.

Sources:

1. https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Czechia_Land_and_Property

2. 2016 Klein, Alexander and Sheilagh Ogilvie "Occupational structure in the Czech lands under the second serfdom" The Economic History Review, 69,2 pp 493-521

3. https://ags.cuzk.cz/archiv/

4. https://www.familysearch.org/records/images/image-details?page=1&place=7257629&rmsId=TH-909-81190-74230-6&imageIndex=4&singleView=true

5. https://www.familysearch.org/records/images/image-details?page=1&place=7257629&rmsId=TH-909-81190-72620-4&imageIndex=4&singleView=true

6. Cherney, John. 1994 "Wisconsin's Land for the Landless: Examining the Push and Pull Forces of Czech Immigration, 1848-1870" University of Wisconsin.

7. Nelson, Judy. "Peasantry levels, occupations, and personal descriptions found in Czech records." 

8. Lomouc, Anna Oscacouva, 2003. "Serfs, Villeins; Nobles, et al

9.  Facebook post between author and Richard D'Amelio, 17 Feb 2022

Rigged?

The National Football League has embraced, to a certain degree, parity among the 32 teams. The salary cap is one way in which that is accomplished. Many point to the issue of parity as the reason why three of the four Divisional round and both of the Conference Championship games were decided by three points, and the one that was not was an overtime win when the Chiefs scored a touchdown to win by six points. This is a league that has seen a few teams rise to the top echelon in Super Bowl wins, with the Pittsburgh Steelers, and New England Patriots having six wins each, and the San Francisco 49ers and the Dallas Cowboys having five each. The Green Bay Packers and New York Giants have four each. Two of the Packer wins, as Green Bay fans know, were the first two Super Bowls. For years I have wondered, has the NFL rigged the games to a certain degree?

Packer Head Coach, who cannot seem
to  sufficiently game plan W's to get his team to win a Super Bowl

The first time I had this conspiracy minded thought was in 1998. The Packers were about to play the Denver Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Two good quarterbacks, John Elway and Brett Favre would be featured in the game. John Elway was nearing the end of his career and the Packers had won the prior year Super Bowl by beating the Patriots 35 to 21. Before the game there was a news report that the television contracts would be opened the week or so after the Super Bowl. As we all know, the NFL is a big money organization and the bulk of that money comes from television contracts. To show how much money the NFL receives for the telecast of its games, the television organizations signed an eleven year deal with the NFL in 2020 totaling more than $110 billion. That is $10 billion a year. The television contracts are important to the NFL. So important, would they rig a game?  Perhaps. As Super Bowl XXXII was set to play the NFC had won 13 consecutive Super Bowls. At that time, my thought was the NFL will want an AFC win to get the television contract price up for AFC games. Add to that situation, that the NFL lead for the contracts was Pat Bowlen (now deceased) who owned, you guessed it, the Denver Broncos. Sure enough, Denver won. One could argue certain incompetence, as usual, on the play of the Packers, but I still hold the thought today that the game was rigged. A fourteenth consecutive win by the NFC would have had the those putting bids for mainly AFC games wondering why should they pay so much money. That and the desire to give John Elway a Super Bowl victory (he would win a second consecutive Super Bowl by winning XXXIII). Not unlike Peyton Manning getting a second Super Bowl while playing with the Broncos.

Let us fast forward to this last Christmas Day. My brother-in-law was watching a Packer team barely eek out a win over the Cleveland Browns. The Packers had difficulty putting the game away, and even my brother-in-law wondered if it was not rigged to keep television viewership high for the featured Christmas Day game. Perhaps it is the parity in the league, or maybe how they rig the game.

Packer President Mark Murphy
Who oversees a team that meltdowns like no other

That theory plays right into the close Divisional and Conference Championship games played this year. Most decided in the last minute of play, if not by the last play of the game. This year the Super Bowl features the Cincinnati Bengals and the Los Angeles Rams. Cincinnati has a devoted fan base, and Tinseltown has trouble filling its new stadium. How much trouble do the Rams have filling their stadium? Well, they had to use a silent snap count in their own home stadium against the 49ers in both week 18 (last week of the season) and the NFC Championship game. That is because so many 49er fans were in the Los Angeles Rams new stadium. At first I wondered if the LA fans were simply stupid by yelling and making noise when the Rams had the ball, but when they showed a shot of the crowd there was almost as much red (49er color) as blue (Ram color)--an indicator of fan base. Of course, Super Bowl tickets are expensive so only the glitterati get in to the game, no regular Joe need apply. As much as the NFL talks about equity, they are an organization, that when it comes down to its final game of the season is about the money and moneyed interests. NFL football privilege. I am sure the LA glittering intelligentsia who fashion themselves as the harbinger of all that is good and right will be well present for the Super Bowl since it is in the Rams home stadium. The broadcasting network will show photos of LA Laker players, politicians and probably even Roger Goddell. 

Robbie Gould, kicking game winning field goal
as time expired. Just when one thinks it not possible, the Packers
find a way to rise to an even higher levels of incompetence.
On this play the Packers had only 10 men on the field.

This is the second year in a row that the Super Bowl game will be played in the home stadium of one of the Super Bowl participants. Tampa Bay beat Kansas City last year in the home stadium of Tampa Bay. This is concerning to some, so much so that the NFL is considering holding all Super Bowl games at US Bank Stadium in Minneapolis, MN, in a way to assure that a team does not make it to the Super Bowl to play in their home stadium again. Perhaps it should be Ford Field. (That is a joke.) 

In the meantime millions of people, including my wife, turn to television to watch football games. This year I knew the Packers would lose to the 49ers. How did I know? It is history. Let me count the ways of  Packer incompetence which has a tendency to show up in such games. This too plays into the rigged nature of the game. Is it possible that a team can be so incompetent, for so many years, in such playoff games?  It is not just Matt "Unprepared" LaFleur as their head coach. It happened with Mike Holmgren, Mike Sherman, and Mike McCarthy, too. Think of the loss to the Seahawks in January 2015 when the Packers had a 19-7 lead, and ended up losing the game in overtime. Or, in January 2004 when they lost to Philadelphia which featured Philly making a first down on the infamous 4th and 26. (It is so infamous it has its own Wikipedia page.) What are the odds that a team could be so incompetent in playoff games? Sure, the Packers have two Super Bowl victories since the Lombardi era (1997 and 2011), but the league throws them in to avoid people like me thinking the league is rigged. 

Packer Meltdown against Seattle

But, it is not just the players. Matt Unprepared LaFleur receives a great deal of money to have properly prepare his team for a game, and with the last loss (and others), he freely admitted that he was not properly prepared. What type of game does it take for LaFleur to be prepared? Is that a sign of knowing incompetence to throw the game? The incompetency of the Packers did not disappoint in this season's Divisional playoff game. I think it would be hard pressed to find another team that rises to such a level of incompetence during playoff games. On the other hand they were a team that could barely beat the Cleveland Browns, and lost to the Lions, so maybe they are just bad. In the last game of the regular season the Lions had the lead before the Packer first team skilled players left the field, so the highly regarded Packer offense did not produce against the fourth worst defense in the league. 

Part of 4th and 26 Wikipedia Page

Were the Divisional round playoff games rigged? I am not sure, but with all the close games, it makes one wonder if it is parity or the NFL rigging games to get even more viewership and money that is at play. The NFL is a money machine, but in the end does not produce much wealth but for some players and the oligarchs and its Commissioner. This year it is hard to say what will occur, and which way the NFL will go. Will they get an AFC victory for the upstart star QB with the Bengals, and to show the home team does not always win in Super Bowls? Or will it be the Rams in the hopes of actually getting Ram fans to attend a game, and not be out-voiced by 49er fans? This weekend will show which way Roger G., wants to rig the Super Bowl.

Images from Google searches

Finding Rosalie

On this date one hundred and ninety-three years ago Rosalie Duscheck, one of my second great grandmothers, was born (3 February 1829)  She was known in the Village of Sun Prairie and its environs as Grandma Duscheck. She was both a formidable, and remarkable woman. Rosalie was the mother of my great grandmother Amelia Duscheck Hovel. Doing genealogical research is a journey of dead ends, and brick walls, through script, language, finding place, and available records. This blog post will not really be about the specific record search for Rosalie, but rather, trying to figure out what type of a person she was. There are a few clues that provide hints as to the type of woman she was, but there will also be some speculation. Rosalie would enter this earth in a peasant cottage in central Europe, perhaps with a small garden; her life would end in the United States, with land holdings she probably never expected to have under her control. My journey in finding out about Rosalie would be nothing compared to the journey she would make.

Rosalie's birth/baptismal record, first row on page
Source: Zmarsk Archives, Czechia

Family records seem to indicate that Rosalie had a surname of Belenka, but she was born to Wenzel Pelinka and his wife Theresia, in an area east of Usti nad Orlici, in Horni Houzovec, known by its German name at the time as Hertersford.  At the time of her birth Bohemia was part of the Austrian Empire. At her birth, the Austrian Empire was ruled by a descendant of the Hapsburg line, Francis I. Francis I, and other nobility, would have led remarkably different lives from those of the peasants. From her baptismal record located in a downloaded Parish book from the Zmarsk Archives, we get a glimpse of the status of her ancestors. The record is not very long, but it does provide important clues to her socio-economic status. Rosalie was born to Wenzel Pelinka, a cottager, and his wife Theresia daughter of Matheous Skalitzky, who was also a cottager, and his wife. Cottager is not an occupation, but denotes they lived in a small house in a rural like area. A cottager was, generally speaking, a non-land holding peasant.

Plat Map Town of Milford, Jefferson County
Source:  Wisconsin Historical Society Archives

Knowing that they were cottagers is very important as it shows that they were not just of the peasant class, but  that they were near the bottom of the peasant class. Peasant cottagers were the most common group of Bohemians to emigrate to the United States. There exists cottagers and small peasant cottagers, with the distinction being a small peasant cottager held no land. A peasant cottager, unlike a small peasant cottager, may have had an area for a garden. If fortunate they may have had available a hectare or two.  Although this is difficult to know, because other times when a cottager has "some land" that is indicated. Since no occupation for her father is identified, at least in that record, I think we can assume that he worked as a farm hand for a sedlak or larger farmer. It is possible, however, that he was involved in a craft--tailor, shoemaker, etc. In this case, since the identified status is as a peasant cottager I think it is safe to say that Wenzel and his father-in-law were farmhands. If they had a garden, that likely would have been predominantly under the care of her mother. 

1920 US Census, Rosalie living with son Edward
in Sun Prairie, WI
Source:  Ancestry.com

This was not an easy life. The farmhand, at times, may have traveled miles to find work to eek out a living, as they would not have had sufficient livestock or land on which to support a family for a full year. They would also have had to provide free labor to the domain, which varied over time, but could be several days a year.  They also had to provide goods to the domain, which you can read about here.  This took away both time and goods that would have been available to the families of Wenzel Pelinka and his father-in-law, Matheous Skalitsky. 

Rosalie with daughter Anne Lohneis and Anne's daughter Marion
Source: Family archives, via Michael J Hovel
Perhaps only known photo of her

Rosalie would become the second wife of Josef Duscheck (born 1808), and they were likely married in 1851, as it appears Rosalie gave birth to her first child in June 1852 in Bohemia, and that child is said to have died in the year of birth. Records of the Duschek family found online indicate that she gave birth to a second child in Bohemia in 1853 (who also is said to have died at a young age), but I have been unable to locate a baptismal/birth record for that child. Death records for that year are not available on line to my knowledge. Rosalie would go on to give birth to seven additional children. Her son, Rudolph, which according to Rosalie's obituary, was born one day before the family arrived at the port of Quebec. In other words, he was born at sea.  In this situation we have a very pregnant woman making a nine week ocean voyage--and giving birth just before arriving at port. I am not sure what ship she was on, but immigrant ships were crowded and not very hospitable places. It certainly was no Queen Mary on which her grandchild, my grandpa Rudy, would travel from the US to Europe with his wife Ida in September 1956, 102 years after Rosalie left for the United States. The other four children were born in Wisconsin. Four of Joseph's children with his first wife, Viktoria, would live to emigrate to the United States with the family in 1854. If one looks at varied Duscheck websites you can see that half or more of the 1960's Sun Prairie was in fact related to Josef Duscheck, which is why Rosalie was simply known in Sun Prairie as Grandma Duscheck. 

Three daughters of Rosalie
Amelia (Hovel), Mary (Neis) and Anne (Lohneis)
Source: David Dixon

The family arrived in Quebec and then made their way to Jefferson County, Wisconsin where, according to an 1862 plat map, they farmed 80 acres in the town of Milford, generally southwest of Watertown, on what is, at least today, French Road. At some point, between 1862 and 1870 the family moved to the Town of Bristol just northeast of Sun Prairie, and about a mile east of the north end of Brazee Lake. The property is located at the northwest corner of Twin Lane Rd and Meadow Rd.  Josef would pass away in 1877 and is buried at St Joseph's Cemetery in East Bristol, WI.  Rosalie, with Josef having passed, was the sole parent for six of the nine children born to her and Josef, and five children of Josef's born to his first wife, Viktoria. Viktoria probably died 1851. Grandma Duscheck, according to her obituary, "showed her courage and business ability in managing the farm and looking after her children, three of whom were very young when their father died." With the help of some of her children she would farm the property after Joseph passed away. Farming was never an easy proposition, but she showed more than courage. She persevered in continuing the family farm. In 1891 she moved to the village to live with her son Edward, and it was in Edward's home that she passed away. In 1920, the village of Sun Prairie had a population of 1,236 persons, and perhaps more cows, horses, and chickens than people. She endured the "privations of a pioneer woman" when woman had more chores to do than one should be able to handle. This was a time when much of their food was home grown, and the livestock slaughtered, eggs harvested, butter churned, and chickens butchered. In other words, she was a Land Girl. 

1873 Town of Bristol Plat Map,
part of Brazee Lake to left
Source: Dane County Plat book

What stood out to most people who met her was not that she was hard working and was very courageous, those were virtues instilled in her when she was born in to the peasant class in an outpost of the Austrian Empire, rather it was her cheerfulness. Her obituary notes that "She was not only a devoted wife and mother but a true friend, beloved by a great circle of friends." She was a woman from a time now distant, split more by changes in values, virtues, and technology than by the over 100 years since her death. What stands out most about Rosalie, beyond her perseverance, was her piety.  

Theresa Skalitzky, Baptismal/birth record 18 Oct 1805
Rosalie's mother
Source:  Zmarsk Archives, Czechia

As stated in her obituary, she found great pleasure in going to mass, for the last thirty years of life a she "scarcely missed a day."  She would walk to mass regardless of the weather conditions. When she reached the age of 90 her health started to fail and she became confined to her home, and a little later to her bed. If she had one regret in her long life, it was her inability to attend daily mass. She had a great desire to see the new Sacred Hearts Church which had recently been completed, so a few months before she passed away her children took her to the church in a wheel chair. It was there "she found great joy praying at the altar." My father, born in 1918, would be one of the thirty-four great grandchildren she left behind. She passed away a few months shy of her 93rd birthday, and at the time was the second oldest person in the village of Sun Prairie. 

Rosalie's grave marker
Sacred Hearts Cemetery, Sun Prairie, WI
Source: Author photo

Rosalie Pelinka (also known as Belenka) Duscheck was a testament to the American dream. She was born near lowest class peasantry in the depths of Central Europe, to being a wife and mother in the Midwestern United States. A world apart in distance and time, but her values and ethics were formed by in the place of her birth. She was a wife and mother who tended and held together farm and family. Her greatest attributes were not, however, that she was a true pioneer woman for those in the Town of Bristol, rather it was the family she raised, and the values she instilled. Those values took hold through her greatest virtue, that of piety.  Piety through her strong faith allowed her to have courage and to persevere through the difficult and trying times. To mark her passing on that fall Friday the Sun Prairie church bells tolled. This was the Village's way of remembering not just the town's Grandma Duscheck, but a woman who gave back to the community more than she asked from it. In finding Rosalie, I found more than expected, which is a testament to her capabilities and strength of will.