‘A Dark Intrigue…’ The Revolutions of 1848

There is a presumed history of things that is taught to most, that even the less powerful from amongst the elites believe…and then there is another history of these events, that only a relative few and powerful know. It is important for those wishing to see not only the preservation of their own people, but the other various peoples of the world as well that make up humanity, to have an excellent grasp of the past so as to see clearly as to what to do in the present. Hence entries here such as this…

Starting in France, in February of 1848, revolutions would sweep much of Europe. These Revolutions of 1848 would be a major milestone in the construction of the continental super-state then called the United States of Europe and today called the European Union…yet in some places this event is known of well before it takes place. In London, over a year prior, all eyes are upon British Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston, a person of very high rank in a certain international organization, in regards to shocking pronouncements he has made about the near term future of Europe as a whole as published below in the November 26, 1846 edition of The London Spectator, and republished in the United States on January 2, 1847 in Littell’s Living Age. Even earlier, and reflecting a dysfunctional relationship between the Jewish and a European people, Benjamin Disraeli in his 1844 book Coningsby also seems to speak of these 1848 revolutions.

The most striking occurrence of the week is not an event, but some writing, highly Palmerstonian in its savor. According to this characteristic effusion, all Europe is about to be in commotion. A dark intrigue is seen in every region…You would think there was going to be instant war - in Italy, in Schleswig, in Switzerland, in Poland - everywhere.

February 1848 Revolution in France - Barricade on the rue Soufflot by Horace Vernet

The London Spectator - November 21, 1846

The most striking occurrence of the week is not an event, but some writing, highly Palmerstonian in its savor. According to this characteristic effusion, all Europe is about to be in commotion. A dark intrigue is seen in every region, with France at the bottom of it all. The French government, we are told, has forfeited its position by the Montpensier marriage; must prepare to submit to indignities all round; and is making ready, in its truckling for pardon, to perpetrate a series of international crimes…

...Thus may France procure assent to her attempted ascendency in the penninsula. “It is true, that to combat such a combination, we have Lord Palmerston at the Foreign Office, and Lord Ponsonby at Vienna.” Too true, indeed. It is an extraordinary coincidence, that no sooner does Lord Palmerston return to office, than this universal conspiring reappears. Perhaps there is something really the matter, though not abroad. The suspicion of being the object for universal conspiracy is one trait of madness, and Lord Palmerston exhibits that symptom with renewed intensity, as though the excitements of office were too much for him. But “we” do not rely altogether on ourselves; “we rely more on the alacrity of the French Opposition to denounce these new tendencies of the policy of their government.” Lord Palmerston then reckons on hubbub in Paris as before 1841; more interpellations, more fuss making about shadowy constructive suspicions of intrigue, more diplomatic turmoil, more despatch writing! If a busy attorney, who wished to seem yet busier than he was, established himself in a country town, and set himself to work detecting flaws in the title deeds and leases all round, or presuming and imputing them all round, with a view to the general litigation that would ensue, the restlessness and turmoil excited in the country would be much like the feeling created in Europe, according to these ministerial accounts, just at the time Lord Palmerston returns to business. You would think there was going to be instant war - in Italy, in Schleswig, in Switzerland, in Poland - everywhere.

In the midst of these revolutions, in March of 1848, The London Times would publish an editorial exhorting Europe to follow the model of the United States as quoted below, italics in original. Editorials in that paper are significant as they have long been seen as a mouthpiece of official British government thought regarding policy, much as the New York Times is in the US regarding the US government…

The German in Pennsylvania, the Frenchmen in Louisiana, the Spaniard in Florida, had no need, when they came to participate in the advantages of the great American Union, of sacrificing one iota of the local institutions to which they were attached.

London Times - March, 1848

‘Let them [Europe] observe the working of federalism in America. The most complete national unity is there preserved as regards foreign nations; complete freedom of trade, complete uniformity of action in all respects essential to national life; while, at the same time, the inestimable habit of self government is created and retained, and the power of adapting local institutions to local wants exercised so fully, that no American citizen has to complain that the interests of his locality suffer by the distance or neglect of the legislative centre. The German in Pennsylvania, the Frenchmen in Louisiana, the Spaniard in Florida, had no need, when they came to participate in the advantages of the great American Union, of sacrificing one iota of the local institutions to which they were attached. So wonderfully elastic and expansive is this principle of government, that the entire American continent might, as it appears to us, be absorbed in one vast federation, with but little inconvenience or danger resulting from its extent and diversity of characteristics.’

Littell’s Living Age, the US publication which the above excerpted Times editorial was republished in its January 2, 1847 edition would add the comment below suggesting that in the future the continental super-states of the United States of [North] America and the United States of Europe might join together…

‘Suppose those European nations to have settled their governments, and then to have made a Federal Union of the whole, within which peace and free trade should be perpetual, as they are between our states. And then suppose the United States of America were invited to join with the United States of Europe, not in political connection, but on the basis of peace and free trade! We desire to prepare our readers for such a question…’

While elites of the United States, as well as those of other countries, were aiding revolutionaries in Europe even earlier than 1848, such as the Greeks in their struggle with the Ottomans…of which the Greek flag below, adopted in the 1820’s, should be noted…

support by powerful people within the US, in cooperation with those of the UK at times, was a bit more prominent in 1848, as with the case of Lajos Kossuth of Hungary…

Kossuth’s time in power was at an end. A solitary fugitive, he crossed the Turkish frontier. He was hospitably received by the Turkish authorities, who, supported by the British, refused, notwithstanding the threats of the allied emperors, to surrender him and other fugitives to Austria…In September 1851 he was allowed to leave Turkey on the American frigate USS Mississippi.

He was the second foreign citizen to make a speech in the [US] National Statuary Hall (Lafayette being the first)...His ship was greeted with a hundred-gun salute when it passed Jersey City and hundreds of thousands of people came to see him set foot in New York. Heralded as the Hungarian Washington, he was given a congressional Banquet and received at the White House and the House of Representatives.

Lajos Kossuth (1802-1894)

Lajos “Louis” Kossuth [?l?jo? ?ko?ut] (Monok, September 19, 1802 – Turin, March 20, 1894) was a Hungarian lawyer, politician and Regent-President of Hungary in 1849. He was widely honoured during his lifetime, including in the United Kingdom and the United States, as a freedom fighter.

Family

Lajos Kossuth was born at Monok, a small town in the county of Zemplén as the oldest of four children. His father belonged to the lower nobility, had a small estate and was a lawyer by profession. The predominantly Slovak ancestors of the Kossuth family had lived in the county of Turóc since the 13th century.[1][2] The Slovak ancestry of Kossuth never became the topic of political debates because the family was part of the Hungarus nobility of the Kingdom of Hungary, Kossuth considered himself an ethnic Hungarian and stated that no Slovak nation exists. The mother of Lajos Kossuth, Karolina Weber was of Lutheran German origin.

Early Years

His mother raised the children as strict Lutherans. Kossuth completed his education at the Piarist college of Sátoraljaújhely and one year in the Calvinist college of Sárospatak and the University of Pest-Buda (now Budapest). Aged nineteen, he entered his father’s legal practice. He was popular locally, and having been appointed steward to the countess Szapáry, a widow with large estates, he became her voting representative in the county assembly and settled in Pest. He was subsequently dismissed on the grounds of using estate funds to pay a gambling debt.

Entry into national politics

Shortly after his dismissal by Countess Szapáry, Kossuth was appointed as deputy to Count Hunyady at the National Diet. The Diet met during 1825–1827 and 1832–1836 in Pozsony (present day Bratislava), then capital of Hungary. Only the upper aristocracy could vote, however, and Kossuth took little part in the debates. At the time, a struggle to reassert a Hungarian national identity was beginning to emerge under able leaders – most notably Wesselényi and the Széchenyis. In part, this was also a struggle for reform against the stagnant Austrian government. Kossuth’s duties to Count Hunyady included reporting on Diet proceedings in writing, as the Austrian government, fearing popular dissent, had banned published reports. The high quality of Kossuth’s letters led to their being circulated in manuscript among other Liberal magnates. Readership demands turned his output into the editing of an organized parliamentary gazette (Országgy?lési tudósítások); spreading his name and influence further. Orders from the Official Censor halted circulation by lithograph printing. Distribution in manuscript by post was forbidden by the government, although circulation by hand continued.

In 1836 the Diet was dissolved. Kossuth continued to report (in letter form), covering the debates of the county assemblies. This new-found publicity gave the assemblies national political prominence. Previously they had had little idea of each others’ proceedings. His skilful embellishment of the speeches from the Liberals and Reformers further enhanced the impact of his newsletters. The government in vain attempted to suppress the letters, and other means having failed, he was in May 1837, with Wesselényi and several others, arrested on a charge of high treason. After spending a year in prison at Buda awaiting trial, he was condemned to four more years’ imprisonment. His strict confinement damaged his health, but he was allowed to read. He greatly increased his political knowledge, and also acquired, from the study of the Bible and Shakespeare, a thorough knowledge of English.

The arrests had caused great indignation. The Diet, which reconvened in 1839, demanded the release of the prisoners, and refused to pass any government measures. Metternich long remained obdurate, but the danger of war in 1840 obliged him to give way. Wesselényi had been broken by his imprisonment, but Kossuth, partly supported by the frequent visits of Teresa Meszleny, emerged from prison unbroken. Immediately after his release Kossuth and Meszleny were married, and she remained a firm supporter of his politics. The Roman Catholic priests refused to bless the marriage as Kossuth would not convert to Meszleny’s religion. This experience influenced Kossuth’s firm defense of mixed marriages.

Journalist and political leader

Kossuth had now become a national icon. He regained full health in January 1841 and was appointed editor of Pesti Hírlap, a new Liberal party newspaper. Notably, the government agreed to grant a licence. The paper achieved unprecedented success, soon reaching the then immense circulation of 7000 copies. A competing pro-government paper, Világ, started up but it only served to increase Kossuth’s visibility and add to the general political fervour.

Széchenyi, the great reformer, publicly warned Kossuth that his appeals to the passions of the people would lead the nation to revolution. Kossuth, undaunted, did not stop at the publicly reasoned reforms demanded by all Liberals: the abolition of entail, the abolition of feudal burdens and taxation of the nobles. He went on to broach the possibility of separating from Austria. By combining this nationalism with an insistence on the superiority of the Magyars to the Slavonic inhabitants of Hungary, he sowed the seeds of both the collapse of Hungary in 1849 and his own political demise.

In 1844, Kossuth was dismissed from Pesti Hírlap after a dispute with the proprietor over salary. It is believed that the dispute was rooted in government intrigue. Kossuth was unable to obtain permission to start his own newspaper. In a personal interview Metternich offered to take him into the government service. Kossuth refused, and spent the next three years without a regular position. He continued to agitate on behalf of both political and commercial independence for Hungary. He adopted the economic principles of List, and was the founder of a “Védegylet” society – whose members consumed only Hungarian produce. He also argued for the creation of a Hungarian port at Fiume.

In autumn 1847, Kossuth was able to take his final key step. Due to the support of Lajos Batthyány during a keenly fought campaign, he was elected to the new Diet as member for Pest. He proclaimed: “Now that I am a deputy, I will cease to be an agitator.” He immediately became chief leader of the Extreme Liberals. Ferenc Deák was absent. Batthyány, István Széchenyi, Szemere and József Eötvös, his political rivals, felt that his personal ambition and egoism led him to assume the chief place, and to use his parliamentary position to establish himself as leader of the nation; but before his eloquence and energy all apprehensions were useless. His eloquence was of that nature, in its impassioned appeals to the strongest emotions, that it required for its full effect the highest themes and the most dramatic situations. In a time of rest, though he could never have been obscure, he would never have attained the highest power. It was therefore a necessity of his nature, perhaps unconsciously, always to drive things to a crisis.

Regent-President of Hungary

The crisis came, and he used it to the full. On March 3, 1848, shortly after the news of the revolution in Paris had arrived, in a speech of surpassing power he demanded parliamentary government for Hungary and constitutional government for the rest of Austria. He appealed to the hope of the Habsburgs, “our beloved Archduke Franz Joseph” (then 17 years old), to perpetuate the ancient glory of the dynasty by meeting half-way the aspirations of a free people. He at once became the leader of the European revolution; his speech was read aloud in the streets of Vienna to the mob by which Metternich was overthrown (March 13), and when a deputation from the Diet visited Vienna to receive the assent of Emperor Ferdinand to their petition it was Kossuth who received the chief ovation. Batthyány, who formed the first responsible government, appointed Kossuth the Minister of Finance.

With amazing energy he began developing the internal resources of the country: re-establishing a separate Hungarian coinage, and using every means to increase national self-consciousness Characteristically, the new Hungarian bank notes had Kossuth’s name as the most prominent inscription; making reference to “Kossuth Notes” a future byword. A new paper was started, to which was given the name of Kossuth Hirlapja, so that from the first it was Kossuth rather than the Palatine or the president of the ministry whose name was in the minds of the people associated with the new government. Much more was this the case when, in the summer, the dangers from the Croats, Serbs and the reaction at Vienna increased. In a great speech July 11 he asked that the nation should arm in self-defence, and demanded 200,000 men; amid a scene of wild enthusiasm this was granted by acclamation. When Croatian viceroy Jellachich was marching on Pest he went from town to town rousing the people to the defence of the country, and the popular force of the Honvéd was his creation. When Batthyány resigned he was appointed with Szemere to carry on the government provisionally, and at the end of September he was made President of the Committee of National Defence.

From this time he had increased amounts of power. The direction of the whole government was in his hands. Without military experience, he had to control and direct the movements of armies; he was unable to keep control over the generals or to establish that military co-operation so essential to success. Arthur Görgey in particular, whose great abilities Kossuth was the first to recognize, refused obedience; the two men were very different personalities. Twice Kossuth deposed him from the command; twice he had to restore him. It would have been well if Kossuth had had something more of Görgey’s calculated ruthlessness, for, as has been truly said, the revolutionary power he had seized could only be held by revolutionary means (by which it is usually meant, revolutions can only be effected by dictatorship, repression and bloodshed); but he was by nature soft-hearted and always merciful; though often audacious, he lacked decision in dealing with men. It has been said that he showed a want of personal courage; this is not improbable, the excess of feeling which made him so great an orator could hardly be combined with the coolness in danger required of a soldier; but no one was able, as he was, to infuse courage into others.

During all the terrible winter which followed, his energy and spirit never failed him. It was he who overcame the reluctance of the army to march to the relief of Vienna; after the defeat of Schwechat, at which he was present, he sent Bem to carry on the war in Transylvania. At the end of the year, when the Austrians were approaching Pest, he asked for the mediation of Mr Stiles, the American envoy. Windisch-Graetz, however, refused all terms, and the Diet and government fled to Debrecen, Kossuth taking with him the Crown of St Stephen, the sacred emblem of the Hungarian nation. In November 1848, Emperor Ferdinand abdicated in favour of Franz Joseph. The new Emperor revoked all the concessions granted in March and outlawed Kossuth and his colleagues. In April 1849, when the Hungarians had won many successes, after sounding the army, he issued the celebrated declaration of Hungarian independence, in which he declared that “the house of Habsburg-Lorraine, perjured in the sight of God and man, had forfeited the Hungarian throne.” It was a step characteristic of his love for extreme and dramatic action, but it added to the dissensions between him and those who wished only for autonomy under the old dynasty, and his enemies did not scruple to accuse him of aiming for Kingship. For the time the future form of government was left undecided, and Kossuth was appointed regent-president (to satisfy both royalists and republicans). The hopes of ultimate success were frustrated by the intervention of Russia; all appeals to the western powers were vain, and on August 11 Kossuth abdicated in favor of Görgey, on the ground that in the last extremity the general alone could save the nation. Görgey capitulated at Világos to the Russians, who handed over the army to the Austrians. Görgey was spared – at the insistence of the Russians. Reprisals were taken on the rest of the Hungarian army. Kossuth steadfastly maintained until his death that Görgey alone was responsible for the humiliation.

USS Mississippi in 1863

Escape and tour of Britain and America

Kossuth’s time in power was at an end. A solitary fugitive, he crossed the Turkish frontier. He was hospitably received by the Turkish authorities, who, supported by the British, refused, notwithstanding the threats of the allied emperors, to surrender him and other fugitives to Austria. In January 1850 he was removed from Vidin, where he had been kept under house arrest, to Shumla, and thence to Kütahya in Asia Minor. Here he was joined by his children, who had been confined at Pressburg (present day Bratislava); his wife (a price had been set on her head) had joined him earlier, having escaped in disguise.

In September 1851 he was allowed to leave Turkey on the American frigate USS Mississippi. He first landed at Marseille, where he received an enthusiastic welcome from the people, but the Prince-President Louis Napoleon refused to allow him to cross France.

On October 23 he landed at Southampton and spent three weeks in Britain, where he was generally feted. Addresses were presented to him at Southampton, Birmingham and other towns; he was officially entertained by the Lord Mayor of London; at each place he spoke eloquently in English for the Hungarian cause; and he indirectly caused Queen Victoria to stretch the limits of her constitutional power over her Ministers to avoid embarrassment, and eventually helped cause the fall of the government in power.

Having learnt English during an earlier political imprisonment with the aid of a volume of Shakespeare, his spoken English was ‘wonderfully archaic’ and theatrical. The Times, generally cool towards the revolutionaries of 1848 in general and Kossuth in particular, nevertheless reported that his speeches were ‘clear’ and that a three-hour talk was not unusual for him; and also, that if he was occasionally overcome by emotion when describing the defeat of Hungarian aspirations, ‘it did not at all reduce his effectiveness’. At Southampton, he was greeted by a crowd of thousands outside the Lord Mayor’s balcony, who presented him with a flag of the Hungarian Republic. The Corporation of London accompanied him in procession through the City, and the way to the Guildhall was lined by thousands of cheering people. He went thereafter to Winchester, Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham; at Birmingham the crowd that gathered to see him ride under the triumphal arches erected for his visit was described, even by his severest critics, as 75,000 individuals. Back in London he addressed the Trades Unions at Copenhagen Fields in Islington. Some twelve thousand ‘respectable artisans’ formed a parade at Russell Square and marched out to meet him. At the Fields themselves, the crowd was enormous; the Times estimated it conservatively at 25,000, while the Morning Chronicle described it as 50,000, and the demonstrators themselves 100,000.

The Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, who had already proved himself a friend of the losing sides in several of the failed revolutions of 1848, was determined to receive him at his country house, Broadlands. The Cabinet had to vote to prevent it; Queen Victoria reputedly was so incensed by the possibility of her Foreign Secretary supporting an outspoken republican that she asked the Prime Minister, Lord John Russell for Palmerston’s resignation, but Russell claimed that such a dismissal would be drastically unpopular at that time and over that issue. When Palmerston upped the ante by receiving at his house, instead of Kossuth, a delegation of Trade Unionists from Islington and Finsbury, and listened sympathetically as they read an address that praised Kossuth and declared the Emperors of Austria and Russia ‘despots, tyrants and odious assassins’, it was noted as a mark of indifference to Royal displeasure. This, together with Palmerston’s support of Louis Napoleon, caused the Russell government to fall and Palmerston himself to take office.

In addition, the indignation which he aroused against Russian policy had much to do with the strong anti-Russian feeling which made the Crimean War possible.

From Britain he went to the United States of America: there his reception was equally enthusiastic, if less dignified. He was the second foreign citizen to make a speech in the National Statuary Hall (Lafayette being the first). Prior to arrival he received the support of abolitionists, freemasons and Protestants, while Catholics (especially Irish) and pro-slavery groups opposed him. Secretary of State Daniel Webster wanted Kossuth’s help in the upcoming presidential election, and spoke of seeing the American Republican model develop in Hungary, although President Millard Fillmore apologised to the Austrian chargé d’affaires for what he explained was an individual unofficial opinion. His ship was greeted with a hundred-gun salute when it passed Jersey City and hundreds of thousands of people came to see him set foot in New York. Heralded as the Hungarian Washington, he was given a congressional Banquet and received at the White House and the House of Representatives.

Following his refusal to condemn slavery, William Lloyd Garrison wrote a book-length open letter to him denouncing him as a criminal.

In 1856, Kossuth toured Scotland extensively, giving lectures in major cities and small towns alike - contemporaneous reports and further information can be found at the following link. [1]

Later exile and death

Gradually, his autocratic style and uncompromising outlook destroyed any real influence among the expatriate community. Other Hungarian exiles protested against his appearing to claim to be the only national hero of the revolution. Count Casimir Batthyány attacked him in The Times, and Szemere, who had been prime minister under him, published a bitter criticism of his acts and character, accusing him of arrogance, cowardice and duplicity. He soon returned to England, where he lived for eight years in close connection with Mazzini, by whom, with some misgiving, he was persuaded to join the Revolutionary Committee. Quarrels of a kind only too common among exiles followed. Hungarians were especially offended by his continuing use of the title of Regent. He watched with anxiety every opportunity of once more freeing his country from Austria. An attempt to organize a Hungarian legion during the Crimean War was stopped; but in 1859 he entered into negotiations with Napoleon III, left England for Italy and began the organization of a Hungarian legion, which was to make a descent on the coast of Dalmatia. The Peace of Villafranca made this impossible.

From then on, Kossuth remained in Italy. He refused to follow the other Hungarian patriots, who, under the lead of Deák, negotiated the 1867 Compromise (Ausgleich), and the ensuing amnesty. It is doubted whether Emperor Franz Joseph would have allowed the amnesty to extend to Kossuth. Publicly, Kossuth remained unreconciled to the house of Habsburg, and committed to a fully independent state. Though elected to the Diet of 1867, he never took his seat. He continued to remain a widely popular figure, but did not allow his name to be associated with dissent or any political cause. A law of 1879, which deprived of citizenship all Hungarians who had voluntarily been absent ten years, was a bitter blow to him. He displayed no interest in benefitting from a further amnesty in 1880.

In 1890, a delegation of Hungarian pilgrims in Turin recorded a short patriotic speech delivered by the elderly Lajos Kossuth. The original recording on two wax cylinders for the Edison phonograph survives to this day, although barely audible due to excess playback and unsuccessful early restoration attempts. Lajos Kossuth is the earliest born person in the world who has his voice preserved.

He died in Turin on 20 March 1894; his body was taken to Budapest, where he was buried amid the mourning of the whole nation, Mór Jókai delivering the funeral oration. A bronze statue was erected, by public subscription, in the Kerepesi Cemetery. Many regard Kossuth as Hungary’s purest patriot and greatest orator.

His complete works were published in Hungarian at Budapest in 1880-1895. The fullest account of the Revolution is given in Helfert, Geschichte Oesterreichs (Leipzig, 1869, &c.), representing the Austrian view, which may be compared with that of C Gracza, History of the Hungarian War of Independence, 1848-1849 (in Hungarian) (Budapest, 1894). See also E. O. S., Hungary and its Revolutions, with a Memoir of Louis Kossuth (Bohn, 1854); Horvath, 25 Jahre aus der Geschichte Ungarns, 1823-1848 (Leipzig, 1867) H Maurice, Revolutions of 1848-1849. Stiles, Austria in 1848-1849 (New York, 1852); Szemere, Politische Charakterskizzen: III. Kossuth (Hamburg, 1853); Louis Kossuth, Memoirs of my Exile (London, 1880); Ferenc Pulszky, Meine Zeit, mein Leben (Pressburg, 1880); A Somogyi, Ludwig Kossuth (Berlin, 1894).

Honors and memorials

Hungary

The main square of Budapest with the Hungarian Parliament Building is named after Kossuth, and the Kossuth Memorial is an important scene of national ceremonies. Most cities in Hungary have streets named after Kossuth. The first public statue commemorating Kossuth was erected in Miskolc in 1898. Kossuth Rádió, the main radio station of Hungary, is named after Lajos Kossuth.

Bela Bartok also wrote a symphonic poem about Kossuth, the funeral march of which a was transcribed for piano and published in Bartok’s lifetime.

Romania and elsewhere in Europe

The memorials of Lajos Kossuth in the territories lost by Hungary after World War I were sooner or later demolished in neighbouring countries. A few of them were re-erected following the fall of Communism by local councils or private associations. They play an important role as symbols of national identity of the Hungarian minority. The most important memorial outside the present-day borders of Hungary is a statue in Rož?ava (hun: Rozsnyó), that was knocked down two times but restored after much controversy in 2004. The only Kossuth statue that remained on its place after 1920 in Romania stands in Salonta (hun: Nagyszalonta). The demolished Kossuth Memorial of Târgu-Mure? (hun: Marosvásárhely) was re-erected in 2001 in the little Székely village of Ciumani (hun: Gyergyócsomafalva). The Kossuth Memorial in Arad, the work of Ede Margó from 1909, was removed by the order of the Br?tianu government in 1925.

In Serbia there are two statues of Kossuth in Stara Moravica (hun: Ómoravica or Bácskossuthfalva) and Novi Itebej (hun: Magyarittebe). Memorials in Ukraine are situated in Berehove (hun: Beregszász) and Tiachiv (hun: Técs?).

There is a letter of support from Kossuth on display at the Wallace Monument, near Stirling, Scotland. The building of the monument, dedicated to Scottish patriot William Wallace coincided with Kossuth’s visit to Scotland.

Kossuth Statue - US

USA

A bust of Lajos Kossuth is housed in the US Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., which also boasts a Hungarian-American cultural center called Kossuth House (owned and operated by the Hungarian Reformed Federation of America). A statue of Kossuth stands in New York City near the Columbia University campus. An American county, Kossuth County, Iowa, was named in Kossuth’s honor. A statue of the freedom fighter stands in front of the county Court House in Algona, Iowa, the county seat). The small USA towns of Kossuth, Ohio and Kossuth, Mississippi are named in honor of Lajos Kossuth. Other statues of Kossuth remain sprinkled throughout the U.S., including in University Circle in Cleveland, Ohio. There is a Kossuth Park at the intersection of East 121st Street and East Shaker Boulevard, just west of Shaker Square, in Cleveland.

References

1. ^ Pareni?ka, Pavel (14.11.1990). “Košút versus Kossuth”. Slovenské Národné Noviny. Retrieved on 2008-02-04.
2. ^ Chmelár, Eduard (2007). “Filozofia slovenských dejín (2): Zrodenie národa”. Slovo (38). Retrieved on 2008-02-04.