Sorin; When I first started Banat research I was bothered by the Hungarian surnames which popped up in the German community from time to time. But now I have grown to accept that some individuals were integrated and some of these people grew to be an accepted part of that German society. I assume that intermarriage although probably infrequent increased in later years and that the German community was not as introverted as I had been lead to believe . I have difficulty in identifying Romanian surnames but I assume mixing occurred to a similar degree with the German community and Craig's example is a case in point. Such a integration appears also to have happened along the German Polish boarder over a longer period to account for the frequent occurrence of Polish surnames in Germany. Clearly, Lorenz Horvath, was one of these Hungarians who was a solid member of the German community. Perhaps he was born into it. Trickier for an outsider like myself it is hard to pick up and identify Germans who became Magyarized and adopted a Hungarian surname. This appears mostly to have occurred among professionals who wanted to be accepted by the Hungarian authorities. I would argue that Philipp Lung did not consciously omit Lorenz Horvath from the D Etschka family book since there are a bunch of other Horvath families listed. This is not to say Romanians, Hungarian or Serbs didn't get omitted from other family books from time to time. Dave Dreyer ----- Original Message ----- From: "GenealogyRO Group" <genealogy@banat.ro> To: "Banat List" <BANAT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 2:28 PM Subject: [BANAT-L] [GenRoG] --RE:Re: Lorenz Horvath in Josefsdorfl > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Dreyer" > To: "Banat List" > Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 > Subject: Re: [BANAT-L] Lorenz Horvath in Josefsdorfl >> This Lorenz Horvath is a long standing problem ... >> The Josefsdorf KBs (church books) indicate that Lorenz Horvath is from >> Etschka. ... >> Lorenz is not in the D Etschka family book but this is not suprising >> since >> the author Philipp Lung did not have copies of all the D Etschka KBs to >> work >> from and there are many records missing. ... > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > OR the explanation is that he, Lorenz Horvath, was not a German, and the > FB > author(s) were not quite interested in his entrances from the original KBs > ... > > In to many cases the title "Familienbuch der katholischen Pfarrgemeinde X" > do not cover the reality and inhabitants of that village, who do not have > a > German name, are ignored deliberately ... > > S o r i n > http://www.genealogy.ro/contributions.htm > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello Horvath Researchers, The name HORVATH translates in to HRVAT, which in English language stands for CROATIAN and therefore is NOT a Hungarian name. However, there were many Horvath/Hrvat/Croatians living in Austro-Hungary and prior to that in the Austrian Empire. Rosina www.hrastovac.net > Sorin; > When I first started Banat research I was bothered by the Hungarian > surnames > which popped up in the German community from time to time. But now I have > grown to accept that some individuals were integrated and some of these > people grew to be an accepted part of that German society. I assume that > intermarriage although probably infrequent increased in later years and > that > the German community was not as introverted as I had been lead to believe > . > I have difficulty in identifying Romanian surnames but I assume mixing > occurred to a similar degree with the German community and Craig's example > is a case in point. > Such a integration appears also to have happened along the German Polish > boarder over a longer period to account for the frequent occurrence of > Polish surnames in Germany. > Clearly, Lorenz Horvath, was one of these Hungarians who was a solid > member > of the German community. Perhaps he was born into it. Trickier for an > outsider like myself it is hard to pick up and identify Germans who became > Magyarized and adopted a Hungarian surname. This appears mostly to have > occurred among professionals who wanted to be accepted by the Hungarian > authorities. > I would argue that Philipp Lung did not consciously omit Lorenz Horvath > from > the D Etschka family book since there are a bunch of other Horvath > families > listed. This is not to say Romanians, Hungarian or Serbs didn't get > omitted > from other family books from time to time. > Dave Dreyer

Rosina, please. HORVÁTH is what Croatians are called in Hungarian. Not in Croatian, not in German, not in Jiddish or Chinese. Therefore it is a Hungarian name. One of the most common ones. Such as TÓTH which means Slovak. In Hungarian. Croatian people are still called HORVÁT (without the H), and the country is Horvátország but, interestingly the original meaning of TÓT, TÓTH got forgotten, and now it is just a name. Boglárka -----Original Message----- From: banat-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:banat-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Rosina T Schmidt Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 18:33 To: Banat List Subject: [BANAT-L] Horvath Hello Horvath Researchers, The name HORVATH translates in to HRVAT, which in English language stands for CROATIAN and therefore is NOT a Hungarian name. However, there were many Horvath/Hrvat/Croatians living in Austro-Hungary and prior to that in the Austrian Empire. Rosina www.hrastovac.net > Sorin; > When I first started Banat research I was bothered by the Hungarian > surnames > which popped up in the German community from time to time. But now I have > grown to accept that some individuals were integrated and some of these > people grew to be an accepted part of that German society. I assume that > intermarriage although probably infrequent increased in later years and > that > the German community was not as introverted as I had been lead to believe > . > I have difficulty in identifying Romanian surnames but I assume mixing > occurred to a similar degree with the German community and Craig's example > is a case in point. > Such a integration appears also to have happened along the German Polish > boarder over a longer period to account for the frequent occurrence of > Polish surnames in Germany. > Clearly, Lorenz Horvath, was one of these Hungarians who was a solid > member > of the German community. Perhaps he was born into it. Trickier for an > outsider like myself it is hard to pick up and identify Germans who became > Magyarized and adopted a Hungarian surname. This appears mostly to have > occurred among professionals who wanted to be accepted by the Hungarian > authorities. > I would argue that Philipp Lung did not consciously omit Lorenz Horvath > from > the D Etschka family book since there are a bunch of other Horvath > families > listed. This is not to say Romanians, Hungarian or Serbs didn't get > omitted > from other family books from time to time. > Dave Dreyer ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3059 - Release Date: 08/08/10 19:57:00

Thank you Boglarka, It is good to learn something new. Rosina www.hrastovac.net Rosina, please. HORVÁTH is what Croatians are called in Hungarian. Not in Croatian, not in German, not in Jiddish or Chinese. Therefore it is a Hungarian name. One of the most common ones. Such as TÓTH which means Slovak. In Hungarian. Croatian people are still called HORVÁT (without the H), and the country is Horvátország but, interestingly the original meaning of TÓT, TÓTH got forgotten, and now it is just a name. Boglárka

This post is addressed to the so called experts, as well as those list-members who are trying to learn about your background. Unless a statement, opinion, answer to a question (or whatever you wish to call it) is accompanied by a refereed scholarly source, it is just a statement, an opinion and in all to many cases, a guess that in most probability is incorrect. In all likelihood such statements made by the experts on this list lead you astray if they do not tell you who offered the information. Typically you need the authors full name, title of the book, article or scholarly work, its publisher, town of publication and the year of publication. If you really want to be sure you need more than one source to learn the truth. This applies to the name "of who we are" and to every detail thereafter. We are not Donauschwaben. In fact, none of us are as such. We are either Banaters or descendants from the other areas in the immediate area of the Banat. To lump the seven areas together because that makes a bigger group has no value nor significants. The number of us still remains insignificant. The different areas had different costumes and histories, background and so forth. You do not get the true picture with a broad paintbrush. The recent discussions of a name, is an excellent example. Now, I know I can't influence the so called experts from continuing to sound like they know everything. But you, as listeners need to be able to discriminate between truth and fiction. You really should look in the literature for true answers. I am not saying that the exchange of information in the Familienbooks isn't valuable but even then you take a chance that the transcriber makes an error. I know assumptions, a fancy name for guessing, is prevalent on this list. Believe me I am an expert in a very small slice of knowledge and I try to stay within my area of expertise. Can you believe 100% of what you find in the published literature? No, you need to review the literature to determine what one group is stating, where that group is coming from and what other scholars have to say. Typically you find believers, disbelievers or attractors and distractors and people who say: "Show me the facts so that I can form an educated conclusion on which group is correct." Again, the recent name discussion beautifully illustrates that point. Peace and please let us not rush to making statements when we do not have all the facts. What is true in the Serbian Banat, by the way is not true for the Romanian Banat. And, by the I won't get into the discussion of Hungary.... I do not want to see any flames... But, please think when you read... And read published material and not only quick replies on this list... Oh, yes, there is periodically wonderful material available on this list and thanks to Steve for doing an excellent job. Peace, Cornell At 04:00 PM 8/9/2010, Boglarka Lazar wrote: >Rosina, please. HORVÁTH is what Croatians are called in Hungarian. Not in >Croatian, not in German, not in Jiddish or Chinese. Therefore it is a >Hungarian name. One of the most common ones. Such as TÓTH which means >Slovak. In Hungarian. > >Croatian people are still called HORVÁT (without the H), and the country is >Horvátország but, interestingly the original meaning of TÓT, TÓTH got >forgotten, and now it is just a name. > >Boglárka > > >-----Original Message----- >From: banat-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:banat-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >Behalf Of Rosina T Schmidt >Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 18:33 >To: Banat List >Subject: [BANAT-L] Horvath > > >Hello Horvath Researchers, > >The name HORVATH translates in to HRVAT, which in English language stands >for CROATIAN and therefore is NOT a Hungarian name. > >However, there were many Horvath/Hrvat/Croatians living in Austro-Hungary >and prior to that in the Austrian Empire. > >Rosina >www.hrastovac.net > > > > > > > Sorin; > > When I first started Banat research I was bothered by the Hungarian > > surnames > > which popped up in the German community from time to time. But now I have > > grown to accept that some individuals were integrated and some of these > > people grew to be an accepted part of that German society. I assume that > > intermarriage although probably infrequent increased in later years and > > that > > the German community was not as introverted as I had been lead to believe > > . > > I have difficulty in identifying Romanian surnames but I assume mixing > > occurred to a similar degree with the German community and Craig's example > > is a case in point. > > Such a integration appears also to have happened along the German Polish > > boarder over a longer period to account for the frequent occurrence of > > Polish surnames in Germany. > > Clearly, Lorenz Horvath, was one of these Hungarians who was a solid > > member > > of the German community. Perhaps he was born into it. Trickier for an > > outsider like myself it is hard to pick up and identify Germans who became > > Magyarized and adopted a Hungarian surname. This appears mostly to have > > occurred among professionals who wanted to be accepted by the Hungarian > > authorities. > > I would argue that Philipp Lung did not consciously omit Lorenz Horvath > > from > > the D Etschka family book since there are a bunch of other Horvath > > families > > listed. This is not to say Romanians, Hungarian or Serbs didn't get > > omitted > > from other family books from time to time. > > Dave Dreyer > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >the subject and the body of the message >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3059 - Release Date: 08/08/10 >19:57:00 > > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an >email to BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the >word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the >subject and the body of the message

IMHO we can't ever get at 100% the truth, or maybe even at anything we can call "the truth," about the distant past. If we can contact primary resources, people who were there or people who communicated with those who were there, that is very valuable. Sometimes it's people's impressions of the truth and feelings about it that give us a real feeling for how things were. At this point, I have a bias about scholarly works. They have value, no doubt. But I see no reason that they would have more value than other accounts of things. They are a piece of the puzzle IMHO and nothing more. In fact, you seem to point that out. I tend to shun anything scholarly at this point, in favor of people with more direct experience. I know, this will sound stupid to some people. But I'm just tired of scholars having a corner on the market of respect and credibility. I'm really tired of it. I wonder what would have happened if people like Richard Leaky and Jane Goodall started in the day when one had to have a PhD to do anything or to get published. I believe some started out without it but we aren't likely to get far without it anymore. Scholarly writers have biases too. I'm sorry I feel that way, but I do. Susan M   --- On Mon, 8/9/10, Dr. Cornell Frank Ph.D. <ccjrfrank@optonline.net> wrote: From: Dr. Cornell Frank Ph.D. <ccjrfrank@optonline.net> Subject: [BANAT-L] The TRUTH To: "'Banat List'" <BANAT-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Monday, August 9, 2010, 3:28 PM This post is addressed to the so called experts, as well as those list-members who are trying to learn about your background. Unless a statement, opinion, answer to a question  (or whatever you wish to call it) is accompanied by a refereed scholarly source, it is just a statement, an opinion and in all to many cases, a guess that in most probability is incorrect.  In all likelihood such statements made by the experts on this list lead you astray if they do not tell you who offered the information.  Typically you need the authors full name, title of the book, article or scholarly work, its publisher, town of publication and the year of publication.  If you really want to be sure you need more than one source to learn the truth. This applies to the name "of who we are" and to every detail thereafter.  We are not Donauschwaben.  In fact, none of us are as such.  We are either Banaters or descendants from the other areas in the immediate area of the Banat.  To lump the seven areas together because that makes a bigger group has no value nor significants.  The number of us still remains insignificant.  The different areas had different costumes and histories, background and so forth.  You do not get the true picture with a broad paintbrush. The recent discussions of a name, is an excellent example.  Now, I know I can't influence the so called experts from continuing to sound like they know everything.  But you, as listeners need to be able to discriminate between truth and fiction.  You really should look in the literature for true answers.  I am not saying that the exchange of information in the Familienbooks isn't valuable but even then you take a chance that the transcriber makes an error.  I know assumptions, a fancy name for guessing, is prevalent on this list.  Believe me I am an expert in a very small slice of knowledge and I try to stay within my area of expertise.  Can you believe 100% of what you find in the published literature?  No, you need to review the literature to determine what one group is stating, where that group is coming from and what other scholars have to say.   Typically you find believers, disbelievers or attractors and distractors and people who say: "Show me the facts so that I can form an educated conclusion on which group is correct."  Again, the recent name discussion beautifully illustrates that point. Peace and please let us not rush to making statements when we do not have all the facts.  What is true in the Serbian Banat, by the way is not true for the Romanian Banat.  And, by the I won't get into the discussion of Hungary.... I do not want to see any flames... But, please think when you read...  And read published material and not only quick replies on this list... Oh, yes, there is periodically wonderful material available on this list and thanks to Steve for doing an excellent job. Peace, Cornell At 04:00 PM 8/9/2010, Boglarka Lazar wrote: >Rosina, please. HORVÁTH is what Croatians are called in Hungarian. Not in >Croatian, not in German, not in Jiddish or Chinese. Therefore it is a >Hungarian name. One of the most common ones. Such as TÓTH which means >Slovak. In Hungarian. > >Croatian people are still called HORVÁT (without the H), and the country is >Horvátország but, interestingly the original meaning of TÓT, TÓTH got >forgotten, and now it is just a name. > >Boglárka > > >-----Original Message----- >From: banat-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:banat-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >Behalf Of Rosina T Schmidt >Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 18:33 >To: Banat List >Subject: [BANAT-L] Horvath > > >Hello Horvath Researchers, > >The name HORVATH translates in to HRVAT, which in English language stands >for CROATIAN and therefore is NOT a Hungarian name. > >However, there were many Horvath/Hrvat/Croatians living in Austro-Hungary >and prior to that in the Austrian Empire. > >Rosina >www.hrastovac.net > > > > > > > Sorin; > > When I first started Banat research I was bothered by the Hungarian > > surnames > > which popped up in the German community from time to time.  But now I have > > grown to accept that some individuals were integrated and some of these > > people grew to be an accepted part of that German society.  I assume that > > intermarriage although probably infrequent increased in later years and > > that > > the German community was not as introverted as I had been lead to believe > > . > > I have difficulty in identifying Romanian surnames but I assume mixing > > occurred to a similar degree with the German community and Craig's example > > is a case in point. > > Such a integration appears also to have happened along the German Polish > > boarder over a longer period to account for the frequent occurrence of > > Polish surnames in Germany. > > Clearly, Lorenz Horvath, was one of these Hungarians who was a solid > > member > > of the German community.  Perhaps he was born into it.  Trickier for an > > outsider like myself it is hard to pick up and identify Germans who became > > Magyarized and adopted a Hungarian surname.  This appears mostly to have > > occurred among professionals who wanted to be accepted by the Hungarian > > authorities. > > I would argue that Philipp Lung did not consciously omit Lorenz Horvath > > from > > the D Etschka family book since there are a bunch of other Horvath > > families > > listed.  This is not to say Romanians, Hungarian or Serbs didn't get > > omitted > > from other family books from time to time. > > Dave Dreyer > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >the subject and the body of the message >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3059 - Release Date: 08/08/10 >19:57:00 > > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an >email to BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the >word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the >subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BANAT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Cornell, Let's agree that we disagree when it comes to calling ourselves 'Banaters'. That would be only correct for those people who were actually born or live in Banat, as a New Yorker is a New Yorker if he was born there or lives there. What's his ethnicity? New Yorker??? Besides there were people of different ethnicity living in Banat as well, like Hungarians, Serbs, Croatians, Slovaks, Walachians, Rumanians, and others. They were also 'Banaters'. Ethnically speaking we have ethnic German roots, but not ethnic Banat roots, as there is no such a thing. There are all kinds of ethnic Germans, as we discussed it on this worthy list so many times, like the Russian-Germans, Bohemian-Germans, Siebenburger Sachsen, Burgunder etc., etc., and us, the Donauschwaben. While some claim that we are German-Hungarians, I beg to differ, than my Donauschwaben clan moved from Hungary in 1865 south to Slavonia or what is now Croatia, so for the 700,000 ethnic Germans of Danube Swabian roots in what used to be Yugoslavia the Hungarian-Germans name is of course wrong. You can't call us the Yugoslavian-Germans also, as there were other ethnic German groups there before our tribe purchased farms in that corner of the woods. Actually Pannonian Plains, not woods. If I recall correctly the name Donauschwaben (Danube Swabians) was coined in 1935. Today in ex-Yugoslavia they call us Podunavski Schwabe, and I beg Boglarka and Sorin to tell us the correct name for our ethnic German group in Hungary and Romania. More on DS history: http://www.hrastovac.net/historical/Danube-Swabian-History.htm. The SIX Danube Swabian areas were settled during the same period of settlement by the Habsburgs, no matter if it was in Sathmar, Batschka, Syrmia, Banat, Swabian Turkey or Ofner Bergland. See you all in Mt. Angel, where we will learn some more about our fascinating DS history! Rosina www.hrastovac.net This post is addressed to the so called experts, as well as those list-members who are trying to learn about your background. Unless a statement, opinion, answer to a question (or whatever you wish to call it) is accompanied by a refereed scholarly source, it is just a statement, an opinion and in all to many cases, a guess that in most probability is incorrect. In all likelihood such statements made by the experts on this list lead you astray if they do not tell you who offered the information. Typically you need the authors full name, title of the book, article or scholarly work, its publisher, town of publication and the year of publication. If you really want to be sure you need more than one source to learn the truth. This applies to the name "of who we are" and to every detail thereafter. We are not Donauschwaben. In fact, none of us are as such. We are either Banaters or descendants from the other areas in the immediate area of the Banat. To lump the seven areas together because that makes a bigger group has no value nor significants. The number of us still remains insignificant. The different areas had different costumes and histories, background and so forth. You do not get the true picture with a broad paintbrush. The recent discussions of a name, is an excellent example. Now, I know I can't influence the so called experts from continuing to sound like they know everything. But you, as listeners need to be able to discriminate between truth and fiction. You really should look in the literature for true answers. I am not saying that the exchange of information in the Familienbooks isn't valuable but even then you take a chance that the transcriber makes an error. I know assumptions, a fancy name for guessing, is prevalent on this list. Believe me I am an expert in a very small slice of knowledge and I try to stay within my area of expertise. Can you believe 100% of what you find in the published literature? No, you need to review the literature to determine what one group is stating, where that group is coming from and what other scholars have to say. Typically you find believers, disbelievers or attractors and distractors and people who say: "Show me the facts so that I can form an educated conclusion on which group is correct." Again, the recent name discussion beautifully illustrates that point. Peace and please let us not rush to making statements when we do not have all the facts. What is true in the Serbian Banat, by the way is not true for the Romanian Banat. And, by the I won't get into the discussion of Hungary.... I do not want to see any flames... But, please think when you read... And read published material and not only quick replies on this list... Oh, yes, there is periodically wonderful material available on this list and thanks to Steve for doing an excellent job. Peace, Cornell

I remember how upset was my mother, who was a TOTH, when I said to her that she is of Slavic origin ... :-))) S o r i n http://www.genealogy.ro/contributions.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: "Boglarka Lazar" To: "'Rosina T Schmidt'" "'Banat List'" Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 Subject: Re: [BANAT-L] Horvath HORVÁTH is what Croatians are called in Hungarian. Not in Croatian, not in German, not in Jiddish or Chinese. Therefore it is a Hungarian name. One of the most common ones. Such as TÓTH which means Slovak. In Hungarian. Croatian people are still called HORVÁT (without the H), and the country is Horvátország but, interestingly the original meaning of TÓT, TÓTH got forgotten, and now it is just a name. Boglárka

Sorin, Your mother should not have been upset. There is not ONE European who can claim that he is 100% something or other! And lets not even talk about us Canadians or Americans! Rosina www.hrastovac.net I remember how upset was my mother, who was a TOTH, when I said to her that she is of Slavic origin ... :-))) S o r i n http://www.genealogy.ro/contributions.htm