Book Reviw

FROM PRAHA TO PRAGUE: ASSIMILATION AND

ETHNIC IDENTITY IN AN AMERICAN FARM TOWN,

PRAGUE, OKLAHOMA, 1891 – 1930

By

PHILIP D. SMITH

Bachelor of Arts in History

Northeastern State University

Tahlequah, Oklahoma

1981

Master of Arts in History

University of Tulsa

Tulsa, Oklahoma

1992

Submitted to the Faculty of the

Graduate College of the

Oklahoma State University

in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for

the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

May, 2010

ii

FROM PRAHA TO PRAGUE: ASSIMILATION AND

ETHNIC IDENTITY IN AN AMERICAN FARM TOWN,

PRAGUE, OKLAHOMA, 1891 – 1930

Dissertation Approved:

Dr. Ronald A. Petron

Dissertation Adviser

Dr. Richard Rohrs

Dr. Joseph F. Byrnes

Dr. David D‟Andrea

Dr. Michael Taylor

Dr. A. Gordon Emslie

Dean of the Graduate College

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank those whose teaching, friendship, and encouragement have

enabled me to complete this study and graduate school at Oklahoma State University.

Without the help and advice of my committee, this work would never have reached

completion. All members read and provided valuable constructive criticism to improve

the study. The suggestions of Dr. Joseph Byrnes, Dr. David D‟Andrea, Dr. Richard

Rohrs and Dr. Michael Taylor strengthened under-developed ideas and enhanced the

overall structure of the study. I truly appreciate the many hours each spent reading and

editing this work.

I owe so much to my advisor that it is nearly impossible to express my gratitude

without sounding maudlin. Dr. Ron Petrin guided this study while still allowing me

almost total freedom in constructing my theses and arguments. He forced me to think

and rethink several propositions in the paper but never belittled or demeaned what I came

to realize was faulty reasoning. For this, I thank him and extend my deepest respect.

Like most professors, Dr. Petrin is extremely busy. However, he never made me feel that

I was wasting his time when I visited his office or called him in the evening or during

weekends, which I did frequently. I will always cherish the hours we spent together

discussing immigration and ethnic issues.

I would also like to thank other faculty whose teaching, scholarship, and

friendship aided and encouraged me during my time at Oklahoma State University.

iv

Dr. Michael Logan was the first professor I met upon entering the doctoral program. At

the time, he was director of graduate studies and his easy-going manner disarmed me and

lessened the anxiety of attempting such a rigorous program after many years away from

school. Dr. James Cooper, Dr. James Huston, and Dr. Jason Lavery proved taskmasters

in the classroom and well prepared me for the qualifying exams and for teaching on the

college level. In Dr. Laura Belmonte‟s research seminar I wrote an early chapter of the

work. I would like to thank her for encouraging me to continue with the study, which

eventually became my dissertation. During my time at OSU, I worked one semester as a

teaching assistant for Dr. Scott Rohrer. Besides being an outstanding teacher, Dr.

Rohrer‟s advice on job-seeking helped me obtain my present position. I hope he realizes

how much he helped me. I would also like to extend my thanks and respect to Dr.

Elizabeth Williams. She is one of the finest teachers I have ever had the pleasure to study

under. I always looked forward to her seminar and discussing the weekly topic. I never

left her classroom without a deeper understanding of the complex factors and issues of

European history.

Fellow students are always important to anyone in graduate school. Deep

friendships evolve through shared experiences and close personal proximity. Kurt Lively

and Mark Popowski, my office-mates, will forever be an integral part of my pleasant

memories of doctoral study. Both are exceptional scholars and deeply humble when it

comes to their excellence. Their sense of humor proved invaluable. They never failed to

chuckle at my old-fashioned, rarely funny jokes and antics. Thank you Kurt and Mark

for being who you are. Toby Wilson, who lived directly below me at my apartment

complex, and Charles Buckner a fellow student, became my close friends during my time

v

in Stillwater. On many evenings we dined together while discussing history topics and

current world news. These short breaks from my studies were relaxing and kept me

involved in the world around me.

This is a great opportunity to extend my thanks to the history department‟s

secretaries, Diana Fry and Susan Oliver. They truly made my stay at OSU easier by

providing assistance and solving the myriad administrative problems associated with a

major university.

John Phillips at the Edmon Low Library at Oklahoma State University helped me

immensely with census materials and government documents. The library staff of the

University of Tulsa granted me access to their government documents and copy

privileges. I would also like to thank the staff at the Museum of Pioneer History in

Chandler, Oklahoma and the Prague Historical Museum in Prague for their assistance. I

especially would like to thank Norma Foreman and Diana Kinzey of the Prague

Historical Museum. Norma allowed me complete access to the holdings of the museum

and Diana spent the better part of three days helping me locate photographs, family

histories, and cemetery records. The churches of Prague allowed me access to their

membership and baptismal records.

A huge thank you goes to the Bohemian Hall of Prague. One of the great

pleasures of a researcher is to be led to an ancient cabinet filled with dust-covered

records, many over a hundred years old. I want to thank the members of the Bohemian

Hall for affording me this experience. Wayne Opela and Ray Reynolds met me every

morning for a week at the Hall and helped me ten hours each day sort through the

vi

financial and membership records of the organization. It was an honor and a great

pleasure to meet and befriend these descendents of the original Czech settlers.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family. Their understanding and encouragement

were indispensible. My children, Phil and Jill, never complained when I could not attend

family gatherings because of my studies. Since our decision to pursue a doctoral degree,

my wife, Pam, has been steadfast in her commitment despite the added burdens it has

placed on her. Without her, I would never have succeeded. I owe so much to her. And it

is to her I dedicate this dissertation. Thank you Pam, for your love and support.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………..1

2. CZECH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES TO 1930 ……………………..32

3. SETTLEMENT OF LINCOLN COUNTY AND THE FORMATION OF

PRAGUE, OKLAHOMA: 1891 – 1902 ………………………………………………………..72

4. RELIGION AND THE CZECH COMMUNITY ……………………………………………90

5. ECONOMIC LIFE IN A SMALL TOWN ……………………………………………………113

6. CZECH FRATERNAL ORGANIZATIONS IN PRAGUE …………………………….142

7. FAMILY TIES IN THE LIFE OF PRAGUE‟S CZECHS ………………………………170

8. EDUCATION AND THE CZECH COMMUNITY……………………………………….202

9. POLITICS AND COMMUNITY LIFE IN PRAGUE ……………………………………227

10. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………………………245

BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………………………………………………263

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Czech Foreign Born by Region (1900) ………………………………………………………42

2.2 Czech Foreign Born by Selected State (1900) …………………………………………….43

2.3 Czech Foreign Born by Selected Cities (1900) ……………………………………………44

2.4 Czechs to the United States by Year ………………………………………………………….54

2.5 Czech Immigrants in the U.S.by Selected State (1910) ………………………………..55

2.6 Czech Immigrants by Year and Sex…………………………………………………………..58

2.7 Immigrants by Sex and Percent (1899-1910) ……………………………………………..59

2.8 Ages of Arriving Immigrants by Percent (1899-1910) …………………………………60

2.9 Occupations of Czech Immigrants by Percent …………………………………………….61

2.10 Yearly Earnings of Males at Least 18 Years of Age ………………………………….62

2.11 Yearly Earnings of Females at Least 18 Years of Age ……………………………….62

2.12 Foreign-Born Households by Percent ………………………………………………………63

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In 1902, the Ft. Smith and Western Railroad Company, seeing an opportunity for

larger profits, made plans to build tracks from Ft. Smith, Arkansas across Indian Territory

and into Oklahoma Territory to tap the exploding towns of central Oklahoma, especially

the Guthrie/Oklahoma City area. The railroad identified the southeastern part of Lincoln

County as a perfect spot for a coaling station. Initially, the railroad company wanted

Lambdin as the coaling site. But when a local native-born farmer rebuffed their offers as

too small, they looked elsewhere, specifically to the farmland of the Czech community.
1

Two Bohemian immigrants, Anton Simek and Vencl Kozak, who had purchased the

homesteads of Eva Barta and her son, Frank, agreed to sell part of their holdings and the

railroad allowed Josephine Barta, wife of Frank, to name the new town.
2
Josephine Barta

decided on the name Praha because she had grown up in Praha, Bohemia. However,

Frank R. (Squire) Vlasak, an influential merchant in the Czech community, convinced

her to Americanize the name to Prague.
3
The deal done, town lots went on sale

1
William Ray Tower, “A General History of the Town of Prague, Oklahoma, 1902-1948,” (M.A.

Thesis, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College, 1948), 9-10. See also Lincoln County: Oklahoma

History, 186. Lee Watts was the farmer who turned down the railroad‟s offer.
2
Russell Willford Lynch, “Czech Farmers in Oklahoma: A Comparative Study of the Stability of

a Czech Farm Group in Lincoln County Oklahoma, and the Factors Relating to its Stability,” Bulletin of

Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College (Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical

College) 39, no. 13 (June 1942): 44. For additional details, see Melva Losch Brown, Czech-Town, U.S.A.,

Prague (Kolache-Ville) Oklahoma (Norman: Hooper Printing, Inc., 1978), 32.
3
Ibid.

2

May 20, 1902 and the brand-new town of Prague opened with the great benefit of being a

railroad town.

Frank Barta, Josephine‟s husband and one of the original settlers, took immediate

advantage of the opportunities offered by the brand-new town. In the summer of 1902,

with great difficulty and just as much excitement, Barta hoisted and moved his entire

farmhouse into the new town and reopened it as Hotel Barta. The enterprising Barta also

opened a general store and restaurant, but it was his family‟s hotel that proved lasting; the

building operated as a hotel on a continuous basis

until 1961.
4

This work hopes to elucidate a little researched

phenomenon: the dilemmas of an immigrant

group living amongst a larger primarily native-

born white population in a small, somewhat

isolated farm town. This inquiry also examines

the processes whereby this ethnic community

maintained its identity and established a presence

in the town while simultaneously joining the

larger community economically, socially, and structurally to the point of complete

incorporation. The area chosen for research is the Czech immigrant community in the

agricultural hamlet of Prague, Oklahoma from the founding of the ethnic colony in

1891until 1930, when most of the original settlers had died. By understanding this ethnic

group‟s reactions to assimilative pressures and the mechanisms they incorporated in

attempting to maintain their ethnic identity may illuminate differences in the urban/rural

4
Prague News, 24 July 1902; 17 December 1915.

3

matrix as well as provide a comparison with other farming towns that hosted a more

homogenous ethnic population

A primary assertion of the work is that the Czechs of Prague, Oklahoma

underwent cultural and structural assimilation more rapidly than Czechs in urban

environments and rural areas such as Milligan, Nebraska where Czechs predominated to

the point of homogeneity. This occurred for several reasons. First, soon after the creation

of the town of Prague in 1902, the Czechs found themselves in the minority. This forced

each individual to make a choice: either participate in the growing community or retreat

and isolate themselves in an ethnic enclave. The new town of Prague was a frontier

community located in Oklahoma Territory but close to Indian Territory. This “wild

west” origin of Prague offered opportunities for the immigrants and an acceptance by

non-Czechs who wished to see the new town succeed. Concomitant with this was the

relative isolation of the community, again probably causing some native-born Americans

to accept the newcomers for practical reasons. Although impossible to know with any

certainty, some of these native-born whites might not have tolerated the strange-talking

immigrants in another setting. Finally, the mere fact that Czechs were “white” helped

them with the majority population. Blacks also moved into the new town, but were not

accorded the opportunities or friendship ceded the Czechs.

Some writers argue that adherence to ethnicity is primarily a reaction to hostility.
5

These scholars argue that many immigrants clung to their ethnic roots and identity as a

defensive measure against an unwelcoming society. In other words, their group identity

served as security during a fearful time. Nevertheless, although they settled in Prague at

5
Candace Nelson and Marta Tienda, “The Structuring of Hispanic Ethnicity: Historical and

Contemporary Perspectives,” in Ethnicity and Race in the U.S.A.: Toward the Twenty-First Century,

ed. Richard D. Alba (Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985), 71.

4

a time of heightened nativist feelings throughout the United States, there is little evidence

that this Slavic group suffered rejection or resistance from the larger community.

Furthermore, because of their special environment and history in Europe, the Czechs of

Prague adjusted quickly to the dominant culture of the United States, which continued to

be centered on Anglo-Saxon law and traditions. They chose to interact with the larger

community rather than isolate themselves into a separate element within the town and

resist any encroachment on their traditional way of life. Yet, they still battled to maintain

their heritage and identity albeit with mixed results. Although the results were probably

not exactly what the original settlers intended, today many Prague Czechs still attend St.

Wenceslaus Catholic Church while others meet regularly in the same Bohemian Hall as

their ancestors and continue to cling to their ethnic identity and recognize their heritage,

even if it is more symbolic than real.

One of the early myths regarding the experiences of immigrants to the United

States was that most ethnic groups underwent similar experiences after their arrival.
6

Since the 1980s, mounting evidence challenged this assumption. Today, most historians

and sociologists agree that ethnic groups‟ encounters with American society differed

sharply.
7
Time of arrival, occupational skill, education, and race were factors

contributing to the diverse experiences.
8
Nevertheless, regardless of group or

circumstance, ethnicity proved important to practically every arriving immigrant.

6
John Bodnar, The Transplanted: A History of Immigrants in Urban America (Bloomington, IN:

Indiana University Press, 1985), xvi, 51. Bodnar argues that ethnic groups faced different obstacles once in

the United States.
7
Nelson and Tienda, “The Structuring of Hispanic Ethnicity,” 49. Richard D. Alba, “The

Twilight of Ethnicity among Americans of European Ancestry: The Case of Italians,” in Ethnicity and

Race in the U.S.A.: Toward the Twenty-First Century, ed. Richard D. Alba (Boston: Routledge & Kegan

Paul, 1985), 134. Also, see Bodnar, The Transplanted, xvi.
8
Bodnar, The Transplanted, 51.

5

Although the words ethnic and ethnicity were seldom used before the twentieth

century, the idea of separate national, racial, or immigrant groups was common in

literature, government documents and United States census records.
9
The concept of

ethnicity is an incredibly complicated subject. Tomes such as The Harvard Encyclopedia

of Ethnic Groups (1980) list no less than fourteen possible attributes contributing to

ethnicity:

1. Common geographic origin.
2. Migratory Status.
3. Race.
4. Language or dialect.
5. Religious faith or faiths.
6. Ties that transcend kinship, neighborhood, and community boundaries.
7. Shared traditions, values, and symbols.
8. , folklore, and music.
9. Food preferences.
10. Settlement and employment patterns.
11. Special interests in regard to politics in the homeland and the United States.
12. Institutions that specifically serve and maintain the group.
13. An internal sense of distinctiveness.
14. An external sense of distinctiveness.

10

Others, like Candace Nelson and Marta Tienda, view ethnicity as a social construct

conducive to change rather than simply a collection of ascriptive traits.
11

However,

Milton Gordon in his 1964 work, Assimilation in American Life, best summed up the

complex issue by positing that in the final analysis ethnicity referred to group feelings

about land, political government, a common culture which included a set of religious

beliefs and values, and a common racial background. He called the culmination of these

shared values, “peoplehood” and suggested the term “ethnic group” be used for groups

9
Harold J. Abramson, “Assimilation and Pluralism,” in Harvard Encyclopedia of Ethnic Groups,

eds. Stephen Thernstrom, Ann Orlov, Oscar Handlin (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard

University Press, 1980), 151.
10

Stephen Thernstrom, Ann Orlov, Oscar Handlin, “Introduction” to Harvard Encyclopedia of

Ethnic Groups, eds. Stephen Thernstrom, Ann Orlov, and Oscar Handlin (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap

Press of Harvard University Press, 1980), vi.
11

Nelson and Tienda, “The Structuring of Hispanic Ethnicity”, 51.

6

with this sense of distinctive identity.
12

A simple and useful definition of ethnicity is a

people who share a common historical origin, cultural and social distinctiveness, and

similar language. An ethnic group evinces a sense of belonging that transcends kinship

bonds.
13

That Czechs consider themselves and should be referred to as a distinctive ethnic

group appears obvious. They share many attributes of ethnicity including language,

shared myths, folklore, and a common history. Furthermore, they claim a definite

homeland, the provinces of Bohemia and Moravia in Central Europe. Although many,

especially early arrivals, referred to themselves as Bohemian or Moravian rather than

Czech, over the years the linguistic term Czech became commonplace when speaking or

writing about these Slavs of Central Europe. Interestingly, in the early twentieth century,

the non-Czech residents of Prague, Oklahoma usually referred to their Czech-speaking

neighbors, whether they originated from Bohemia or Moravia, as “Bohemian.” Thus, the

terms “Czech,” and “Bohemian,” in this case are synonymous.

Regardless of where Czechs settled in the United States, they were used to being a

minority within a larger culture. Beginning in 1621 with the defeat of the Czechs at the

Battle of White Mountain, the Austrian crown controlled the areas of Bohemia and

Moravia with the result being a strong Germanizing of Czech territory. The German

language became the primary tongue of the government, military, and universities as well

as among most of the aristocracy and professional class. As a result, for several centuries

the Czech language served as nothing more than a peasant patois. Nevertheless, the

historic language of Bohemia and Moravia persisted despite repeated attempts by the

12

Milton M. Gordon, Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race, Religion, and National

Origins (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), 23, 27.
13

Abramson, “Assimilation and Pluralism,” 151.

7

Habsburg rulers to extinguish it.
14

In addition, the Austrian lords inundated their

conquered dominions with their Germanic culture which included not only western

European ideas of governance and law but even delved into culinary tastes including

even beer making. For example, Czechs claim that pilsner beer, considered by most a

German brew, originated in the Bohemian town of Plzen, and was a joint creation of the

Czech inhabitants and a hired Bavarian brewer.
15

The Habsburg domination resulted in two seemingly contradictory mindsets

which helped Czech immigrants in the United States adjust to American culture and resist

complete assimilation or “Americanization” at the same time. The centuries-long foreign

domination empowered Czechs with the ability to sustain their heritage and identity

under harsh conditions, while their intimate contact with German culture caused a partial

adoption of German ways as their own.
16

Thus, Czechs became the most western-

oriented of all Slavic groups and although considered part of the “new immigration” of

the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, Czech immigrants differed significantly

from their Slavic neighbors. Many arrived earlier than other Slavic groups and most

came as family units with every intention of staying and making the United States their

new homeland.
17

This “Germanization” or “westernization” proved valuable to most

Czechs once they were in the United States. American culture, although definitely

foreign and unfamiliar, does not appear to have daunted Czechs to the extent it did other

14

See Robert A. Kann, A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526-1918 (Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1974), 533-534.
15

There are conflicting stories of the origin of pilsner beer. The most accepted is that the

inhabitants of Pilsen in 1838 hired Josef Groll, a Bavarian brewer to instruct them in the German lagering

method of brewing. He included Saaz hops in the recipe resulting in the famous pilsner draft.
16

See Kann, A History of the Habsburg Empire, 533-534. German-speaking lands bordered

Bohemia in the North, West, and South.
17

Czechs speak an Indo-European language that is related to Polish, Slovak, Russian, Ukrainian,

Bulgarian, and several other southern and eastern European peoples. The family of languages is known as

Slavic.

8

Slavic groups like the Slovaks and Poles. Czech immigrants entered America with a

distinct advantage over other Slavic immigrants.

Although most of the original forty-eight Czech settlers of the Prague, Oklahoma

area had previously lived in another state, many were but a few years removed from the

farming villages of Central Europe.
18

These villages were community-oriented rather

than individualistic, which served the Czechs well in their new environment.
19

Czechs

stuck together. This enabled them to succeed when many native-born farmers, who were

fiercely independent, failed. Nevertheless, the story of the Prague Czechs centers on their

ardent desire to maintain their ethnicity while simultaneously diving into the culture of

their new homeland. This dual lifestyle in a town dominated by native-born whites

resulted in rapid acculturation and incorporation into the mainstream, but also resulted in

these small-town Czechs carving a permanent niche in the community as a distinct group.

Due to the frontier setting, they reacted pragmatically to the environment into which they

found themselves and despite their numerical inferiority, succeeded in establishing a

permanent presence. The outcome proved somewhat different from Horace Kallen‟s

famous cultural pluralism model, which promoted ethnic minorities preserving their

distinctive culture while simultaneously pledging loyalty to their new nation.
20

The

Czechs of Prague gradually lost much of their European culture, such as language,

religion, and holidays, but conserved their most important attribute – the preservation of

18

Lynch, “Czech Farmers in Oklahoma,” 89.
19

Ibid.,
20

For further discussion, see Horace Kallen, Culture and Democracy in the United States: Studies

in the Group of the American People (Salem, NH: Ayer Company, 1924). Also, see Kallen,

Cultural Pluralism and the American Idea: An Essay in Social Philosophy (Philadelphia: University of

Pennsylvania Press, 1956).

9

their ethnic identity. They stubbornly maintained an internal sense of distinctiveness, a

sense of who they were.
21

Beginning with the immigrant generation, the Czechs of Prague began losing

much of their original European ways. By 1930, most ethnic Czechs fit comfortably in

their new environment; their children attended public school, played baseball and football

with as much fervor as anyone in the community, worked for whoever paid the highest

wage regardless of ethnicity, and married outside the group with little or no

condemnation from other Czechs. The product of the Prague experience also suggests

minor differences from Herbert Gans‟s idea of “symbolic ethnicity” where ethnicity

became more a question of “feeling ethnic” which centered primarily on ethnic foods and

ethnic festivals rather than actually being a practicing member of a distinct ethnic

group.
22

Although Gan‟s research focused on later generations, the persistent and deep

ethnic distinctiveness forged by the early Czechs of Prague laid the groundwork for a

lasting and more far-reaching ethnic identity than what should be labeled “symbolic

ethnicity.” Furthermore, the experience of these small-town ethnics suggests that

Richard Alba‟s contention that the ethnic identities of European-origin groups

progressively declines is not all-encompassing.
23

Instead, the Czechs of Prague,

Oklahoma, trod a unique path on their journey towards assimilation into American

society. They quickly lost much of their European ways, but managed to hang onto their

identity as a singular group in the midst of a vast field of “American” neighbors. This

21

According to the Harvard Encyclopedia of Ethnic Groups this internal sense of distinctiveness

is one of the defining characteristics of ethnicity. See Thernstrom, Harvard Encyclopedia of Ethnic

Groups, vi.
22

Herbert Gans, “Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in America,”

Ethnic and Racial Studies 17, no.4 (October 1979): 9.
23

Richard D. Alba, “The Twighlight of Ethnicity,” in Ethnicity and Race in the U.S.A.: Toward

the Twenty-First Century, ed. Richard D. Alba (Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985), 152.

10

middle path or birthright ethnicity evolved out of the strong desire by the earliest Czechs

to take a practical approach in maintaining their group‟s identity while embracing their

new home.

When writing about assimilation, there is little accord regarding the concept and it

remains a controversial subject even today. The theory of complete assimilation or

Anglo-conformity and later known as Americanization entails the idea of minority ethnic

groups completely and totally joining the all-encompassing culture, which in the United

States was based on the …