ABSTRACT
In the contribution, I unpretentiously deal with some problems of Slovenes returning from the countries of Western Europe and Australia in the last fifteen years. In my work, I proceeded from empirical materials and the division of work within the project The Perception of Slovene Integration Policy.

A review of selected Slovene and foreign literature revealed that researchers of return migrations have comprised variegated aspects of returning but mostly avoided problematizing the lives of individuals after their return to the native society. Until a few years ago, there was little trace of such issues in Slovene political and public discourse. The first and only relevant research of return migrations of Slovenes was a part of a several-years sociological research project on Slovenes in the Federal Republic of Germany, which was carried out in the second half of the seventies of the previous century. However, the returning into the source environment is, similarly to emigrating, a process that is connected with difficulties an individual must overcome to be able to start a normal life: from acquiring different documents and permits, solving residential problems, looking for work to the inclusion into a narrower social environment.

When discussing the life of return migrants we must distinguish and pay regard to different motives for returning (there is never only one), which in tight connection with “survival strategies” of individuals, complexly influence the individual’s perception of (re)integration into source environment. Motives alleged by return migrants are connected with their expectations when returning to source environment. Confrontation with other (realistic) situation in source environment can influence negatively on the individual, cause dissatisfaction and can lead to remigration. In a brief leap to the problematic of motives and causes for returning, we have stopped at the most and the least mentioned motives for returning: patriotism and economic motive.

Difficulties that in the research involved “returnees” alleged are variegated, complex and indirectly point to inefficiency of Slovene remigration policy. The principal difficulties are lengthy and unregulated procedures in acquiring various permits (personal and real property) documents, in asserting welfare rights, in import and payment of customs, and with nostrification of certificates. People are disappointed over the negative attitude of employees in offices where they seek help and information. Necessary to mention are difficulties due to the non-flexible educational system, and difficulties that are a consequence of insufficient informing before the returning as consular missions and emigrant organisation do not have all needed information at their disposal. That is why “returnees” at times experience sensations of non-belonging; they identify themselves with the society they previously worked in and criticize some aspects of Slovene society – for example bureaucracy and too slow judicature.

ABSTRACT
In the contribution, I unpretentiously deal with some problems of Slovenes returning from the countries of Western Europe and Australia in the last fifteen years. In my work, I proceeded from empirical materials and the division of work within the project The Perception of Slovene Integration Policy.

A review of selected Slovene and foreign literature revealed that researchers of return migrations have comprised variegated aspects of returning but mostly avoided problematizing the lives of individuals after their return to the native society. Until a few years ago, there was little trace of such issues in Slovene political and public discourse. The first and only relevant research of return migrations of Slovenes was a part of a several-years sociological research project on Slovenes in the Federal Republic of Germany, which was carried out in the second half of the seventies of the previous century. However, the returning into the source environment is, similarly to emigrating, a process that is connected with difficulties an individual must overcome to be able to start a normal life: from acquiring different documents and permits, solving residential problems, looking for work to the inclusion into a narrower social environment.

When discussing the life of return migrants we must distinguish and pay regard to different motives for returning (there is never only one), which in tight connection with “survival strategies” of individuals, complexly influence the individual’s perception of (re)integration into source environment. Motives alleged by return migrants are connected with their expectations when returning to source environment. Confrontation with other (realistic) situation in source environment can influence negatively on the individual, cause dissatisfaction and can lead to remigration. In a brief leap to the problematic of motives and causes for returning, we have stopped at the most and the least mentioned motives for returning: patriotism and economic motive.

Difficulties that in the research involved “returnees” alleged are variegated, complex and indirectly point to inefficiency of Slovene remigration policy. The principal difficulties are lengthy and unregulated procedures in acquiring various permits (personal and real property) documents, in asserting welfare rights, in import and payment of customs, and with nostrification of certificates. People are disappointed over the negative attitude of employees in offices where they seek help and information. Necessary to mention are difficulties due to the non-flexible educational system, and difficulties that are a consequence of insufficient informing before the returning as consular missions and emigrant organisation do not have all needed information at their disposal. That is why “returnees” at times experience sensations of non-belonging; they identify themselves with the society they previously worked in and criticize some aspects of Slovene society – for example bureaucracy and too slow judicature.

ABSTRACT
The present contribution deals above all with analysing the situation within the population of Slovenes who after the year 1990 returned to Slovenia from Argentina. In the forefront are questions connected with principal goals and purpose of the research on returning and reintegration of Slovenes after their return from abroad. The research was focused on identifying and studying difficulties that individuals confront with when returning to Slovenia. The aims of the research were to detect (system) causes of those difficulties and to classify suggestions for solving or annulling them. Another field the research was focused on was a presentation of the immigrants’ perception of the attitude of the Slovene state towards returnees and their descendants. The intention was to elaborate suggestions for preparing an appropriate model of reintegration policy of the state of Slovenia in relation to Slovenes across the world who are returning home, and their descendants (immigrants).

The goals of the research present a red thread of the contribution, which is divided into problem fields that follow the very process of transmigration as experienced by our collocutors. Thus, we first meet with an analysis of circumstances during the move; follow other fields as arranging documentation, residential problematic, employment, education, social contacts and quality of life. In the end, the contribution acquaints us with solutions as seen by our collocutors. The contribution concludes with a final statement that for conducting active policy in the field of returnship it is in the first place necessary politicians publicly declare and decide the returning of Slovenes from abroad is in the interest of the state. A grounded standpoint is expected on why the returning of citizens home or obviating intensive emigration (for example brain drain) is in the interest of this state. Only such positions would enable the formation of active policy and system adjustment.

ABSTRACT
The present contribution deals above all with analysing the situation within the population of Slovenes who after the year 1990 returned to Slovenia from Argentina. In the forefront are questions connected with principal goals and purpose of the research on returning and reintegration of Slovenes after their return from abroad. The research was focused on identifying and studying difficulties that individuals confront with when returning to Slovenia. The aims of the research were to detect (system) causes of those difficulties and to classify suggestions for solving or annulling them. Another field the research was focused on was a presentation of the immigrants’ perception of the attitude of the Slovene state towards returnees and their descendants. The intention was to elaborate suggestions for preparing an appropriate model of reintegration policy of the state of Slovenia in relation to Slovenes across the world who are returning home, and their descendants (immigrants).

The goals of the research present a red thread of the contribution, which is divided into problem fields that follow the very process of transmigration as experienced by our collocutors. Thus, we first meet with an analysis of circumstances during the move; follow other fields as arranging documentation, residential problematic, employment, education, social contacts and quality of life. In the end, the contribution acquaints us with solutions as seen by our collocutors. The contribution concludes with a final statement that for conducting active policy in the field of returnship it is in the first place necessary politicians publicly declare and decide the returning of Slovenes from abroad is in the interest of the state. A grounded standpoint is expected on why the returning of citizens home or obviating intensive emigration (for example brain drain) is in the interest of this state. Only such positions would enable the formation of active policy and system adjustment.

ABSTRACT
The ethnological studying of homecomers is tightly linked to researching emigrant life in general. Homecoming – as the final phase in the migration cyclus, composed of the life of the emigrant – then immigrant and finally homecomer, is in ethnology a poorly treated theme: in comparison to ethnological researchedness of the both first phases it has a marginal role. The author seeks the reason for such, several decades old a condition in the branch, in merely coincidental including of migrational (European, overseas) problematic into the pedagogical programme of the university studying of ethnology.
For this reason, in the systematic review of three technical-scientific publications/journals (Etnolog/Slovenski etnograf published by the Slovenski etnografski muzej since 1926; Glasnik – between the years 1956-1959 technical journal of the Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje SAZU, from 1959 to 1975 journal of the Slovensko etnografsko društvo, and from 1975 on journal of the Slovensko etnološko društvo, and Traditiones, from 1972 on miscellany of the Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU) and significant ethnological monographs and students' work in that field, in the period between 1926 and 2003 only the period of the eighties is outstanding. At that time a Seminar for ethnological research of Slovene emigration was established at the Department for Ethnology of The Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana, which developed the ethnology of emigration and homecoming in methodological and content sense. From ethnological view, homecomers from America, Australia, Argentina, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Austria, and France have been dealt with. Prevailing were descriptions of the consequences of the life of Slovenes abroad after their returnig to the homeland and their influence on source environment. The dealings comprised the time before World War I and the return of scarce “modern”, after 1945 emigrated and returned families. Soon after cessation of the activity of the mentioned seminar (1981/1982), quite in the second half of the eighties, the interest of the branch for researching emigration in general strongly declined. Thus, the actual studying of homecoming in ethnology as well as of emigration, is a good deal elemental and without proper systematic, which results in ethnology not matching other humanistic and sociological disciplines as well dealing with the mentioned thematic.
We expect more hope for a renewed prosperity of the ethnology of emigration and homecoming in the newly established custodiate for Slovene emigrants and Slovenes in the neighbouring countries, members of national minorities and other ethnicities at the Slovenski etnografski muzej.

Breda Čebulj Sajko, Ph for Ethnology, Research Associate at the Institute for Slovenian Emigration Studies of Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Ljubljana, Slovenia.

ABSTRACT
The ethnological studying of homecomers is tightly linked to researching emigrant life in general. Homecoming – as the final phase in the migration cyclus, composed of the life of the emigrant – then immigrant and finally homecomer, is in ethnology a poorly treated theme: in comparison to ethnological researchedness of the both first phases it has a marginal role. The author seeks the reason for such, several decades old a condition in the branch, in merely coincidental including of migrational (European, overseas) problematic into the pedagogical programme of the university studying of ethnology.
For this reason, in the systematic review of three technical-scientific publications/journals (Etnolog/Slovenski etnograf published by the Slovenski etnografski muzej since 1926; Glasnik – between the years 1956-1959 technical journal of the Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje SAZU, from 1959 to 1975 journal of the Slovensko etnografsko društvo, and from 1975 on journal of the Slovensko etnološko društvo, and Traditiones, from 1972 on miscellany of the Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU) and significant ethnological monographs and students' work in that field, in the period between 1926 and 2003 only the period of the eighties is outstanding. At that time a Seminar for ethnological research of Slovene emigration was established at the Department for Ethnology of The Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana, which developed the ethnology of emigration and homecoming in methodological and content sense. From ethnological view, homecomers from America, Australia, Argentina, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Austria, and France have been dealt with. Prevailing were descriptions of the consequences of the life of Slovenes abroad after their returnig to the homeland and their influence on source environment. The dealings comprised the time before World War I and the return of scarce “modern”, after 1945 emigrated and returned families. Soon after cessation of the activity of the mentioned seminar (1981/1982), quite in the second half of the eighties, the interest of the branch for researching emigration in general strongly declined. Thus, the actual studying of homecoming in ethnology as well as of emigration, is a good deal elemental and without proper systematic, which results in ethnology not matching other humanistic and sociological disciplines as well dealing with the mentioned thematic.
We expect more hope for a renewed prosperity of the ethnology of emigration and homecoming in the newly established custodiate for Slovene emigrants and Slovenes in the neighbouring countries, members of national minorities and other ethnicities at the Slovenski etnografski muzej.

Breda Čebulj Sajko, Ph for Ethnology, Research Associate at the Institute for Slovenian Emigration Studies of Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Ljubljana, Slovenia.

ABSTRACT
he party that became ruler in Slovenia in 1945 attempted to prevent the Slovenes in Slovenia from acquainting with cultural creativity of Slovenes in the neighbouring countries and in emigration. When Slovenes in Slovenia wanted books of authors from the mentioned cultural sphere they encountered great difficulties. Stocks of old books were in 1945 destroyed; as for the after-war editions of works of emigrants, a person intending to acquire one was to request a special permission for importing. Prohibited books and magazines have in Slovenia been collected in special library departments, closed for a wider public, and became more accessible only in the eighties.

Gabrič, Aleš, Ph.D of History, Senior Research Fellow, Institut for Contemporary History, Kongresni trg 1, SI-Ljubljana, Slovenia

ABSTRACT
he party that became ruler in Slovenia in 1945 attempted to prevent the Slovenes in Slovenia from acquainting with cultural creativity of Slovenes in the neighbouring countries and in emigration. When Slovenes in Slovenia wanted books of authors from the mentioned cultural sphere they encountered great difficulties. Stocks of old books were in 1945 destroyed; as for the after-war editions of works of emigrants, a person intending to acquire one was to request a special permission for importing. Prohibited books and magazines have in Slovenia been collected in special library departments, closed for a wider public, and became more accessible only in the eighties.

Gabrič, Aleš, Ph.D of History, Senior Research Fellow, Institut for Contemporary History, Kongresni trg 1, SI-Ljubljana, Slovenia

ABSTRACT
After 1848 and 1851, respectively, neoabsolutist policy began to inaugurate a vigorous policy of Germanization of the whole Habsburg Monarchy. The aim of the bureaucratic reforms was to form a single administration run by the German-speaking officials for the whole country. Along with the introduction of a unique, one-language state, Alexander Bach’s aim was also to suppress all national movements, particularly Slavic. Among German speaking officials whose task was to implement German language were also Slovene intellectuals, scholars and gymnasium professors, treated as “officials”, state bureaucrats. Due to their political affiliation, many of them could find a proper job only out of Slovene lands. The main destination, directed by the state authorities was Croatia, the then one of the constitutional parts of Hungarian part of the Habsburg Monarchy. One of those who has been given opportunity of employment there, was also Jernej Bartol(omej) Francelj, professor of History, Geography and Slavic languages, in police records noted as “Illyrist and Pan-Slavist”. Thus, he has finally – after lecturing at Rijeka and Zagreb Gymnaziums - permanently settled only in Varaždin, where he taught at the Varaždin Gymnazium. His great wish and aim was to educate not only the pupils but also Croatian farmers and craftsmen. For these reasons, he began to publish a populist paper Pueki prijatelj (Peoples’ Friend) in which he directed his attention mainly to general education of people, mainly the farmers; he also paid great attention to education of women. His great interest was to introduce a more intensive development of agriculture in Croatia. Although limited with the then political constellation in Croatia, his articles were not strictly apolitical; he has never denied his sympathies for Illyrians and Illyrian language, his sympathies for the national policy of the Czechs, and sympathies for Croatian national politicians versus Hungarian ones. Although he has been entirely bonded with the Croatian society, he has never denied his everlasting devotion to his homeland, Slovenia.

Irena Gantar Godina, Doctor of Historical Science, Assistant Professor and Research Adviser at the Institute for Slovenian Emigration Studies of Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Ljubljana, Slovenia.

ABSTRACT
After 1848 and 1851, respectively, neoabsolutist policy began to inaugurate a vigorous policy of Germanization of the whole Habsburg Monarchy. The aim of the bureaucratic reforms was to form a single administration run by the German-speaking officials for the whole country. Along with the introduction of a unique, one-language state, Alexander Bach’s aim was also to suppress all national movements, particularly Slavic. Among German speaking officials whose task was to implement German language were also Slovene intellectuals, scholars and gymnasium professors, treated as “officials”, state bureaucrats. Due to their political affiliation, many of them could find a proper job only out of Slovene lands. The main destination, directed by the state authorities was Croatia, the then one of the constitutional parts of Hungarian part of the Habsburg Monarchy. One of those who has been given opportunity of employment there, was also Jernej Bartol(omej) Francelj, professor of History, Geography and Slavic languages, in police records noted as “Illyrist and Pan-Slavist”. Thus, he has finally – after lecturing at Rijeka and Zagreb Gymnaziums - permanently settled only in Varaždin, where he taught at the Varaždin Gymnazium. His great wish and aim was to educate not only the pupils but also Croatian farmers and craftsmen. For these reasons, he began to publish a populist paper Pueki prijatelj (Peoples’ Friend) in which he directed his attention mainly to general education of people, mainly the farmers; he also paid great attention to education of women. His great interest was to introduce a more intensive development of agriculture in Croatia. Although limited with the then political constellation in Croatia, his articles were not strictly apolitical; he has never denied his sympathies for Illyrians and Illyrian language, his sympathies for the national policy of the Czechs, and sympathies for Croatian national politicians versus Hungarian ones. Although he has been entirely bonded with the Croatian society, he has never denied his everlasting devotion to his homeland, Slovenia.

Irena Gantar Godina, Doctor of Historical Science, Assistant Professor and Research Adviser at the Institute for Slovenian Emigration Studies of Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Ljubljana, Slovenia.