ABSTRACT
The inauguration of Bach's absolutist system in the summer of 1849, and particularly after 1852, and Thun's school reforms, have both inaugurated a rigorous policy of Germanization during the whole decade. It included a single law for the entire Monarchy, a single administration run by German speaking officials for the whole country, among whom were also middle-school or gymnasium professors. Bach’s intention was to unify and Germanize the Monarchy by bureaucracy. Thus, he began to move state officials, also professors, out of their native countries to non-German countries: the Czech gymnasium professors and officials were sent to Slovenia, while Slovene and also some Czech officials and gymnasium professors were sent to Croatia. These Slovenes – as loyal citizens - were sent by the authorities as state officials to accomplish Thun's school reforms. For the state authorities they were a most useful link between Bach’s policy and non-German people, implementing Germanization in all fields of social life. They remained anonymous creators of the state policy irrespective of their national appurtenance.

Among the Slovenes there were also many sympathizers of the 1848 national movements, also of the Croatian national »Illyrian« movement, and were – by being moved - »punished« for their then activities, since for political reasons, they were not allowed to work in Slovenia. On the other hand, after 1848 some Slovenes came to Croatia voluntarily, mainly to experience the Illyrian movement and ideas. Many Slovene intellectuals have settled there permanently, many have assimilated, especially those who have created their families there. The contribution of Slovene gymnasium professors, university professors, scholars, scientists, artists and cultural workers to Croatian science, art and culture was, undoubtedly, of major importance for the entire Croatian and as well Slovene society.

ABSTRACT
The inauguration of Bach's absolutist system in the summer of 1849, and particularly after 1852, and Thun's school reforms, have both inaugurated a rigorous policy of Germanization during the whole decade. It included a single law for the entire Monarchy, a single administration run by German speaking officials for the whole country, among whom were also middle-school or gymnasium professors. Bach’s intention was to unify and Germanize the Monarchy by bureaucracy. Thus, he began to move state officials, also professors, out of their native countries to non-German countries: the Czech gymnasium professors and officials were sent to Slovenia, while Slovene and also some Czech officials and gymnasium professors were sent to Croatia. These Slovenes – as loyal citizens - were sent by the authorities as state officials to accomplish Thun's school reforms. For the state authorities they were a most useful link between Bach’s policy and non-German people, implementing Germanization in all fields of social life. They remained anonymous creators of the state policy irrespective of their national appurtenance.

Among the Slovenes there were also many sympathizers of the 1848 national movements, also of the Croatian national »Illyrian« movement, and were – by being moved - »punished« for their then activities, since for political reasons, they were not allowed to work in Slovenia. On the other hand, after 1848 some Slovenes came to Croatia voluntarily, mainly to experience the Illyrian movement and ideas. Many Slovene intellectuals have settled there permanently, many have assimilated, especially those who have created their families there. The contribution of Slovene gymnasium professors, university professors, scholars, scientists, artists and cultural workers to Croatian science, art and culture was, undoubtedly, of major importance for the entire Croatian and as well Slovene society.

ABSTRACT
This nearly too descriptive a text reveals how the Republic of Slovenia with its institutions legally and normatively regulates various fields and solves concrete problems the returnees and members of their families meet with, and how (if at all) the state defines in various guidelines or concrete actions towards this phenomena. A review of different fields reveals that an active policy, which would encourage or at least more complexly and synchronically solve the phenomenon of remigration, does not exist. The legislation, ministries and other state institutions with their laws, guidelines, starting-points, programmes and other actions, are dealing with remigration only partially and sporadically.

In its continuation, the article presents the Resolution on Relations with Slovenes across the World, adopted by the parliament in 2002.The resolution presents the first step on the way to complex solving and encouraging remigration. Yet on the other hand it brings only a basis for the in the article presented “Law on relations of the Republic of Slovenia with Slovenes outside Slovene borders”, with which the proposers aimed among other to legally regulate some fields or difficulties, and to mark out the state policy towards remigration. The submitted law was in 2004 in the parliament turned down.

ABSTRACT
This nearly too descriptive a text reveals how the Republic of Slovenia with its institutions legally and normatively regulates various fields and solves concrete problems the returnees and members of their families meet with, and how (if at all) the state defines in various guidelines or concrete actions towards this phenomena. A review of different fields reveals that an active policy, which would encourage or at least more complexly and synchronically solve the phenomenon of remigration, does not exist. The legislation, ministries and other state institutions with their laws, guidelines, starting-points, programmes and other actions, are dealing with remigration only partially and sporadically.

In its continuation, the article presents the Resolution on Relations with Slovenes across the World, adopted by the parliament in 2002.The resolution presents the first step on the way to complex solving and encouraging remigration. Yet on the other hand it brings only a basis for the in the article presented “Law on relations of the Republic of Slovenia with Slovenes outside Slovene borders”, with which the proposers aimed among other to legally regulate some fields or difficulties, and to mark out the state policy towards remigration. The submitted law was in 2004 in the parliament turned down.

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.