In article >, Eva Durant
> writes:

>. I have more valid
>experience than he has in living/working with the
>"working class".  All he can do is - premeditated, malicious
>lying. Not my style. (But why and how can a human being
>do this ???? I cannot comprehend.)
>
>Eva Durant
>
>
Heh, heh, heh -- this is great stuff! You wouldn't know working class
people if they stomped on your corns. You're just sore because you're not
able to uphold your end of this discussion without resorting to lies and
slander yourself. I'm enjoying myself, but I also owe you some thanks for
your willingness to stumble through the same minefield over and over
again. You're giving me some good opportunities to hone my net debating
skills.
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- Are you going to read the Johnson book for yourself or are you
just going to keep passing off book reviews from leftist English
publications as your own?

At 04:41 PM 5/15/96 -0700, Eva Balogh, wrote:

>        Second, concerning the charge of being "confrontational" in my
>historical discussions on the Forum I would like to add the following.....

>The Hungarian moderate right unfortunately refuses to turn against the
>extreme right and therefore, although by inclination I would belong there, I
>cannot join them. In the last two years, ever since I have been following
>Hungarian politics, this became crystal clear to me. The moderate right in
>Hungary either doesn't exist or if it does, it does not distance itself from
>Albert Szabo, Istvan Csurka, and, yes, Jozsef Torgyan. Therefore, however
>regretfully, I cannot join their ranks.

You don't have to join their ranks.  Just arguing for a moderate right
position bolsters their numbers.  The moderate right are simply the
gatekeepers for the extreme right.

Joe Szalai

At 11:19 AM 5/16/96 -0400, Sam Stowe, wrote:

>I read "Capital" in undergraduate school. It was like someone took Hegel
>and made him really boring. I somehow doubt that a discredited political
>philosophy cooked up by a liar will somehow be re-discovered over and over
>again outside of a few humanities departments at North American
>universities and the Durant home. The current emphasis on extreme
>laissez-faire capitalism among self-styled "conservatives" in the West is
>itself Marxist in nature if you think about it. Marx's religion elevates
>man's role as a producer and consumer -- homo economicus -- above any
>other aspect of his existence. The children of Uncle Miltie Friedman and
>your good friend Hayek do the same thing.

Trying to understand Marx (and I'm not saying that that was your goal) by
reading "Capital" as an undergraduate is a little like trying to learn
English by reading James Joyce's, "Ulysses".  Ask any pedagogue and they'll
tell you that it just won't work.  Ask me, and I'll tell you the same thing.

Joe Szalai

P.S.  As for my 'friend' Hayek, he'd think that Hitler was a socialist.

At 09:24 AM 5/16/96 -0700, Charlie Vamossy, wrote:

>We, in the US, are trying to do something about it.  A number of laws,
>most importantly the line-item-veto and the balanced budget ammendment
>propsal, all are aimed to restoring this country's fiscal and economic
>health, which is prerequisite to a decent means of living and social
>provisons.  You simply cannot spend what you don't have, so we need a
>healthy economy to produce the surplusses to redistribute.
>
>It's also pretty much useless, to my mind, to talk anymore of
>"capitalism and socialism".  They are simply different models of the
>economy, which works according to rules of its own.  Interference with
>the model can produce results, most of them temporary, some good and
>some disastrous.  Benign neglect should not be underestimated as a
>vauable method.
>
>At any rate, I think that most Americans, regardless of party
>affiliation, would agree with Bill Clinton:  it's the economy, stupid!

Are you prouldy serving your corporate masters or are you just showing the
signs of acute toadyism?  Is there a difference?

Joe Szalai

Dear Colleagues,

As the guests of USIA, a delegation of five members of the Hungarian
Parliament is visiting the United States. The delegation is led by Imre Mecs,
the president of the Military Committee of the Parliament. Thanks to the help
of Istvan Kovacs and Karoly Vamossy, the delegation will be welcomed at the
Hungarian House in New York (213 E. 82nd St.) at 6:30 PM on Tuesday, the 28th
of May. Mr. Mecs will discuss not only the subjects of Hungarian-American
military cooperation and NATO, but also the 40th anniversary celebrations,
the monument for the "Pesti Srac" and the legislation dealing with the
opening of the ÁVH files.

My purpose with this letter is to ask the members of the Hungarian Lobby in
Washington and on the West Coast, to also organize such meetings. The
delegation will spend a total of 10 days in the USA, will start the tour in
Washington and end it on the West Coast. For details you can contact Imre's
secretary at the fax: 011-361-268-4815, or can contact your Hungarian
Embassy/Consulate.

Because my 40-years of friendship with Imre, I would like to tell you a
little more about him:
         Imre Mecs was born in 1933. His father was a doctor, his mother a
teacher and his uncle was the well known poet-priest, Laszlo Mecs. He grew up
in a very religious atmosphere both at home and in the Jesuit Highschool of
Pecs. The Communists deported his family, arrested his uncle and Imi kimself
became an electrician. Having so established his "working class" status, he
was admitted to the Technical University of Budapest.

I met him on October 22, 1956 at the meeting which formulated the 16 points
and worked with him in organizing the National Guard regiment at the
University. He then joined the Revolutionary Council of Ujpest and later
continued his resistance to Russian occupation underground, until his arrest
in June 1957. He was sentenced to death in 1958 and spent 9 months in the
cell for the condemned. This cell was a 6 feet by 10 feet closet, occupied by
two.
  
It was this cell from which the commander of the Tozolto Street
freedomfighters, Istvan Angyal was taken to the gallows. (Pista Angyal was an
Auschwitz survivor, his mother and sister were murdered there. One of Pista's
last words were: "If I could live again, I would want to live as the son of
this freedom-loving nation, I would once again be a Hungarian.")

Imre's life was spared and he was released in 1963. After being "freed", he
was harassed by the secret police (ÁVH), abandoned by his old friends, so he
concentrated on his work. As an electronics engineer, he patented some 30
inventions, received several technical awards and came close to getting his
Ph.D., when the authorities instructed the university to deny that.

In 1978, he supported Charta 77 and in 1983, at the funeral of Miklos
Peterfi, (who was also condemned to death after the Revolution, but
survived), for the first time in Hungary, he declared in public, that 1956
was a popular revolution. As a consequence, he lost his job. It was in 1983,
- after 27 years -, That we met again. I was most impressed by his lack of
bitterness, his good humor, in short that these 27 years did not change him.
His personality was the same as in 1956, he was relaxed, his eyes still
sparkled, his mouth always was ready to smile. 
In 1983, I was searching for the grave of Imre Nagy, and Imi was the only one
in Hungary, who had both information and the guts to help. We made the first
map of the graves in section 289 and 301, which later were published in the
New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. From that time on, we worked
together on several projects. In 1984, he was one of the first in Hungary to
oppose the Bos-Nagymaros dam and when in 1987 I held the first open lecture
on the subject in the Jurta Theater, it was Imi, who was operating the slide
projector (until we lost electricity in the whole building.)

On the 30th anniversary of the Revolution in 1986 we appeared together in the
BBC film "Cry Hungary" and the ZDF film "30 Years Later" and what Imre had to
say in those fims, speaks volumes of his quiet, yet fearless integrity and
loyalty.

The Central European University was Imre's idea in 1987, in 1988 he was one
of the founders of the Federation of Free Democrats, of the Hungarian Human
Rights League and of the Historical Justice Committee (TIB). He published the
first list of the executed freedomfighters and demanded that the nation pay
honor to Imre Nagy and the other 400 murdered heros. In 1989 he participated
in the Opposition Roundtable and on June 16th, he was one of the speakers at
the reburial of Imre Nagy.

Imi was nominated to become the president of SZDSZ. He is totally opposed to
the present political polarization of the nation and is hoping that the 40th
Anniversary will give us an opportunity to reestablish the sense of national
unity and common purpose, which we had in 1956. He knows that reconciliation
can only come from the truth and therefore he is fighting in the Parliament
for the opening of the ÁVH files, including those of the III/II  section,
who's files dealt with the Hungarians in Western countries.

Imre's wife is Fruzsina Magyar, a theatrical stage manager, the sister of the
Minister of Education, Balint Magyar. Imi is called Papa by Monika, Imre,
Laci, Mate, Anna, Balint, Janos and David. He feels that now it is time for
an other girl! They still live in the same tiny apartment, which they had
when Communism collapsed, and chaos or overcrowding can not disturb their
happiness. Imi is one of the few "clean" people in Hungary. The people of the
street feel that, strangers come up to him on the street, smile at him or
caress him, and go on. He still uses the streetcars, or walks. He's got his
priorities right and although lately, he has often quoted the untranslatable
refrain of Laszo Mecs's poem: "I too wanted this, but I did not want this!"
(En is igy gondoltam, megsem igy gondoltam!")  We need people like him.

Bela Liptak

At 04:54 PM 5/17/96 +0200, Gyorgy Kadar wrote:

>        To Eva Balogh's arguments:
>EB>France did have ... a strong royal authority. In Hungary, the nobility
>EB>fought continuously against such strong center and most of the time
>EB>they were victorious. With the possible exception of Matthias Corvinus
>EB>I cannot think of one strong king after his reign, whether it was
>EB>Habsburg or otherwise. The Hungarian nobility had its way against a
>EB>strong royal power...
>        These lines - kind-of - illustrate my above thesis. My explanation
>reads: The French Kings respected and cooperated with their nobility, thus
>they were able to build strong ECONOMY and strong royal authority. The
>Hungarian great Kings with strong royal authority had lived all before
>Matthias Corvinus (Arpad's, Anjou's, Zsigmond), had respected (partly
>liked, partly hated, but respected) their nobility and had looked for
>their better destiny on the soil of Hungary.

        Your assumption seems to be that the Hungarian nobles were nasty to
the king because he was not a *Hungarian* king. If we had "national" kings
the nobles would have let their "ancient privileges" laps and wouldn't have
fought the king whose inclinations were absolutist. But this is not really
the case. The Hungarian nobility wasn't fussy: after all, the Golden Bull
was issued during the reign of a *national* king, in whose veins the blood
of Arpad flowed.

        Moreover, let's compare Hungary and Poland. Poland didn't have to
endure the "colonial" overloards of the House of Habsburg and yet their
nobility acted exactly (even more so) as their Hungarian counterparts. Just
think of the liberum veto, or the Polish word for rebellion against the
authority of the king (rakosz, borrowed from the Hungarian Field of Rakos).
We gave great examples to our neighbor!


>        The Habsburgs for 300 years (up to the "Reform" period) only
>wanted to look down on Hungary,

        Don't you think that there is a ring of inferiority complex in your
writings? Also, a certain amount of finger pointing: it is all your fault,
it is all your fault! What about us? Are we entirely blameless?

        Eva Balogh

Eva Balogh writes:

>         I don't think that the cultural aspect was that important.

But I think it was together with the developing industrial and commercial
basis. There were many Hungarian students studying at western universities.
And in the area that was not in the middle of the warfare, there were many
Hungarian educational institutions as in Transylvania and in northern
Hungary and in Croatia. There were hundreds of books published in
Transylvania. The industrial regions, again based on minerals were
developing both in northern Hungary and Transylvania.

That there was very limited industry in central Hungary can not be blamed
on backwardness but on the lack of raw materials. It was only the communist
mania that created steel mills where there is no iron ore or usable fuel.
Yes, the Alfold was a disaster, and except for the overgrown villages
(mezovarosok) there was not much going on, but we should not equate the
status of that area with all of the country. In spite of the very frequent
incursions by Habsburg and Turkish  (not talking about the internescene
warfare) incursions into Transylvania they were slowly being
industrialized. (Just read some sections of the Erdely Tortenete II
(1606 - 1830) and northern Hungary with its mines and metal working was
also becoming an exporting region. If even the limited independence of
Transylvania permitted this faster development, why deny the same
opportunity to the rest of the country?


Hungary
> was on a very different economic and therefore social level from Jeliko's
> example of France. The difference was always great but the seventeenth
> century's devastations (especially the Fifteen-Year's War) made the
country
> extremely backward. According to some demographic research, about
one-third
> of all villages simply disappeared during this century. The population
was
> also extremely thin. During the same century, there were also serious
> economic problems: the price of beef went down considerably and raising
of
> cattle was the mainstay of Hungarian agriculture. The nobility was
> economically devastated and since there was no capital accumulation they
> tried to keep their heads above water by insisting on their privileges.

I disagree, there were corporations formed for manufacturing and even
solely for export, it ws after the Habsburghs had complete control of the
country and everything became controlled by Vienna, that the economic
morass became what you are describing. Under the Habsburghs Hungary became
a colony and its economy and culture were subservient to the overall aims
of the Vienna policy.



The
> roads were practically impassable, urbanization nonexistent. Under these
> circumstances it is hard to imagine a kind of assimilation process we are
> talking about. For that you need some mobility, some urbanization, some
> reasonable level of economic prosperity. None of these was present in
> Hungary at the end of the seventeenth century.

Again, I plead that you check up on the available sources.


>         Of course, it wasn't the existence of the University of Paris
which
> was responsible for making France French. Certainly the existence of
central
> royal power helped. But I think the most important consideration was the
> relative economic development. Take a look at the map of
seventeenth-century
> France, the size of its cities, the number and quality of its roads, and
a
> vrey impressive capital accumulation. Compare the French nobility's
wealth
> to the poverty-stricken Hungarian nobility whose houses could hardly be
> distinguished from peasant huts.

While it mainly covers only Transylvania this is all contrary what is
described in the above cited volumes. There were no major indutrial or
commerce based cities on the Alfold even before the Turkish wars, along the
rivers commercial activity existed and please do not forget about the
mobility at which the individual peasants moved into the larger mezovaros
(Kecskemet, Cegled, the Kiskun cities, etc.) Sure there were seven plum
tree nobles, and unpassable roads in central Hungary, it was a big swamp
in may areas. But that is not the only thing that existed.


>         I don't believe in this. If the English occupied France they
would
> have most likely disappeared in the sea of French speakers--like the way
the
> French disappeared in England after William the Conqueror's conquest of
England.

There was not a sea of French speakers at the time of the English wars.
Large parts of what is France was still speaking different languages. The
French did not really disappear in English, only the pronounciation became
bastardized, and only a small (numerically) incursion occured with Billy.

>         Let's separate the two issues. (1) Integration of Transylvania.
Yes,
> I am sure that would have helped but you must keep in mind that by the
end
> of the seventeenth century the number of Romanians have grown to over
> one-third of Transylvanian's population. A steady stream of immigrants
> arrived daily from the east. I very much doubt that given Hungary's
> backwardness the central authorities could have actually put an end to
this
> immigration. Moreover, I doubt that they would have even considered it
> necessary.
It is not only the immigration, which at times was also combined with
emmigration for political reasons that affects the assimilation. It was
specifically under Rakoczi that Hungarian was an official language for a
short time. After him everything fell back to Latin as a compromise of not
wanting to speak German.


(2) Yes, Hungary was a demographic disaster and if the central
> authorities considered immigration necessary, where would this new
Hungarian
> government get their immigrants, if not from the Germanies.
> have more Serbs, or more Romanians with no more sills than the Hungarian
> peasants. Or less.

But the "central authorities" had their major problems with the Hungarians,
thus certainly it was not in their interest to maintain conditions favoring
Hungarians. The central authority was in fact enfocing the return of the
serfs from the Alfold area back to Transylvania or back to northern Hungary
and rather brought in foreign settlers and settled them in cohesive blocks


> >Better
> >cooperation with Croatia, more direct commercial contacts with
neighbors.

>         I don't know what the situation was in Croatia at the time, but I
am
> somewhat baffled by "more direct commercial contacts with neighbors."
Which
> neighbors do you have in mind? The neighbors, with the possible exception
of
> Poland, were even more backward than we were.

Well, a little capitalism is never hurt by having bacward neighbors. I am
surprised that when we are discussing industrialization and urbaization,
you do not recognize the importance of the possibility of exporting
finished goods to less developed neighboring countries.

> >Faster development of the country by lessening or redistributing some of
> >the land of the oligarchs on the loosing side. (Please note that Rakoczi
> >had a significant middle nobility and freeman following, who probably
would
> >have expected to be rewarded.)

>         I am not even sure whether economically that would have made more
> sense than having large estates.

Here we beg to disagree. Many of those estates went to outsiders, who again
did not much consider what happens to the folks around tham.

> >It was also the last anti Habsburg uprising
> >that did not polarize the minorities against the Hungarians and quite
> >possible a much better minority relationship would have arisen.

>         No, it didn't because modern nationalism hadn't hit Eastern
Europe
> yet. Although I read an article some years ago by a Hungarian specialist
of
> the seventeenth century according to whom there were already signs of
> national separation during the Thokoly Rebellion. Slovaks were reluctant
to
> join. They didn't consider it their struggle.

Well, the Romanians joined in hordes. He was also very successful in
holding northern Hungary which should be an indication of some ability to
work with the Slovaks. I have not read much about the demographics of his
recruiting campaigns and because part of those wars were polarized along
religious lines also, it is possible that good Catholic Slovaks may not
have been to interested to join up to fight for the rights of the
Protestants.


>         And finally, one important consideration which you may not have
> considered: a strong central power. France did have such a strong royal
> authority.

There were many kings of France who did not have strong central authority.

I think in this discussion we just stay disagreed. I will be gone for two
weeks, so there is time to come back with a reparte.

Regards,JLK.

J.Szalai wrote:

>You don't have to join their ranks.  Just arguing for a moderate right
>position bolsters their numbers.  The moderate right are simply the
>gatekeepers for the extreme right.

As much as the 'dreamer' or 'believer' communist, like Eva Durant and
you (actually I am not so sure that you are in this category you sounds
much more cynical than that) are the forerunner of Dzsugasvillis and
Berijas.

J.Zsargo

> =====================================================================

                        THE VISA-FREE LIST

"Discussion of how to gain another nationality for visa-free travel"

> =====================================================================

VISA-FREE an unmoderated discussion list covering the problems
associated with international travel.  In particular the issues
discussed will cover acquiring a different nationality to overcome
these problems.  VISA-FREE is open to anyone wanting more information
on visa-free travel, or with useful tips about gaining another
nationality quickly.  It is also open to specialists in nationality
law.

Over time it is expected that documentation covering the relevant
laws of countries that grant their citizenship quickly will be
archived for subscribers to the list.  Also information covering
problems that people have experienced when using a new passport
will be covered.

There will also be an e-journal called "THE VISA-FREE JOURNAL" sent
to subscribers.  Anyone wishing to write to the list-owner directly to discuss
relevant issues and who does not wish this circulated to the list may do so.
The address is .  Please also state whether you would
mind if your comments are put into the journal.  The list-owner will
respect any requests for privacy.  The list-owner's public key is:


-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6

mQCNAi/xbwUAAAEEALZolxs1l/DbYtEOIJV71EdsDepzR+DhLPPATIMwYiYgU9Yc
PRIa6aUI4VKrtz23/3Nz4pFP45kCfKUehsJ3oqtXzGWqCqIpPVm4q4d6oV44Csn5
EykR3ujlzYaCopzsYRD9E/EIaxVztnIantfLeN0IwQL0k9XazPkj64yNL1lpAAUR
tCRTYW0gUmlsZXkgPHNhbUBiY2xpbXNlci5kZW1vbi5jby51az4=
=nj7+
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



*IMPORTANT: Anyone offering specialist assistance to VISA-FREE must
provide the list owner with the relevant laws applicable to any
citizenship programme offered, in the form of plain text to be
archived and made available to the list.  Also the legal basis of
any programme must be fully verified with the list owner before
permission is granted for circulation to the list.  This is to
safeguard the integrity of the list.  Permission will not be
unreasonably withheld from such people.  At the same time the list
-owner reserves the right to exclude those people who do not adhere
to the purpose of the list, engage in unnecessary flaming or offer
services of a dubious nature.*


To subscribe to VISA-FREE, please send the message:

        "SUBSCRIBE VISA-FREE"
        (without the quotes and without your name!)

        or for the digest

        "SUBSCRIBE VISA-FREE-DIGEST"

        to

        

To send messages to the full list:  

For messages to the list owner:  

Sam Riley (AKA "Sanwar Ali")
List-Owner


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ------------------------------------------------

*****BCL IMMIGRATION SERVICES*****

40 South Audley Street, Mayfair, London W1Y 5DH, UK.
Tel: +44 171 495 3999 or +44 171 495 8662, Fax: +44 171 495 3991.

e-mail: 

"International Immigration and Nationality Law since 1988"

OWNERS OF THE "VISA-FREE" E-MAIL LIST AND PUBLISHERS OF THE E-
JOURNAL "THE VISA-FREE JOURNAL".
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ---------------------------------------------------

At 12:13 PM 5/18/96 PDT, Jeliko wrote:

>I think in this discussion we just stay disagreed. I will be gone for two
>weeks, so there is time to come back with a reparte.
>
        Yes, we still disagree practically on all points. Some of Jeliko's
description of late seventeenth-century Hungary bears no resemblance to
reality: a country of manufactured goods, for example, for exports to the
less developed nations, etc.!! A dream world. Please read a few less
Hungaro-centric descriptions of the real state of affairs.

        Eva Balogh

First of all let me apologize to those on whose toes I may have stepped. My
hobby is writing, and I use a lot of metaphores, which are usually harsher
than intended, especially whern I am angry, and, in tune with my age, I am
usually angry.
        1./ I did not mean that the history contributions are the only ones
I read, or deem worth reading. But I did mean, that the eternal clashes on
gayness don't really belong here, and are utterly boring. Like religion,
gayness is not debatable. The gays despise the straights, the straights
despise the gays, and never the twain will meet. It's not a Hungarian
problem, it's global. As far as I know, the net has some gay and lesbian
lists, argue there, if you must.
        2./ Anti-semitism is another tiresome subject. All the atrocities
the Jews may have committed against Christians, are more than well matched
by all the atrocities the Christians committed against the Jews. Both camps
are human, and the disznosag begins when both sides start behaving
inhumanely. Human, of course is a far cry from humane. An awful lot of
worldwide sympathy the Jews attracted after the Holocaust, has been lost
because of their behaviour towards the Palestinians, whose land they had no
more rights to than we here have to the land of Indians. It was done by a
few pen strokes by the victors declaring this to be one party's, that the
other's. Day by day, week by week, month by month and year by year, the
powerful spend their time sowing seeds of discontent. Then they spend a lot
of rhetoric and of the nation's money to try to rebuild what they have
destroyed.
        3./My metaphore "I wish that those who are not proud of their
heritage would crawl into a hole and come out only for their payckecks" was
not appropriately chosen, according to my wife. It was one of my more angry
utterances. What I mean is in scholarly, academicianish English: The world
is full of Americans, British, Germans, Jews, etc.etc.and "csodak csodaja"
even Hungarians who commit shameful acts. People who belong to the
offending nations can be duly embarassed by such individuals, but not by
the nation they belong to. Those who want to take blame for every misstep
their countries take, could go and hide, instead of airing the causes of
their embarassement.
        Referring to the "paychecks":everybody I meet on the net seems to
have jobs, grants, or other secure incomes,for which they receive
paychecks. They would obviously come out of their hiding for that. Any
embarassed Hungarians who is financed by their government or nation's
economy could forget that he or she had ever anything to do with Hungary
and/or Hungariandom, should keep silent about his past and the only thing
we, loyal Hungarians can expect them to do is not to heap disgrace upon our
heads, but look at the rest of humanity with open eyes.
        Magyar vagyok, magyarnak szulettem, meg a sziv is magyarul ver bennem.
(I am Hungarian, born Hungarian, even my heart beats in Hungarian.) Which
doesn't mean, that I am not loyal to my adoptive country, the USA. I am
criticizing it just as much as I criticized Hungary, when I lived there.
What else can I criticize, except what I see around me? I lived here for
half a century, after all.
        Thanks for both positive and negative reactions to my postings.

Respectfully

Csipkay Karoly

Eva Balogh writes:
>         Yes, we still disagree practically on all points. Some of
Jeliko's
> description of late seventeenth-century Hungary bears no resemblance to
> reality: a country of manufactured goods, for example, for exports to the
> less developed nations, etc.!! A dream world. Please read a few less
> Hungaro-centric descriptions of the real state of affairs.

Well Eva, when short of the background information, it is easy to fall back
to adjectives.

Just look at some of the data from the end of XVII and early XVIII century
which covers the Rakoczi times. There was the Magyar Encyclopaedia
published Apafi/s library contained books by Bacon,Machiavelli, Descartes,
Coccejus, Lipsius, Grotius, etc. At least in Transylvania there was a law,
that "anyone is free to travel for foreign studies, and furthermore the
prohibition  of forign studies can not be made in perpetuum. (1669). The
1665 assembly declared that the reformed church should establish schools in
every village. The non-Transylvanian students in the 1690 to 1699 period
in Nagyenyed were about 30%, thus there was educational opportunity for the
rest of the Hungary students also. Those were the days when new words wre
created in the Hungarian language like "kozjo" "kozerdek" but also
"gepely", "uvegfuvo palca" "vasfuttato kemence" "muszer" and for our
economist friends "koltseg", "bevarando penz" There are books published
in Hungarian like the Bible and Harmas Historia and A Bekesseg turesenek
pajzsa. The Nagyenyed kollegium's rebuilding took place in 1704 with
assitance from Holland and Brandenburg. The castles in Bonyha, Bethlen and
Kersed were built then and some of them still stand. There were 53 students
from Hungary in Wittenberg between 1700 - 1703. Paget the British
ambassador to Constantinople takes four student with hime to England in
1702. Teleki, Bethlen and Papai Pariz Ferenc has one thing in common all
there of their sons in England. The first teacher's handbook A Magyar
Oskola was written by Szonyi Nagy Istvan who studied in Utrecht and printed
by Misztotfalusi Kis Miklos in 1690. These wre the times when the Apafi
Teka, the Bethlen Teka, the Tolnai Teka were established. In 1680 there
printing shops in Debrecen, Nagyvarad, Kolozsvar, Brasso, Szeben,
Gyulafehervar, Zagreb. The Debrecen printer Szenci Kertesz Adam studied
with the Elsevier printers (who are still in business). But even smaller
towns had printshops like Csiksomlyo and Keresd. There was still a complain
in Transylvania that they do not have all the capacity needed and have to
import books from Hungary proper. In 1690 they have papermills adjoining
the printing shops in Kolozsvar. The number of titles published in
Transylvania was

1651-1660    165
1661-1670    122
1671-1680    196
1681-1690    225
1691-1700    265
1701-1710    232

Papai Pariz is teaching Descartes theories in 1690.
In Eperjes, Czaban Izsak teaches the Cartesian theories in 1696
In 1657 there is a medical book published "Medicina et Praxis medica" by
Regius, Siko Janos,Enyedi Samuel and Gunesch Janos. But by 1690 there is a
Hungarian publication "Pax corpis az az Azestnek belso Nyavalyainak Okairol
Feszkeirol es azoknak orvoslasanak modjaval valo tracta." By the way by
1774 it reached eleven editions. Ther was also the "Predikacio Varad
veszadalmerol published in Debrecen in 1661 and the first hHungarain
history "Florus Hungaricus" in 1663 and later Bethlen Farkas' "Historiarum
Pannonico Dacicarum" in 1670. And please do not forget  "Az torok ellen
valo orvossag"  of Zrinyi.

As far as the buildings are concerned just look at the types and number of
churches built in that time period. If you need list can supply.

In 1710 alone there were noble metal mines established in Tresztia,
Hercegany and Kristyor. Between 1720 and 1730 the gold production of
Transylavnia alone increased by 25% to ~5,000 lb/year. The iron furnace in
in Vajdahunyad produces 300 tonne/year in 1670, but the one in Toplica
produces 1000 tonne/year in 1754.

In the early 1700s there are 11 glass production shops in Transylavania
alone. The Porumbak plant supplied 14,660 glass plates in a single year in
late 1600s. By the way the records of this glass plant are still avilable
and give an intersting mix of the products produced, bottles, plates,
window glass, medicinal glass, rosewater, etc.

The late 1600s commercial activities are well described in the
Autobiography of Bethlen Miklos, who himself participated in business
activities in Hungary, Austria and Transylvania. There were even two
"off shore" companies formed  in 1662 the Compania Graeca and the Compania
Orientalis the former was obviously Greek in origin, while the latter was
started by the Armenians. These groups had daughter companies in many
places in Hungary, Transylvania, Croatia, Venice and the Romanian
principalities. Exports were fabrics, animals, copper, salt, beeswax, wine,
mercury, glass, honey, but also horseshoes, nails, and other finished
leather goods like saddles, clay products and even some furs. At least for
Transylvania even the balance of payments are available for this period.
And of course there is the data about the one thirtieth export/import tax
which as an example in Torcsvar alone gained from the 1664 of 4,000 Ft to
the 1668 6,000 Ft to the 1680 20,000 Ft. (and that Ft was a little better
than the current Ft).

There was even a cooperative venture by nobles and artisans. like the
company formed by Bethlen Janos, Kornis Gaspar (nobles) and Pater Janos and
Jo Janos in 1680 to stamp coins.

An aside for the hovels of the nobles.

Castle of Radnot built in 1650
Castle of Kemeny in Brassow built in 1633
Castle of the Hallers built in 1610
Castle of the "Muranyi Venus" built in 1621
Castle of Gyulais built in 1642
Castle of Kornis family built in 1720
Castle of Bonchida built in late 1600s
Castle of Wesselenyi Ferenc in 1732
Castle of the Banffy built in 1674

I have only limited data for northern Hungary at this time but I will dig
it up as soon as I get back because I am disturbed by the lack of
knowledege about these times as demonstarted by your response. As sergeant
Friday said, just the facts Ma'am, just the facts.

Regards,Jeliko.

Dear Jeliko,

You write:

>Well Eva, when short of the background information, it is easy to fall back
>to adjectives.

        I thought that you were leaving and had no time to continue our
discussion. Therefore, I didn't marshal any evidence and didn't go over your
letter point by point. But perhaps it is still not too late.


>Just look at some of the data from the end of XVII and early XVIII century
>which covers the Rakoczi times. There was the Magyar Encyclopaedia
>published Apafi/s library contained books by Bacon,Machiavelli, Descartes,
>Coccejus, Lipsius, Grotius, etc.

        But that doesn't prove anything about economic backwardness. After
all, here we are talking about the Prince of Transylvania and not just
anybody. But even if he had scores of these books, what does that have to do
with the economic development of the country as a whole.

>At least in Transylvania there was a law,
>that "anyone is free to travel for foreign studies, and furthermore the
>prohibition  of forign studies can not be made in perpetuum. (1669).

        Sure thing. And many went to the Netherlands and so what. They came
back and were horrified at the conditions at home. A good example would be
Miklos Misztotfalusi Kis, the printer.

>The
>>1665 assembly declared that the reformed church should establish schools in
>every village.

        Assemblies can declare all sorts of things, but it doesn't mean that
their legislations are actually translated into action. As they were not.
They couldn't be.

>The non-Transylvanian students in the 1690 to 1699 period
>in Nagyenyed were about 30%, thus there was educational opportunity for the
>rest of the Hungary students also. Those were the days when new words wre
>created in the Hungarian language like "kozjo" "kozerdek" but also
>"gepely", "uvegfuvo palca" "vasfuttato kemence" "muszer" and for our
>economist friends "koltseg", "bevarando penz" There are books published
>in Hungarian like the Bible and Harmas Historia and A Bekesseg turesenek
>pajzsa.

        Yes. The Bible was at last translated into Hungarian but I remember
vividly how surprised my Polish and Czech professors and friends were, how
late it was.

        Then you give a long list of cultural accomplishments. But surely,
we are talking about two different things. You are talking about some
cultural achievements--which if you compare with, let's say, England or
France sound rather modest--which have little bearing on the general
economic development of the country. I am talking about roads; you are
talking about the establishment of some rather modest libraries. Someone in
Hungary read Descartes, France produced Descartes--to put it simply. Hungary
was on the fringes of European civilization and surely there were some well
educated men in the sea of backwardness. But I am talking about economics
and general welfare.

>In 1710 alone there were noble metal mines established in Tresztia,
>Hercegany and Kristyor.

Followed by a long list of "commercial" accomplishments. But again, what is
missing is comparative data. In comparison to other countries west of us it
was a very modest beginning.

        Your writing reminded me of a certain Slovak gentleman on the
Internet a couple of years ago. Every time I said that Hungary was
comparatively backward, he came up with data very similar to yours, except
all of them from Upper Hungary and therefore he claimed that they were
Slovak in origin. I do know the period fairly well, and believe me that on a
comparative basis Hungary was very, very poor, and very much behind times.
Devastated by the Fifteen Years' War, the Thokoly Rebellion and later even
more so as a result of the Rakoczi Rebellion.

>I have only limited data for northern Hungary at this time but I will dig
>it up as soon as I get back because I am disturbed by the lack of
>knowledege about these times as demonstarted by your response.

        But if your data are similar the ones you marshaled this time, you
are comparing apples and oranges. We are not talking about the same thing.

        Eva Balogh

In article >, Joe Szalai
> writes:

>Trying to understand Marx (and I'm not saying that that was your goal) by
>reading "Capital" as an undergraduate is a little like trying to learn
>English by reading James Joyce's, "Ulysses".  Ask any pedagogue and
they'll
>tell you that it just won't work.  Ask me, and I'll tell you the same
thing.
>
>Joe Szalai
>
>P.S.  As for my 'friend' Hayek, he'd think that Hitler was a socialist.
>
Please don't insult Joyce's memory by comparing him with a hack like Marx.
Actually, your comments may draw down the wrath of Durant for insinuating
that Marx is anything less than crystal clear and powerfully eloquent in
his dialectic. I didn't say he was hard to understand. He wasn't. He was
just boring and unconvincing. And I don't need to ask your opinion. Lo, it
has already arrived on my screen unbidden.
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- Your buddy Hayek would be right just as long as he noted that
Hitler was a national socialist.